Land Cruiser Speeds/Performance

[jronpaul]

Hi,

Looking for a used Land Cruiser and am interested in their performance and handling. I had assumed the 2006+ version would be the best since it has slightly more horsepower vs other UZJ100's. However I noticed on a 0-60 time website that the 1998 (not UZJ100) version seems to be a lot quicker.

1998 Toyota Land Cruiser 0-60 mph 8.6
1999 Toyota Land Cruiser 0-60 mph 9.3
2003 Toyota Land Cruiser 0-60 mph 11.4
2006 Toyota Land Cruiser0-60 mph 11.3
2008 Toyota Land Cruiser 0-60 mph 6.4

I know that is not the purpose of these cars but am curious: is the 1998 cruiser actually significantly quicker than the 2003-2006 version? Obviously once you get to the 2008 it's another story as well. I love the look of the earlier cruisers and if they are actually faster that might be a good option for me. What do the experts here think?

Thanks

 

[ikarus]

The only thing I could think of is the switch from 4 speed transmission in 2003 to a 5 speed. From back in my WRX days I remember that the Subaru WRX and its 5 speed trans was technically faster in the 0-60 vs a WRX STI with the 6 speed cause you had to shift 3 times to get to 60, instead of twice.

Other important things to consider between the years are weaker front diff 98-99, rear locker 98-99, and better transmission 03+. They're all gonna handle/perform pretty much the same.

At this point with bigger tires, bumpers, winch, sliders and a lift, my 0-60 time is "yes" hahah

 

[Mike6158]

I don't think I've ever even thought about saying - man... my Land Cruiser is fast, quick, or speedy. Especially post lift and tire upgrade. The handling suffered a little with the lift but thanks to AWD it corners pretty well but it doesn't do avoidance maneuvering very well. The back end wants to come up... I may switch my 0-60 time from eventually to yes

 

[cruisermaine]

I know the 200 series is much faster as it was very noticeable when I drove one. However, I would expect the each generation of the 100's should be basically the same allowing for variations between tests ( different drivers, elevations, temperature) with the 2nd generation posting faster times given they have substantially more HP and torque with the vvti. Both the 4 and 5 speeds can get to 60 in 2nd gear.

 

[FXJ 96]

Hi,

Looking for a used Land Cruiser and am interested in their performance and handling. I had assumed the 2006+ version would be the best since it has slightly more horsepower vs other UZJ100's. However I noticed on a 0-60 time website that the 1998 (not UZJ100) version seems to be a lot quicker.

1998 Toyota Land Cruiser 0-60 mph 8.6
1999 Toyota Land Cruiser 0-60 mph 9.3
2003 Toyota Land Cruiser 0-60 mph 11.4
2006 Toyota Land Cruiser0-60 mph 11.3
2008 Toyota Land Cruiser 0-60 mph 6.4

I know that is not the purpose of these cars but am curious: is the 1998 cruiser actually significantly quicker than the 2003-2006 version? Obviously once you get to the 2008 it's another story as well. I love the look of the earlier cruisers and if they are actually faster that might be a good option for me. What do the experts here think?

Thanks

You've quoted some times for diesel or other non-North American spec Land Cruisers mixed in with times from "normal" US Land Cruisers.

 

[FXJ 96]

2000 - 9.4 (motor trend) 4.7L w/4 speed
2005 - 9.02 ("carspecs") 4.7L w/5 speed
2006 - 8.05 (carspecs) 4.7L w/VVTi and 5 speed
2008 - 6.5 (Road and Track) 5.7L

 

[Eicca]

My solution to a slow Land Cruiser was to buy a different car.

It’s just not built for speed and excitement. And that’s fine. Just enjoy the fact that nothing can stop you getting to wherever you’re going.

 

[Mike6158]

1998 Toyota Land Cruiser 0-60 mph 8.6 | Quarter mile 16.5 <<--- slower than a 2500HD Chevy crew cab truck 7.3/15.7
1999 Toyota Land Cruiser 0-60 mph 9.3 | Quarter mile 16.6 <<--- slower than a 2500HD Chevy crew cab truck 7.3/15.7
2003 Toyota Land Cruiser 0-60 mph 11.4 | Quarter mile 18.7 <<--- slower than a 2500HD Chevy crew cab truck 7.3/15.7
2006 Toyota Land Cruiser 3.0 D-4D 0-60 mph 11.3<<--- slower than a 2500HD Chevy crew cab truck 7.3/15.7 no quarter mile time
2008 Toyota Land Cruiser 0-60 mph 6.4 | Quarter mile 14.9--- not bad but not impressive
2011 Toyota Land Cruiser LC5 Diesel 0-60 mph 11.5 <<--- slower than a 2500HD Chevy crew cab truck 7.3/15.7
2016 Toyota Land CruiserC 0-60 mph 6.7 | Quarter mile 15.2--- no slower than a 3/4T pickup but meh...
Trucks aren't made for speed either (they can be tweaked though)

All in all... very underwhelming times... there goes my aspirations to build a "Land Cruiser Ferrari killer"

 

[Alibaster]

I drive like a tool sometimes and I can easily get to 80-90mph on the highway in the hills of West Virginia and PA. In the city I leave a distance and slow roll the traffic. But I drive a Volvo S60 to work most days so I don’t care how the LC goes. Once you get bigger tires and a bumper it will go to s*** anyway.

