GX 550 Overtrail vs Land Cruiser

[cruiseroutfit]

One reason why some of us, rather than selling our 80 series, opted to buy a second.

I suspect that if the 80 were to get payload ratings under current criteria, Toyota would give it a much more conservative rating. I.e. I don't think we can compare apples to apples on a spec given that number is in part derived from legal teams not engineers. I've spent my share of time in Land Cruisers, if I've got to drive a Cruiser with 2000lbs of humans and gear down a long windy canyon, I'd take a 200 over an 80 Series 8 days of the week. I don't think the 80 would pass current brake standards

 

[TWILLY]

I suspect that if the 80 were to get payload ratings under current criteria, Toyota would give it a much more conservative rating. I.e. I don't think we can compare apples to apples on a spec given that number is in part derived from legal teams not engineers. I've spent my share of time in Land Cruisers, if I've got to drive a Cruiser with 2000lbs of humans and gear down a long windy canyon, I'd take a 200 over an 80 Series 8 days of the week. I don't think the 80 would pass current brake standards

I sure wish we had more information on how these ratings are derived. It's a lingering question on the forum.

Door placards for production First Editions provide for a 1100 lbs load capacity (passengers and cargo). Despite my high level of initial enthusiasm for the platform, there's no way I'm buying a touring wagon rated to carry only 1100 lbs.

I hope Toyota fixes this.

Do you have a sense of whether the 8.2" diff is a limiting factor driving the 250's low weight capacity?

 

[LX4x4]

So if the frame is shared between the two, the GX550 is rated higher towing and payload because of the V6 engine right?

 

[Fort9378]

So if the frame is shared between the two, the GX550 is rated higher towing and payload because of the V6 engine right?

V6 engine, bigger rear axle, and transmission are the only glaring differences between the platforms.

 

[krice118]

V6 engine, bigger rear axle, and transmission are the only glaring differences between the platforms.

Wait the GX and LC have different transmissions?

 

[Fort9378]

Wait the GX and LC have different transmissions?

They do, yes. Someone pointed out earlier in the thread I think one has an 8 speed and one is a 10 speed.

 

[Oakleyguy]

They do, yes. Someone pointed out earlier in the thread I think one has an 8 speed and one is a 10 speed.

This is correct. GX gets the 10spd and LC gets the 8

 

[TWILLY]

V6 engine, bigger rear axle, and transmission are the only glaring differences between the platforms.

Fuel efficiency and capacity are markedly different too.

 

[Fort9378]

Fuel efficiency and capacity are markedly different too.

Yeah, I just meant mechanical differences. There are obviously different stats as a result.

 

[Corbet]

I've got to drive a Cruiser with 2000lbs of humans and gear down a long windy canyon, I'd take a 200 over an 80 Series 8 days of the week. I don't think the 80 would pass current brake standards

Braking improvements are rarely discussed but significant.

 

[cruiseroutfit]

I sure wish we had more information on how these ratings are derived. It's a lingering question on the forum.

Door placards for production First Editions provide for a 1100 lbs load capacity (passengers and cargo). Despite my high level of initial enthusiasm for the platform, there's no way I'm buying a touring wagon rated to carry only 1100 lbs.

I hope Toyota fixes this.

Do you have a sense of whether the 8.2" diff is a limiting factor driving the 250's low weight capacity?

Alright, I did a bit of digging/asking... and I don't know that I can present a clearer answer.

As suspected, there is far more that goes into advertising a payload than just a simple NHTSA standard, which makes it very difficult to compare manufacture to manufacture or even across different models from the same manufacture that have different engineering/legal teams. Those factors include NVH aka ride quality, fuel economy, mechanical capacity, suspension capacity, wheels, tires, brakes, bearings, diffs, CAFE standards and absolutely legal ramifications of customers exceeding payload/towing, all of which goes into their decision to land at any given number. An example that was offered is the same vehicle having different payloads in different markets, not because the testing is different but rather market emissions requirements could change based on GVW and if it's considered a cargo vehicle versus a passenger vehicle. So they may sandbag in market x to land in an emissions bracket that better suites their overall fleet standard (see CAFE). On the other hand a competitor, Company X, could test/certify their economy and payload on a package that they don't really even manufacture other than on paper, i.e. you'll never find it available on a dealers lot. Pretty fascinating and confusing really, it sounds like it's a moving target too.

Additionally, if a certain package or trim makes up 33%? or more of their total volume, NHTSA says they have to test that too so that could introduce why some trims are kept at a lower mix rate. Even though said trim could have a better payload due to better suspension, it could also hit them on the CAFE side so they only make 25% of their total volume in those packages. In Australia (and other markets), it's very popular for aftermarket companies to offer GVW upgrades which is generally comprised of better suspension and in some cases brakes. But often the axles, frame, steering, etc are completely un-touched. Some of those GVW upgrades are simply suspension and now it legally has a higher legal payload. Manufactures won't do that as it could both hurt their NVH factors that most consumers want AND bump them into a different emissions standard, import tax bracket, etc. Then some include axles in their GVW upgrade kits and make you pull the rear seating so it's now a "Medium Goods Carrying Vehicle" instead of a passenger car. I'm glad we're not there yet in the US

 

[TWILLY]

Alright, I did a bit of digging/asking... and I don't know that I can present a clearer answer.

