Is the 250 the best size Landcruiser platform since the 40 series ? (1 Viewer)

[bugsnbikes]

Heres the bloated 200 next to the 250..... Id almost venture to say the 250 platform size is going to better the 80 when it comes to the ideal offroad platform base to build upon. The big question will be weight. I think the 300series is coming in at close to 6000lbs. 200s at 5900lbs. And i think published curb weights on these arent accurate.yet. WIll the barebones 1958 lop 800-1000lbs less??? theres no doubt the front rear bias will be better balanced in the 250 with lighter motor up front and heavier hybrid battery in rear making the 250 weighted alot better front to back.

 

[D21FJ60]

So it's the size of a 4Runner?

 

[TWILLY]

Heres the bloated 200 next to the 250..... Id almost venture to say the 250 platform size is going to better the 80 when it comes to the ideal offroad platform base to build upon.

View attachment 3471063

That's my hunch too, and it was my immediate reaction upon first seeing it. I like that it's narrower. The similarities between in overall design of the 80 and 250 are pretty striking: low beltline, tall greenhouse, big windows and views, exceptional off road capability, and a return to relative utilitarian simplicity (of at least the early 80s). The 250 is the closest we may ever see to what would be a modernized 80. But I still haven't seen photos of the 80 and 250 side by side, and specs released thus far don't afford a good numerical comparison of width because of differing metrics with and without mirrors.

 

[Devils Paw 80]

Heres the bloated 200 next to the 250..... Id almost venture to say the 250 platform size is going to better the 80 when it comes to the ideal offroad platform base to build upon. The big question will be weight. ...

Better because why-maybe smaller? Here are specs. It looks to be narrower than an 80. https://media.toyota.co.uk/wp-conte...1/03/1614162854210223MLandCruiserTechSpec.pdf

 

[Patassa]

Heres the bloated 200 next to the 250..... Id almost venture to say the 250 platform size is going to better the 80 when it comes to the ideal offroad platform base to build upon. The big question will be weight. I think the 300series is coming in at close to 6000lbs. 200s at 5900lbs. And i think published curb weights on these arent accurate.yet. WIll the barebones 1958 lop 800-1000lbs less??? theres no doubt the front rear bias will be better balanced in the 250 with lighter motor up front and heavier hybrid battery in rear making the 250 weighted alot better front to back.

View attachment 3471063

Dang, I like the 200 better now.

 

[Patassa]

"The 2024 Land Cruiser is a smaller vehicle, too. It's 4.4 inches narrower and 1.2 inches shorter."

If the above is correct, this dumb chart that google pulls up is very wrong.

This toyota website helps for everything before the '24 at least.

75 Years of TOYOTA | TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION GLOBAL WEBSITE | Vehicle Lineage | In-depth Vehicle Information, Specification

The Vehicle Lineage gives a systematic overview of the diverse transformation that Toyota and Lexus brand vehicles have undergone in the last 75 years. The diagram is sorted by principal body type, and a remodeling timeline is presented for each vehicle.

www.toyota-global.com

 

[Jetboy]

I think the overall width is very similar to a LC200/300 in spec because it's essentially wide body fenders on a 4Runner with a LC300 chassis. But the door to door width is narrower. Has a roughly hourglass shape with same width axles and suspension. I think that will make it feel a lot more nimble on the trails that have tight squeezes. Interior size is going to be interesting to see though. 4Runner and LC200 are basically identical on interior cargo volume. LC300 is smaller. I'd guess it'll also be smaller cargo volume from the current 4Runner. Mostly because they move the 12v battery to the rear side panel and that makes those rear side panels super thick and the result is a small cargo volume.

It's really apparent when you look at a LC60 vs a LC300

LC250

200

4Runner:

 

[Rednexus]

The 200 is wayyy to wide for serious off-roading east of the 100th meridian unless one does not mind extensive pinstripes and a decent chance of body damage.

The 80 is basically the same size as a 4th/5th gen 4Runner/GX470, which is still on the big side but doable for eastern off-roading, albeit with extensive pinstripes. Even with that, I still carry a sawzall in my GX and end up doing a bit of logging to fit down some of our trails here.

In terms of a true off-road platform - again for tighter/tree-ridden eastern trails where size matters, I'm not sure the LC provides much benefit over a current 4Runner/GX other than beefier front and rear axles and a nicer interior. Too many folks have picked up SXSs and our eastern/midwestern trails are getting super narrow and no one bothers to maintain them.

 

[M1911]

So it's the size of a 4Runner?

No, it’s bigger than the 4Runner. I think the 250 is bigger than it looks in pictures and is very close in size to the 200.

 

[bugsnbikes]

The other big thing that jumped out to me is the lower tow rating.......while most think this lower number is a negative based upon engine power.....the rating is based on a safety calculation of vehicle length / braking /tongue weight and the curb weight of the vehicle. So if theres 1000lb less tow rating vs the 200- its because a lighter weight 250 of the same length with similar brakes just wont hold back a larger mass in emergency situations. It will be interesting to see how much that hybrid battery adds to the rear end and overall curb weight and front/rear bias comparisons. I always hated how an empty 80 felt boucing off rocks and purposely carrying an extra 300lbs of junk vs the LC250 thats carrying a hybrid batt back there pushing an extra 10+mpgs seems like a platform balance win win offroad.

