Kai from Tinker's Adventure thoughts on the new 250 series

[jay3253]

Okay, so the thing we are not considering is economy of scale. The new TGNA platform is now universal excluding the 70 series. The mounts as well are different frame to frame sometimes. The only thing Tinker tested was US frames. Can someone from over seas do some of those measurements and let us know if there is a difference. I watched the video this weekend and don't remember if he measured a 300 or just a 200. Maybe go measure a LX to test this idea.

I do not believe this vehicle is as robust as others else where. However, the market it is made for it is more than robust enough. IF, there is a need then the market and Toyota will make a change. If not the few who think it is too weak will make the needed changes themselves. Also, this vehicle is far more serviceable than any of the previous versions. I think that is more important than others in this market. If I was taking a TLC across the Sahara or all of Africa and South America I most likely would take a 70 series not this one. I would take my 100 before this one.

 

[Rednexus]

Not questioning other than 5 PEs? I have a PE in ME what do you mean when you say 5 PEs? Once you have one you have one that is it unless you have them in many types of engineering. In that case you just hate yourself and life.

You have to have one for each state you practice in if you are in a responsible charge role, so I have 5. Some of my colleagues have 20+, but it gets a bit onerous to keep up with the annual renewals, professional development hours, and other different state-by-state laws. Practicing in a state you aren't licensed in is a big no-no in my field and can result in $$$$ in personal fines and cause you to lose licenses in other states too, so it can effectively end your career.

 

[Phillyd2]

Kai is not wrong. It seems that the marketing and accounting departments finally asserted their dominance over the engineers. The 250 looks nice but it’s audience is now overlanding glampers, online influencers and those who want to project a certain image.

And while I have no clue what the GX engineer is saying, it’s low clearance and crap approach angle mocks his earnest script reading.

Both look good and will hopefully well serve their intended audience but sadly neither are what was hoped for or what could have been. No doubt the new 4R will only double down on the new reality.

 

[jay3253]

You have to have one for each state you practice in if you are in a responsible charge role, so I have 5. Some of my colleagues have 20+, but it gets a bit onerous to keep up with the annual renewals, professional development hours, and other different state-by-state laws. Practicing in a state you aren't licensed in is a big no-no in my field and can result in $$$$ in personal fines and cause you to lose licenses in other states too, so it can effectively end your career.

My first thought was good lord you are a gluten for punishment. Taking the test again at my age would kill me! Are you a CE? I work with basically only CEs and many of them have reciprocity in other states. I don't envy you keeping up with that, I hope your renewals are all in the same year.

 

[Oakleyguy]

Kai is not wrong. It seems that the marketing and accounting departments finally asserted their dominance over the engineers. The 250 looks nice but it’s audience is now overlanding glampers, online influencers and those who want to project a certain image.

And while I have no clue what the GX engineer is saying, it’s low clearance and crap approach angle mocks his earnest script reading.

Both look good and will hopefully well serve their intended audience but sadly neither are what was hoped for or what could have been. No doubt the new 4R will only double down on the new reality.

So regarding the GX overhangs.

I ran the GX5 over the following trails: Imogene, Poughkeepsie Gulch, and Blackbear Pass without any scraps to the chin or rear bumpers.

Suspension is stock with 275/70/18 KO2s.

I think the criticism on the GX overhangs is over stated.

 

[Rednexus]

My first thought was good lord you are a gluten for punishment. Taking the test again at my age would kill me! Are you a CE? I work with basically only CEs and many of them have reciprocity in other states. I don't envy you keeping up with that, I hope your renewals are all in the same year.

You only have to take the test one time, after that NCEES will have your records on file and you need to re-apply for each state, which is maybe half a day of work (but varies significantly from state-to-state). I'm licensed as a civil but my specialty is geotechnical engineering, where failure consequences are often quite high, so a entry bar to keep out folks who don't know what they are doing is definitely warranted. Unfortunately my renewals are NOT on the same year, and every state has a different renewal processes and required information.

