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

[onemanarmy]

"sole" was my point.

'a lot'....depends on hundreds of variables.

i'm in no denial. everything i typed is true.

this fascination with MPGs above all else (which causes cars to become more complex, more expensive, and less reliable) is baffling.

make them less complex, cheaper to work on (keep them on the road longer...much less polution to rebuild a transmission vs. building an entire new car), less mining for batteries, less trucking/boating pollution (all these parts have to get to the factor somehow), lighter, smaller, and cheaper (no one needs $1000 each dancing LED head/tail lights....doesn't add to MPG or safety either.....so why?)

give me a NA V6 with a 6 speed in a tighter, lighter, cheaper, less complex truck. No affect on safety either!

less pollution TOO.

for example....they made the Rivian R1T and R1S so heavy its burning thru tires at a crazy rate.....while at the same tine we read articles about how used tires are causing polution issues. But it gets great MPGs!

Crazy man.

 

[Phillyd2]

The current North American SUV market is much like the guy who wants to go to heaven but doesn't want to die. In other words, crazy.

But those living paycheck to paycheck gotta take the grandkids to the mall.

 

[Jetboy]

The Turbo4 based on EPA rating bin should have ~10% reduction in CO2 emissions and 50% less NOx emissions than the GR it replaces. Between the 1GR and T24A - I think I'd take the turbo 4 just for the better power curve. My only beef is that I think it's too small. I should withhold judgment until I drive it. The 2GR is just such a dog in the Tacoma I wouldn't want anything to do with that engine in a LC250. Oddly - it's pretty great in the RX350. So, maybe it's just the gearing/tuning that's the bigger issue on the Taco.

MPG has been a core Land Cruiser ethos since essentially day 1. The diesel land cruisers aren't diesel for the performance. They're slow AF. It's the efficiency. Hybrid is just a different path to the same end.

 

[jayp2]

The Turbo4 based on EPA rating bin should have ~10% reduction in CO2 emissions and 50% less NOx emissions than the GR it replaces. Between the 1GR and T24A - I think I'd take the turbo 4 just for the better power curve. My only beef is that I think it's too small. I should withhold judgment until I drive it. The 2GR is just such a dog in the Tacoma I wouldn't want anything to do with that engine in a LC250. Oddly - it's pretty great in the RX350. So, maybe it's just the gearing/tuning that's the bigger issue on the Taco.

MPG has been a core Land Cruiser ethos since essentially day 1. The diesel land cruisers aren't diesel for the performance. They're slow AF. It's the efficiency. Hybrid is just a different path to the same end.

There's never been anything efficient about the F series of engines.

I used to joke that in 4wd it approached the 1/1 miles to gallon, gallons per mile threashold

And @1911 you looked at where the overwhelming majority of electric production in the US comes from?

U.S. power generation by source 2024| Statista

The U.S. electricity generation peaked in 2022. How is the majority of electricity generated in the U.S.? The main electricity sources are fossil fuels.

www.statista.com

 

[onemanarmy]

Maybe 1 person ever has puchased a LC for the MPGs?

and they got screwed

they are bought for thousands of reasons, but MPG is not one of them

200 series flew off the shelves at 11 mpgs.

diesels were sold cause they would run on just about anything on the African, AUS, and middle east continents/countries. A bit better MPG was a side benefit, but was usually not a reality due to the poor fuels.

the turbos/hybrids/EVs are just because (not to get TOO political here) meddling, ignorant, corrupt, out of touch, pandering, and clueless politicians can't leave things alone.

see: the chicken tax/gray market/25 year rule....you telling me a European spec 2019 BMW sedan is more polluting and less safe than a 1969 US spec Chevrolet Malibu with exploding gas tanks and no cat converter? One of those I can drive on US roads, the other I can't.

lets be real.....its not about some real/imagined effciency, really.

its about control. oh, and billions of lobbying dollars.

that we all vote for and continue to blissfully go along with.....for some reason.


sorry....

 

[VamosHugo]

200 series flew off the shelves at 11 mpgs.

Isn't this the reason we now have a Land Cruiser with a hybrid engine? Because the 200 series did whatever the opposite of "flew off the shelves" is? People just weren't buying them.

 

[onemanarmy]

na...they just didn't advertise the 200 in the US and/or didn't offer enough trims like they did ROW. For the U.S., at the time, Toyotas focus was tacoma, 4runner, and all the generic crossovers. Cheap to build and profit makers. Still basically is.

Toyota was saying "see, they don't sell!" while at the same time not advertising them, selling them alongside $20k corollas, and not offering a variety of trims to appeal to more people. Of course they didn't sell that well.

They didn't sell many compared to a Tahoe, but they sold as many as they made for the US, LX570 too. They sell just fine ROW as well.

we have a LC with a hybrid engine now due to what I stated above.

Don't you think Toyota would have used existing GREAT drivetrains that are proven, less complicated, and cheaper that they have all over the world to power the new LC250 instead of spending billions on a new one? That cuts into profits!
Save those hundreds of R&D billions, sell at the same price (or just a bit lower to get more people to buy), and instant billons more profit!