As suspected, there is far more that goes into advertising a payload than just a simple NHTSA standard, which makes it very difficult to compare manufacture to manufacture or even across different models from the same manufacture that have different engineering/legal teams. Those factors include NVH aka ride quality, fuel economy, mechanical capacity, suspension capacity, wheels, tires, brakes, bearings, diffs, CAFE standards and absolutely legal ramifications of customers exceeding payload/towing, all of which goes into their decision to land at any given number. An example that was offered is the same vehicle having different payloads in different markets, not because the testing is different but rather market emissions requirements could change based on GVW and if it's considered a cargo vehicle versus a passenger vehicle. So they may sandbag in market x to land in an emissions bracket that better suites their overall fleet standard (see CAFE). On the other hand a competitor, Company X, could test/certify their economy and payload on a package that they don't really even manufacture other than on paper, i.e. you'll never find it available on a dealers lot. Pretty fascinating and confusing really, it sounds like it's a moving target too.

Additionally, if a certain package or trim makes up 33%? or more of their total volume, NHTSA says they have to test that too so that could introduce why some trims are kept at a lower mix rate. Even though said trim could have a better payload due to better suspension, it could also hit them on the CAFE side so they only make 25% of their total volume in those packages. In Australia (and other markets), it's very popular for aftermarket companies to offer GVW upgrades which is generally comprised of better suspension and in some cases brakes. But often the axles, frame, steering, etc are completely un-touched. Some of those GVW upgrades are simply suspension and now it legally has a higher legal payload. Manufactures won't do that as it could both hurt their NVH factors that most consumers want AND bump them into a different emissions standard, import tax bracket, etc. Then some include axles in their GVW upgrade kits and make you pull the rear seating so it's now a "Medium Goods Carrying Vehicle" instead of a passenger car. I'm glad we're not there yet in the US

Thank you for taking the time to both research and write that. I appreciate it, as I know will many others too. It is indeed fascinating, complicated, and confusing.

So, next: Who will volunteer to run their new 250 on some pitchy dirt with, say, a 1600 lb load so that we can all see how she behaves?

 

[cruiseroutfit]

...So, next: Who will volunteer to run their new 250 on some pitchy dirt with, say, a 1600 lb load so that we can all see how she behaves?

I'd volunteer to drive someone elses new machine under that criteria

 

[TWILLY]

I'd volunteer to drive someone elses new machine under that criteria

That was a bit tongue in cheek, but it is to say that these criteria are so convoluted that I think it’s certainly possible that they’ll fare fine in terms component longevity with weight loads at or above what’s listed in the doors. Lord knows that’s never stopped many Tacoma owners.

 

[cruiseroutfit]

That was a bit tongue in cheek, but it is to say that these criteria are so convoluted that I think it’s certainly possible that they’ll fare fine in terms component longevity with weight loads at or above what’s listed in the doors. Lord knows that’s never stopped many Tacoma owners.

Or Cruiser owners

 

[TWILLY]

Or Cruiser owners

View attachment 3622537

 

[Jstawgn]

Or Cruiser owners

Or even lowly light duty 2WD Hilux Owners

 

[Adam R]

I think the 9,000 lb towing capacity for the GX550 says a lot about it's braking capability. Engineers have to design for the idiot that won't use, doesn't know how to use or is clueless about the health of a trailer's braking system. Basically, they have to assume someone will tow a 9,000 lb trailer that doesn't have brakes. This would be a very bad idea in my 80 series, but with a functioning brake controller, a 5,000lb load is doable and safe, but it's not my first vehicle of choice from my small fleet.

I happen to own a 2.4L HiLux and I may, at a time very long ago, have hit the scales at nearly 11,000 lbs towing a bumper pull trailer with two pallets of sod on it. It was rural, traffic was very light and I decided that it was something I probably shouldn't repeat.

 

[TXSunDevil]

It looks like the LC 250 only the Land Cruiser model comes with the roof rails. I like to add cross bars so I can use a rocket box and strap other junk on the roof. I really thought I could make the 1958 work until I saw this.

 

[cruiseroutfit]

It looks like the LC 250 only the Land Cruiser model comes with the roof rails. I like to add cross bars so I can use a rocket box and strap other junk on the roof. I really thought I could make the 1958 work until I saw this.

Add them. I suspect there will be plenty of take-offs as people add Prinsu, Westcott, Sherpa, ARB, K9, etc, etc, etc racks. Provisions should be avail under the caps for all.