 

[NY2LA]

I really appreciate Kai's technical discussions, but I think this particular video represents a reduction in analytical robustness on his part. I'm not an engineer, but if the whole vehicle is lighter, surely many individual parts will be supporting less weight and can be thinner. And obviously, materials and shapes are critical too. I'm not persuaded by arguments that only look at how thick a component is.

As the former owner of a 200, current owner of the GX 550, and someone who just returned from Iceland, where I drove a GX150 for several hundred miles on the unpaved F-roads, I greatly appreciate Toyota's improvements over the years. The 150 was a crude and harsh experience vs my GX550. The only thing I really enjoyed about that vehicle was the fuel economy. The diesel just lasted forever. In fact, without such good fuel economy, travelling across Iceland's highlands would have been impossible. But I was dreaming the whole time of being able to be in my GX550 during the drive.

My 200 was a formidable beast, and there are some things I liked about it better, such as the quietness, but I greatly appreciate being in the much lighter GX550. It's faster, nimbler, and better for mixed driving in many respects. We'll see about how it holds up over time; but I think we all need a lot more data for that.

 

[Jeremy556]

So regarding the GX overhangs.

I ran the GX5 over the following trails: Imogene, Poughkeepsie Gulch, and Blackbear Pass without any scraps to the chin or rear bumpers.

Suspension is stock with 275/70/18 KO2s.

I think the criticism on the GX overhangs is over stated.

Guessing you bypassed the wall on P Gulch? San Juans don't really test approach and departure angles much. Head over to Moab and you'll be dragging bumper a lot.

 

[Jeremy556]

I really appreciate Kai's technical discussions, but I think this particular video represents a reduction in analytical robustness on his part. I'm not an engineer, but if the whole vehicle is lighter, surely many individual parts will be supporting less weight and can be thinner. And obviously, materials and shapes are critical too. I'm not persuaded by arguments that only look at how thick a component is.

As the former owner of a 200, current owner of the GX 550, and someone who just returned from Iceland, where I drove a GX150 for several hundred miles on the unpaved F-roads, I greatly appreciate Toyota's improvements over the years. The 150 was a crude and harsh experience vs my GX550. The only thing I really enjoyed about that vehicle was the fuel economy. The diesel just lasted forever. In fact, without such good fuel economy, travelling across Iceland's highlands would have been impossible. But I was dreaming the whole time of being able to be in my GX550 during the drive.

My 200 was a formidable beast, and there are some things I liked about it better, such as the quietness, but I greatly appreciate being in the much lighter GX550. It's faster, nimbler, and better for mixed driving in many respects. We'll see about how it holds up over time; but I think we all need a lot more data for that.

The GX and LC250 are only about 200lbs lighter than the 200

As far as the thickness of LCA mounts... I don't think it really matters. If you wheel it and drop on rocks, they are going to bend, even the 200 series. I've never seen an LCA mount ripped off, except from poor welds on fabricated setups. Just like in the previous models, if you are going into rocks, you need aftermarket armor.

 

[NY2LA]

The GX and LC250 are only about 200lbs lighter than the 200

Noted. I stand corrected on the weight. Let's go with "lighter-feeling." What's at play there is another topic, though.

 

[Rednexus]

The GX and LC250 are only about 200lbs lighter than the 200

As far as the thickness of LCA mounts... I don't think it really matters. If you wheel it and drop on rocks, they are going to bend, even the 200 series. I've never seen an LCA mount ripped off, except from poor welds on fabricated setups. Just like in the previous models, if you are going into rocks, you need aftermarket armor.

If they are already bending on a 200, they are really going to bend on a 250 that is essentially the same weight and has significantly thinner steel .

 

[Jetboy]

150, 200, 250, 300 - as touring wagons, they're great. And probably are all interchangeable functionally. There's very little a 200 does that a 150 doesn't, or a 250 or 300 in any of their various forms. The biggest difference I see is that the 250 and 300 that make them significantly better base platforms is the re-worked front IFS clearance. You can just go buy some 37's, bolt them on with minor mods, and go play. Getting the 150 or 200 past 34" tires gets complicated and expensive fast. The Tundra has that same advantage over the LC200 or J150 - 35's are just a bolt on option with no mods and 37s are pretty easy to fit.