 

[Phillyd2]

The only reason there's a hybrid has been stated more than once and confirmed by Toyota engineers. The rest is just ridiculous justification, marketing and a dash of cult like religion.

 

[Jetboy]

There's never been anything efficient about the F series of engines.

I used to joke that in 4wd it approached the 1/1 miles to gallon, gallons per mile threashold

And @1911 you looked at where the overwhelming majority of electric production in the US comes from?

U.S. power generation by source 2024| Statista

The U.S. electricity generation peaked in 2022. How is the majority of electricity generated in the U.S.? The main electricity sources are fossil fuels.

www.statista.com

It's the diesels that have been the fuel economy models. Apparently 28mpg - one better than the LC250. I'd love to see an LC40 get 28mpg in any configuration. Haha.

 

[TWILLY]

Maybe 1 person ever has puchased a LC for the MPGs?

and they got screwed

they are bought for thousands of reasons, but MPG is not one of them

200 series flew off the shelves at 11 mpgs.

diesels were sold cause they would run on just about anything on the African, AUS, and middle east continents/countries. A bit better MPG was a side benefit, but was usually not a reality due to the poor fuels.

the turbos/hybrids/EVs are just because (not to get TOO political here) meddling, ignorant, corrupt, out of touch, pandering, and clueless politicians can't leave things alone.

see: the chicken tax/gray market/25 year rule....you telling me a European spec 2019 BMW sedan is more polluting and less safe than a 1969 US spec Chevrolet Malibu with exploding gas tanks and no cat converter? One of those I can drive on US roads, the other I can't.

lets be real.....its not about some real/imagined effciency, really.

its about control. oh, and billions of lobbying dollars.

that we all vote for and continue to blissfully go along with.....for some reason.


sorry....

Step away from the bong and come get a hug.

Land Cruiser‘s terrible, laughable efficiency and range has for decades been a failure of remote touring capability in the US market.

That Toyota finally remedied that failure (about damn time) is not a political conspiracy; it’s common sense.

Good job Toyota.

 

[bj70bc]

you guys are gonna get the ban hammer
but please, dont stop

 

[onemanarmy]

Step away from the bong and come get a hug.

Land Cruiser‘s terrible, laughable efficiency and range has for decades been a failure of remote touring capability in the US market.

That Toyota finally remedied that failure (about damn time) is not a political conspiracy; it’s common sense.

Good job Toyota.

there is no 'conspiracy'

nothing is hidden anymore. its fact.

its done out in the open while they count our votes (again, see the '25 year rule' that has nothing to do with you or me or safety or emissions, it was to protect big biz money) and no one will roll it back. Its too lucrative.

and wait...of all the markets that the Land Cruiser name is sold in.....the US has the most abundant and reliable fueling network, or at least tied for the best

yet the non-hybrid gas and diesels are still offered ROW.....why? aren't they hampered and stymied by that laughable efficiency?

what is going on here:

failure of remote touring capability in the US market.

when in fact, for decades the Cruiser has been the GO TO for remote work all over the world. Has it not been? Why do I see Land Cruisers (gas and diesel) in all types of outdoor activies to this very day? Lots of pics and vids from the70s, 80s, and 90s as well. How can that be?!

you telling me that without the arbitrary, feel good, MPG mandates that we would still have hybrid/tech heavy/overly complex/more expensive tacomas, 4runners, and land cruisers coming in 2024?

 

[TWILLY]

Like I said…

 

[Jetboy]

The land cruiser 300 diesel gets about 26mpg. If it only got 15mpg, Toyota would sell few if any. Buyers care about fuel economy. Anyone who's drives far or anywhere remote cares a lot. North America is a bit unique in not having almost any places that are far from a gas station. There are basically zero in the lower 48. It's not a badge of honor to have terrible efficiency. It's an Achilles heel of a vehicle that could be significantly better.

 

[onemanarmy]

Toyota offers gas and diesel engines all over the world. Non-hybrid. They sell. Sell well. How is that?! The UN and all the terrorist warring factions drive non-hybrid Toyotas. Is MPG their main concern?!

Toyota wasn't explicitly designing the Cruiser to have 'bad' gas mileage, it was a combination of a lot of things. It still sold well. Most are still on the road, all over the world.

Toyotas and Land Cruisers have been the GO TO for around the world travel and 'overlanding' for decades now. This thing about MPGs holding us all back is non-sense.

Sure, better fuel efficency is a good thing......however this rabid, tunnel vision focus on STRICTLY mpgs is not the answer.

I get it......driving to the mall or taking your fam to the beach at 12 mpg is not that fun....but perhaps those people didn't get the correct tool for that lite duty job.

Like I said…

yes?

 

[Rednexus]

The LC has to have better MPG to sell here. We have CAFE requirements for fuel economy that aren't getting any better. Toyota is doing what it needs to do to sell vehicles in the USA in a highly regulated market. Bringing a hybrid to this market is a smart thing to do, and nobody knows hybrids better than Toyota.

I challenge any of the nay-sayers on here to actually drive a Toyota hybrid. You'll love the smoothness/power/range.

