Help with Buying - 2015 LC w/ 29K miles or 2017 w/ 60K ? (1 Viewer)

[NCTroutHunter]

Which of these 2 would you go for, based strictly on price and miles:

2015 w/ 29K miles, $59K
2017 w/ 60K miles, $60K

Both are in great shape.

 

[Redbull]

I’d go lower miles because I’m assuming better condition. 2015.

but that’s a high price you have to REALLY want a mint 200.2 gen Landcruiser to pay $60k.

 

[Tex68w]

Of those two I’d go with the ‘15 just because of the miles. I prefer the ‘16+ aesthetically though and I’d look for one with lower miles but that’s just me.

 

[fireball]

You can't decide based on just price and mileage. For me, the improvements in the 2017 makes it the better buy. YMMV.

 

[NCTroutHunter]

You can't decide based on just price and mileage. For me, the improvements in the 2017 makes it the better buy. YMMV.

@fireball What improvements were made in 2017 that you like? I'm aware of the facelift in 2016

 

[NCTroutHunter]

Tah

Of those two I’d go with the ‘15 just because of the miles. I prefer the ‘16+ aesthetically though and I’d look for one with lower miles but that’s just me.

@Tex68w Thanks for the feedback. How would you compare your LC to your GX? I'm actually somewhat considering a GX blackline in Nori Green. FYI - I have 4 kids, but it's not really our kid hauler. I like the extra space in the LC, but don't necessarily need it - and, of course, I like the classic styling of the LC.

 

[TheIcemanCometh]

I was in a similar position a few years back. I bought the 2015 because I did not like the interior color nor the driver assist features of the 2016+ model years. The biggest mechanical difference is probably the transmission. Lots of discussion on that.

 

[NCTroutHunter]

I was in a similar position a few years back. I bought the 2015 because I did not like the interior color nor the driver assist features of the 2016+ model years. The biggest mechanical difference is probably the transmission. Lots of discussion on that.

Thanks for the feedback!

 

[1Maverick]

I would personally go with the 2017. It looks less Highlander and much more updated all the way around. 60k miles is pretty low. My biggest concern with really low mileage vehicles is they seem to be less maintained. Some owners forget they still need to change oil every year regardless of miles. Make sure to get photos or look underneath each of them and confirm the low range engages if these 200 have never been off-road. Of course, check service history. Good luck on picking one, either way they will bring joy.

 

[NCTroutHunter]

I would personally go with the 2017. It looks less Highlander and much more updated all the way around. 60k miles is pretty low. My biggest concern with really low mileage vehicles is they seem to be less maintained. Some owners forget they still need to change oil every year regardless of miles. Make sure to get photos or look underneath each of them and confirm the low range engages if these 200 have never been off-road. Of course, check service history. Good luck on picking one, either way they will bring joy.

Good feedback. The former owner on the 2015 was a wealthy lady with multiple vehicles. Serviced every 5K at Toyota dealer. Super clean. I do prefer the aesthetics of the 2017

 

[ToothDr]

Good feedback. The former owner on the 2015 was a wealthy lady with multiple vehicles. Serviced every 5K at Toyota dealer. Super clean. I do prefer the aesthetics of the 2017

Sounds like you’ll need to replace the recirculate door flap from the start with the 2015. common for dealers to break them while inspecting/replacing the cabin filter. I say because Toyota dealers are known for doing this. I prefer the looks of the 2016+ rigs. Really can’t go wrong with either.

 

[Madtiger]

2016+……arguably better leather (semi-aniline), better looks (less Highlander-ish), better headlights, better safety nannies (better adaptive cruise, BSM, etc), arguably better transmission (better for towing and off-roading but may not be as smooth), better brakes (bigger discs), better dash arrangement, and possibly better approach/departure angles.

But you can’t deny the low mileage of the 2015 and own by a rich lady with impecable records……..that vehicle is basically new!

 

[NCTroutHunter]

2016+……arguably better leather (semi-aniline), better looks (less Highlander-ish), better headlights, better safety nannies (better adaptive cruise, BSM, etc), arguably better transmission (better for towing and off-roading but may not be as smooth), better brakes (bigger discs), better dash arrangement, and possibly better approach/departure angles.

But you can’t deny the low mileage of the 2015 and own by a rich lady with impecable records……..that vehicle is basically new!

@Madtiger Great, succinct list of the improvements. It may be worth just holding out on a 16+. I didn't realize the leather was improved. Is that opinion or fact (seriously wanting to know)?