Something that makes that option of big tires easy to fit really great for dual purpose rigs is that you can keep a set of stock tires and use it as a daily driver or touring wagon and just keep a set of 37's on wheels in the shop and swap them over when you want to go have a weekend wheeling trip. In 30 minutes you can go from comfortable grocery getter 20+mpg to rubicon ready. That's not something that can realistically be done with the older platforms.

 

[NY2LA]

150, 200, 250, 300 - as touring wagons, they're great. And probably are all interchangeable functionally. There's very little a 200 does that a 150 doesn't, or a 250 or 300 in any of their various forms. The biggest difference I see is that the 250 and 300 that make them significantly better base platforms is the re-worked front IFS clearance. You can just go buy some 37's, bolt them on with minor mods, and go play. Getting the 150 or 200 past 34" tires gets complicated and expensive fast. The Tundra has that same advantage over the LC200 or J150 - 35's are just a bolt on option with no mods and 37s are pretty easy to fit.

Totally disagree with this. I literally stepped out of a 150 a couple weeks ago after driving several days in Iceland, and it was a completely different vehicle than my 200 and 550, each of which were/are also very different from each other.

The 200 was a quiet tank that would be my #1 choice for long stretches on the highway with some offroad adventures--including heavy duty ones after building it out. The GX550 OT gets more sporty in, well, "sport" mode and is by the fast the best vehicle for harried jaunts around town combined with some highway driving and offroading. The 150 was rough, harsh, and has that old-school truck feeling. It was harder to steer, harder on the body, louder, and just a much less sophisticated animal all around. But the 150 still got me across some very rough paths for a many miles. And it's superior fuel economy was critical for my use.

These vehicles overlap but are not interchangeable. But they each offer something different for different needs and preferences.

But I see and agree with your point on swapping out tire sizes on other vehicles. I wonder how many people do that, though, versus haven't a dedicated offroad rig.

 

[Jetboy]

Totally disagree with this. I literally stepped out of a 150 a couple weeks ago after driving several days in Iceland, and it was a completely different vehicle than my 200 and 550, each of which were/are also very different from each other.

The 200 was a quiet tank that would be my #1 choice for long stretches on the highway with some offroad adventures--including heavy duty ones after building it out. The GX550 OT gets more sporty in, well, "sport" mode and is by the fast the best vehicle for harried trips around town combined with some highway driving and offroading. The 150 was rough, harsh, and has that old-school truck feeling. It was harder to steer, harder on the body, louder, and just a much less sophisticated animal all around. But the 150 still got me across some very rough paths for a many, many miles. And it's superior fuel economy was critical for my use.

There's nothing interchangeable about these vehicles. But they each offer something different for different needs and preferences.

I think you are mostly describing the variations among trims. A GR spec 200 isn't much different from a J150. Toss some TRD Pro Fox bypass shocks on that J150 and it would ride better than most 200s on the same terrain. A GX460 is also going to be more comfortable than a base GR spec 200. The different platforms certainly have some variations. Some are slightly bigger, smaller, wider, longer. But they're all midsize 4x4 touring wagons. The biggest differences are powertrains and mostly those overlap. The LC250 could have a turbo6, the TRD Pro 4Runner absolutely should have the turbo6, the GX will come with the same 2.4 turbo 4 hybrid soon. The right mix and match option for an individual user is probably important to get the best value for that use. And they all have their own character. But they are all shades of the same color - midsize 4x4 wagon.

 

[izzyandsue]

My first thought was good lord you are a gluten for punishment. Taking the test again at my age would kill me! Are you a CE? I work with basically only CEs and many of them have reciprocity in other states. I don't envy you keeping up with that, I hope your renewals are all in the same year.

I was wondering the same, as a Mech E here from BS to post grad and only took one test (NY) as most states offer reciprocity, or at least used to back in the 80s and 90s.

What I do not understand is why people who obviously dislike or hate the product join a group that buys the product, but I never took psych classes.