 

[onemanarmy]

The LC has to have better MPG to sell here. We have CAFE requirements for fuel economy that aren't getting any better. Toyota is doing what it needs to do to sell vehicles in the USA in a highly regulated market. Bringing a hybrid to this market is a smart thing to do, and nobody knows hybrids better than Toyota.

I challenge any of the nay-sayers on here to actually drive a Toyota hybrid. You'll love the smoothness/power/range.

Yes, we all know why Toyota is going hyrbid here in the states. That was my whole point.

Its not because people don't drive them due to poor MPGs......Cruisers have been the go-to for reliable backcountry, around the world travel for decades....even with 'poor' economy.

They are going hybrid because of meddling, clueless, ignorant people in charge. Not because the Land Cruiser masses are asking for it. The people in charge don't really care about polution. If they did, they would do so many more obvious things instead of mandating that cars have elecetricl motor and battery packs and 50 ECUs.

This is obvious becuase around the rest of the world, the tried and true, dependable, cheaper, less complex engines are still being used. Those poeple value reliablity, cost, and ease of use over a few MPGs.

A longer lasting, less complex, easier to work on vehcile is 'less poluting' as well. I can't count the number of cars that are scrapped due to a $20 part or a repair that is super costly, due to poor design or poor engineering. That mentallity is wasteful and 'not efficient' too.

I'll take a N/A V6, 6 speed that I can work on in my backyard and has as many crossover parts as possible, to keep costs down and to ensure that parts will be available for decades so I can keep it on the road.

 

[desmocruiser]

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.

The dimensions and design theme were intentionally that of the 80 series according to the designer of the 250, both vehicles from an interior space standpoint are notably small, offer good visibility etc. and the 250 should be very effective off road once the approach and departure angles are addressed.

I am not knocking the 250, it is what it is and I like it for that reason. But what it isn’t, is a solid triple locked axle, incredibly simple, over engineered and overbuilt 80 series. I think more a modernized properly sized upscale 4Runner for grown ups and a great answer to how adventure vehicles are utilized today and a positive move for Toyota to sell vehicles in today’s environment ( no pun intended).

I personally prefer the simplicity of former models and despise the reasons that much of today’s engineering (before it is cost effective and feasible) and the creation of throw away cars is being forced on us, but my kids and the generation between us mostly don’t and will not care.

To answer the thread question, it is the best size since the 40? After wheeling a 40, 80, and a 73 and have spent many hours on the trail both East and West with every type Land Cruiser built, I personally think the 73 is the best size possible for wheeling solo or plus one Toyota has ever offered, (but I prefer my 40), however the 80 series and likely the 250 are the most perfect for full family adventure!

 

[jayp2]

Maybe 1 person ever has puchased a LC for the MPGs?

and they got screwed

they are bought for thousands of reasons, but MPG is not one of them

200 series flew off the shelves at 11 mpgs.

diesels were sold cause they would run on just about anything on the African, AUS, and middle east continents/countries. A bit better MPG was a side benefit, but was usually not a reality due to the poor fuels.

the turbos/hybrids/EVs are just because (not to get TOO political here) meddling, ignorant, corrupt, out of touch, pandering, and clueless politicians can't leave things alone.

see: the chicken tax/gray market/25 year rule....you telling me a European spec 2019 BMW sedan is more polluting and less safe than a 1969 US spec Chevrolet Malibu with exploding gas tanks and no cat converter? One of those I can drive on US roads, the other I can't.

lets be real.....its not about some real/imagined effciency, really.

its about control. oh, and billions of lobbying dollars.

that we all vote for and continue to blissfully go along with.....for some reason.


sorry....

 

[jayp2]

na...they just didn't advertise the 200 in the US and/or didn't offer enough trims like they did ROW. For the U.S., at the time, Toyotas focus was tacoma, 4runner, and all the generic crossovers. Cheap to build and profit makers. Still basically is.

Toyota was saying "see, they don't sell!" while at the same time not advertising them, selling them alongside $20k corollas, and not offering a variety of trims to appeal to more people. Of course they didn't sell that well.

They didn't sell many compared to a Tahoe, but they sold as many as they made for the US, LX570 too. They sell just fine ROW as well.

we have a LC with a hybrid engine now due to what I stated above.

Don't you think Toyota would have used existing GREAT drivetrains that are proven, less complicated, and cheaper that they have all over the world to power the new LC250 instead of spending billions on a new one? That cuts into profits!
Save those hundreds of R&D billions, sell at the same price (or just a bit lower to get more people to buy), and instant billons more profit!

If toyota WANTED to sell a 70 series or whatever you want to call it to compete with the greater that 200,000 units that Jeep and Ford Bronco sell every year and do it with little to no R&D because they already make all the require components/drive trains they could do so and it would be very profitable.

They are choosing not to and instead embark on an attempt to sell a new unproven model to a market segment (people) that doesnt yet exist.

Chevy Tahoe, escalades, Ford Exploder's are all bread and butter of those brands and fly off the lots/are highly profitable.

Problem is that once again Toyota is selling what they want instead of what consumers are demanding and purchasing in large numbers from their competitors