 

[Madtiger]

@Madtiger Great, succinct list of the improvements. It may be worth just holding out on a 16+. I didn't realize the leather was improved. Is that opinion or fact (seriously wanting to know)?

Fact. It is softer leather. It does crease easier.

 

[Madtiger]

@Madtiger Great, succinct list of the improvements. It may be worth just holding out on a 16+. I didn't realize the leather was improved. Is that opinion or fact (seriously wanting to know)?

And 2016+ brings changes of its own:


For LC:

2020+: new front differential design…maybe better/stronger differential carrier??

2018+: KDSS bolt change, automatically power-folding outside mirrors, late-2018s have new radiator design, late-2018s have capacitive touch screen on center display, powered lift gate, non-mandatory rear entertainment, newer transmission software (flashable on 2016-2017), and new key (very cool) design.

2016+ LC also gains bigger front brakes, 8-speed auto, semi-aniline leather of the LX, and has better buttons arrangement than prior years.

 

[Tex68w]

You can't decide based on just price and mileage. For me, the improvements in the 2017 makes it the better buy. YMMV.

Ehh to each his own, IMHO you certainly can, it jus depends on what your primary drivers are. That said, I prefer the 16+ for looks alone and you get all of the improvements.

 

[Supra Turbo]

I was in a similar position a few years back. I bought the 2015 because I did not like the interior color nor the driver assist features of the 2016+ model years. The biggest mechanical difference is probably the transmission. Lots of discussion on that.

+1. Similar situation about a year ago, with similar price paid for our '13. That said, I personally prefer the looks of '13-15 over 16+ haha.

The rest of changes are fairly minor and take it or leave it.. they did not make much difference to me now and will make even less in 10-15 years. On the other hand, the drastic difference in mileage and wear, did.

That said, I always prefer go for nicest and fewer miles vehicle over one thats a few years newer but with higher miles particularly if talking about same model.

My vote goes toward '15

 

[Tex68w]

Tah

@Tex68w Thanks for the feedback. How would you compare your LC to your GX? I'm actually somewhat considering a GX blackline in Nori Green. FYI - I have 4 kids, but it's not really our kid hauler. I like the extra space in the LC, but don't necessarily need it - and, of course, I like the classic styling of the LC.

I've had three GX's so we are certainly fans and they finally got it right with the '22-23's. The GX makes for a better around town daily, it's peppier from 0-40, easier to park, feels more nimble/sportier. Fit and finish is still full on Lexus however, it's not on par with the LX but it's not expected to be given the price point differences. We had a 2019 LX570 prior to the LC and we liked everything about it except for the flashier styling and the mouse pad controls, the announcement of the Cruiser going away pushed us to trade the LX for the LC so that we could get one before they were gone. For long distance travel, vacations, towing, the Cruiser gets the nod.

Oddly enough there isn't a huge difference in interior space between the GX and LC but it is noticeable where it matters. I know you said the GX wouldn't be your family hauler but it becomes a bit tight beyond four full-size occupants. Our Cruiser is likely to never leave our stable where we run through a new GX every few years. That might change though if the next gen GX isn't everything we hope it'll be. If we had gotten a Blackline in Nori Green or Nightfall Mica (blue) we would be much more likely to keep it for the long haul, IMHO the Blackline is the way to go if you're buying a new GX.

Deciding whether or not the GX can get it done for your needs is up to you but even with how much we like the GX if I could only have one the Cruiser gets the nod every single time.

 

[2021 LC200]

Which of these 2 would you go for, based strictly on price and miles:

2015 w/ 29K miles, $59K
2017 w/ 60K miles, $60K

Both are in great shape.

Mileage difference seems insignificant in the bigger picture. I would check out and drive each. Check drive feel, going straight, braking straight, maintenance history, one or multi owner etc. and then move.

 

[Zill]

I would opt for the 2017. Mileage is the least of your concern with a Land Cruiser and what kills these machines is time (rubber degradation\leaks) and rust. The 16+ have much needed improvements and quite arguably much better looks (hood buldges and led taillights set the car apart from your average SUV). The 16+ blue hue to the interior button lights is a nice touch compared to the green in the pre-facelift models. One item that is commonly over looked is the radar assist cruise control on the pre-facelift models only increases in increments of 5 mph. While 16+ allows for 1 mph adjustments.

Then again, get photos of the underside of both and make sure they’re not starting to rot out. Rust is your biggest enemy with these time tested machines.