As for robustness etc., what is typically missed is the engineering that goes into the design (and yes enginerds do make mistakes, therefore errs and omissions insurance). But for example we are not building DC9 aircraft anymore as strength of materials, alloys, manufacturing techniques, and structural application knowledge all change and evolve. And time will tell if Toyota made metallurgical changes no one can see but strengthen materials beyond what we know, or it is all the same.

I have an 80 series and a fj43, both are awesome and simple, but I am truly amazed by what the 250 can do in trails I have taken it, just returned from a 10 day trip to NM from NC and it was impressive.

 

[Rednexus]

What I do not understand is why people who obviously dislike or hate the product join a group that buys the product, but I never took psych classes.

I would say no one on here hates it, in fact I quite like the GX550 looks/tow capacity/power and concept of hybrid the LC250 as well - as we also own a late-model Toyota hybrid and love it. BUT, Toyota obviously made some rather large departures from their past design philosophy, and are charging a premium $60-90K price for these rigs. They've also had some huge misses recently (e.g., costly engineering/manufacturing mistakes) in the TNGA-F platform - VA35F Tundra/LX engine recall plus the Tacoma transmission recall. Time will tell if they hold up long-term like their past rigs (like the one I drive currently). And, from someone who is used to having their work questioned - I'm never going to go along with "they are engineers, don't question them" .

If I needed a new rig today, I'd still pass on either of them and pick up a lightly used GX460 at half the costs of either of those rigs, and has the benefit of having known reliability/known faults and a markedly less steep depreciation curve. Sure, we aren't building aircraft here, but I look at it from the lens of a low-risk and a high-risk capital investment. If the 250/550 pan out, I'd certainly consider one in a few years.

 

[Phillyd2]

So regarding the GX overhangs.

I ran the GX5 over the following trails: Imogene, Poughkeepsie Gulch, and Blackbear Pass without any scraps to the chin or rear bumpers.

Suspension is stock with 275/70/18 KO2s.

I think the criticism on the GX overhangs is over stated.

Ha. Ran all those back in a stock 4R Trail which had better clearance and I still wished I had more but bless your heart if you think those numbers aren’t pathetic for something sold as a capable off road truck.

 

[Rednexus]

Ha. Ran all those back in a stock 4R Trail which had better clearance and I still wished I had more but bless your heart if you think those numbers aren’t pathetic for something sold as a capable off road truck.

Poughkeepsie/San Juan Chief side trail scars on mine. Bottom of the hitch has some nice metal gouges. Clearance is king.

 

[jay3253]

You only have to take the test one time, after that NCEES will have your records on file and you need to re-apply for each state, which is maybe half a day of work (but varies significantly from state-to-state). I'm licensed as a civil but my specialty is geotechnical engineering, where failure consequences are often quite high, so a entry bar to keep out folks who don't know what they are doing is definitely warranted. Unfortunately my renewals are NOT on the same year, and every state has a different renewal processes and required information.

No one knows the trouble that test is. I'll be honest it took me 2 times. 8 hours open book 100 questions for an engineering test is a daunting task. If one thinks engineers don't make mistakes don't know engineering is a art of close enough. And once I wasn't close enough and the next I was.

I have owned a number of TLCs and then I had a number of VWs. I think even with the new TLC will be more reliable than any of my VWs. I miss my VWs.

 

[Jetboy]

I think it's easy to put a bit too much emphasis on raw approach and departure angles. A better formula for offroad angles would include a factor for the actual height of the bumpers and belly. My formula would go something like taking approach/departure/breakover in a formula like this: (Angle)*((Min front bumper height in inches)/16). So if the GX has a bumper height from ground of 12 inches, it would have an effective approach score of 26*(12/16) = 19.5. The GX approach is a problem IMO - but that's partly due to the oddly long nose, but also partly due to it just being a bit of a low rider in general. My RX350 has better approach and departure angles than a GX550 - really. Even the overtrail version. But it's going to still bump into things more often because it's just lower to the ground in general.

I think the GX would be mostly a non-issue once you get some 35s or 37's on it and a bit of armor. In stock form - it's probably going to leave a lot of paint and plastic on the rocks on anything much beyond a fire roads.