 

[ton504]

I love my supercharged 100 as a daily but a supercharged 200 would be a better. I suggest you look into a 200 series to start with. Hopefully I can make the jump in the near future.

 

[Alibaster]

I definitely think there are at minimum two sub populations there. There are mainly stock guys who go on pavement and well maintained trails in public parks and guys who want to go “off road” on trails and use some of the features that a 99 LC has that aren’t available to modern SUVs. So I guess you need to decide what you’re gonna use it for to decide which performance is better. I, personally, would not choose to daily drive a 20 year old SUV with an inefficient engine.

 

[Zero Emissions]

Watch This Toyota Land Cruiser Set a 230 MPH SUV Top Speed Record

Nascar driver Carl Edwards takes the Land Cruiser to a place it's never been before.

www.roadandtrack.com

 

[FxFormat]

I've drag raced against a geo metro and lost, these are pigs, but they're built for a different purpose.

This is my solution to a slow Land Cruiser, have a secondary speed toy.

 

[planomateo]

I doubt the earlier 100s are faster than the late model 100s, due to transmission and engine improvements. You're probably comparing gas vs diesel engine numbers.

I was driving a supercharged 5.7L Tundra prior to my 07 100. I miss the quick acceleration and prefer the 100. My priority is balance of off-road / on-road performance.

 

[Njck22]

I doubt the earlier 100s are faster than the late model 100s, due to transmission and engine improvements. You're probably comparing gas vs diesel engine numbers.

I was driving a supercharged 5.7L Tundra prior to my 07 100. I miss the quick acceleration and prefer the 100. My priority is balance of off-road / on-road performance.

Supercharged 5.7l sounds amazing. Was it the magnuson/trd charger? I head it makes something like 500hp 550lbft. Quite the change going to a 100 huh?

 

[planomateo]

Yes, the TRD. Bought on eBay from a Toyota dealership in Massachusetts for $4750 and had Toyota in Richardson do the install for $700 + 5 gallons of premium gas. Saved myself about $2k doing it this way

It put a smile on my face every single day.

 

[jronpaul]

2000 - 9.4 (motor trend) 4.7L w/4 speed
2005 - 9.02 ("carspecs") 4.7L w/5 speed
2006 - 8.05 (carspecs) 4.7L w/VVTi and 5 speed
2008 - 6.5 (Road and Track) 5.7L

Thanks for these specs. I am not looking for something that is "fast" but would also like it to be enjoyable to drive on CO highways where it will spend most of its time. I'm having a hard time finding any other sources for the 2006 VVTi getting an 8 second 0-60, but that would probably be fine. The 2008+ around 6 seconds seems to be pretty quick for a large truck.

Time to get out there and start driving the different model years to decide...

 

[planomateo]

Thanks for these specs. I am not looking for something that is "fast" but would also like it to be enjoyable to drive on CO highways where it will spend most of its time. I'm having a hard time finding any other sources for the 2006 VVTi getting an 8 second 0-60, but that would probably be fine. The 2008+ around 6 seconds seems to be pretty quick for a large truck.

Time to get out there and start driving the different model years to decide...

LOL, probably fine?? You're talking about driving the highways and worried about 0-60 speeds. Does not compute.

On a serious note, can you even enjoy driving the highways in Colorado? Every time I drive I25 from Wyoming to New Mexico I get irked because people are slow poking in the fast lane.

My 07 is plenty fast enough, I tow my m416 trailer with a RTT at 85 and have no issue passing people.

 

[2000 LC]

I don't think you will notice a drastic difference between the different model years of the 100.

The 200, however, is like driving a sports car compared to the 100. I was blown away by the power of the 5.7

As for the 100, let's just say I've gotten used to driving like an old man. I like being able to actually stop.

 

[jronpaul]

LOL, probably fine?? You're talking about driving the highways and worried about 0-60 speeds. Does not compute.

On a serious note, can you even enjoy driving the highways in Colorado? Every time I drive I25 from Wyoming to New Mexico I get irked because people are slow poking in the fast lane.

My 07 is plenty fast enough, I tow my m416 trailer with a RTT at 85 and have no issue passing people.

0-60 speeds are simply indicative of the overall acceleration and responsiveness of the car....and acceleration is still important on the highway. I-70 is a nightmare of twists and turns and I like to be able to get past some FWD no-snow tire POS that's about to careen across the interstate. I don't find people generally drive too slow in CO, just very poorly and crash often.