 

[bugsnbikes]

Better because why-maybe smaller? Here are specs. It looks to be narrower than an 80. https://media.toyota.co.uk/wp-conte...1/03/1614162854210223MLandCruiserTechSpec.pdf

yeah - according to the specs- the low weight 2200kg - likely for the cloth seat 1958 which translates to 4860lbs....take out second row seats people and that 250series is 1100lbs lighter than a 200 !! that about explains the differences in tow capacity........and solidifies the 250 coming in at a few hundred pounds less than an 80 series.....wooohooo! I read somewhere the front overhang was like 7" shorter than the 200......cant find that link now.

 

[krice118]

no. It’s still much bigger than a wrangler offroadwise but much less interior space than a 200…

My fat 100 hasn’t stopped me due to its size…

 

[stridertexas]

I saw this today. It was tiny.

I mean TINY.

 

[Brown98LC]

Better because why-maybe smaller? Here are specs. It looks to be narrower than an 80. https://media.toyota.co.uk/wp-conte...1/03/1614162854210223MLandCruiserTechSpec.pdf

these are LC150 specs not the 250

 

[onemanarmy]

if they had not bothered with the hybrid nonsense it would have been even lighter, cheaper, more reliable

and lighter = better MPGs

 

[hoser]

The other big thing that jumped out to me is the lower tow rating.......while most think this lower number is a negative based upon engine power.....the rating is based on a safety calculation of vehicle length / braking /tongue weight and the curb weight of the vehicle. So if theres 1000lb less tow rating vs the 200- its because a lighter weight 250 of the same length with similar brakes just wont hold back a larger mass in emergency situations. It will be interesting to see how much that hybrid battery adds to the rear end and overall curb weight and front/rear bias comparisons. I always hated how an empty 80 felt boucing off rocks and purposely carrying an extra 300lbs of junk vs the LC250 thats carrying a hybrid batt back there pushing an extra 10+mpgs seems like a platform balance win win offroad.

The tow rating is lower likely because of the powertrain. Compare it to the GX550 with a tow rating of 8000 lbs. The LC250 puts out big HP/Torque numbers for its given engine size but it likely CAN'T sustain those levels for the given towing tests. Take a look at the SAE J2807 towing standards, which pretty much all modern trucks sold in the US use nowadays.

https://www.motortrend.com/how-to/1502-sae-j2807-tow-tests-the-standard/

 

[Jetboy]

The tow rating is lower likely because of the powertrain. Compare it to the GX550 with a tow rating of 8000 lbs. The LC250 puts out big HP/Torque numbers for its given engine size but it likely can sustain those levels for the given towing tests. Take a look at the SAE J2807 towing standards, which pretty much all modern trucks sold in the US use nowadays.

https://www.motortrend.com/how-to/1502-sae-j2807-tow-tests-the-standard/

This is right I'm pretty sure.

In the JS2807 std the davis dam grade is the benchmark hill climb. A 6k lb trailer with no friction or other factors included, just the energy required to lift the weight 3,000 feet in elevation requires 6.8kwh or energy. The battery has 1.8kwh. The hybrid doesn't help much on towing if any. It helps in acceleration for sure. But on long grade like the Davis dam - it has enough energy if it's at 100% charge for roughly 1500lbs of weight (ignoring friction). Since the hybrid weighs about 500lbs more - it would benefit the towing of around 1000lbs. BUT... it also possibly reduces payload = reduced tongue weight = lower tow rating.

At the end of the day - it'll probably pull up grades about the same as the normal 270hp turbo 4. Probably not nearly as well as the TTv6.

 

[Jetboy]

if they had not bothered with the hybrid nonsense it would have been even lighter, cheaper, more reliable

and lighter = better MPGs

I think we'll see the 4Runner in that form. Probably both base T4 and T4hybrid just like the Tacoma. I'd guess the base T4 will be the high volume model of the BOF SUV lineup. If it starts around $40k - it'll be hard to beat for the value proposition.

I doubt it'll return better mpg though - I'll take a flyer here and guess around 22-23mpg for the non-hybrid based on the Lexus RX - Turbo4 hybrid is 27mpg combined, non-hybrid turbo4 is 24mpg combined. Pretty similar hybrid on the max hybrid RX.

(The 2 or 3 motor hybrid RX are more like 36mpg, but they're not very comparable.)

 

[onemanarmy]

yea.....give me a 3.8 - 4.2 NA V6 and a 6 speed manual / 6 speed auto

less complex, less expensive, lasts longer, easier to work on, plenty of power to cruse at 80 mph with some gear.

This sole fascination with MPGs on blocky SUVs is 100% stupifying.

no battery = less polution
less miles of wire = less polution
lasts longer = less polution
less parts in general = less polution
less engineers to design = less expensive
use more crossover parts / use the parts for longer = less expensive
less weight / tighter packaging / smaller body = less polution/more mpgs

the masses rarely see those 'CAFE' numbers in the real world anyways

prius/RX/NX/camry hybrid applicance cars.....all day. I don't care.

but its gone too far.

 

[M1911]

yea.....give me a 3.8 - 4.2 NA V6 and a 6 speed manual / 6 speed auto

less complex, less expensive, lasts longer, easier to work on, plenty of power to cruse at 80 mph with some gear.

This sole fascination with MPGs on blocky SUVs is 100% stupifying.

no battery = less polution
less miles of wire = less polution
lasts longer = less polution
less parts in general = less polution
less engineers to design = less expensive
use more crossover parts / use the parts for longer = less expensive
less weight / tighter packaging / smaller body = less polution/more mpgs

Uses a lot more gas = more pollution.

This is the simple reality and all your denial won't change that fact.