Landcruiser VS Prado component strength comparison (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Hulsty
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
I appreciate the video and what they are looking at. Make no mistake, Toyota absolutely is building to adjusted specifications to achieve their target price points in order to capture share in the very attractive SUV market.
Here is a 250/300 price (Australian) comparison from the same dealership in Melbourne. 34% more for the Land Cruiser 300 versus the Land Cruiser 250/Prado. I'm personally pretty impressed they can build a both as BoF, boxed frame and full-time 4WD and have them in the market with this big of a price difference and even get component specifications close. Toyota has the engineering capacity to choose the differences wisely and the manufacturing skill to source quality parts and bolt them together well.
Good on Toyota, set a competitive bar, then good on the other auto manufacturers to respond and compete and keep Toyota on their toes.
If the 250 isn't your thing, good for you, spend your money how you see fit.
www.toyota.com.au
Here is a 250/300 price (Australian) comparison from the same dealership in Melbourne. 34% more for the Land Cruiser 300 versus the Land Cruiser 250/Prado. I'm personally pretty impressed they can build a both as BoF, boxed frame and full-time 4WD and have them in the market with this big of a price difference and even get component specifications close. Toyota has the engineering capacity to choose the differences wisely and the manufacturing skill to source quality parts and bolt them together well.
Good on Toyota, set a competitive bar, then good on the other auto manufacturers to respond and compete and keep Toyota on their toes.
If the 250 isn't your thing, good for you, spend your money how you see fit.
Prices | LandCruiser 300 | Toyota AU
Get latest prices, find offers, & calculate financing across all models and specifications of the LC-300. Locate your nearest dealer & check for availability.
It’s a Prado and not a 300. That doesn’t mean weight and strength were taken out. It was just built different because Landcruiser is a family of vehicles.
That's interesting! The curb weights are so similar - I wonder if the weight reduction efforts were worth the effort and cost of doubling all the tooling, engineering, etc. And - would be intersting to know how the 300 compares to the Sequoia and Tundra. And I suppose also to the 4Runner with the 9.5" rear axle.
This is the first I have heard the 4Runner is getting the 9.5”. I thought it was still the 8.2” found in the 250?
bjowett
Supporting Vendor
Now the big question… can we take a Tundra front suspension/knuckles and bolt it on to the 250? An easy and cheap +2” suspension arms with HD knuckles and probably wheel bearings. Or did Toyota put up their typical road blocks by changing things to prevent an easy swap?
Some trims get the 9.5. I think it's hybrids without AWD. I can't remember what Tacoma trims have the 9.5, but id guess it's the same combination in the 4R.
Who buys a 4Runner without 4WD?
Blasphemy!
That is literally what the video shows.
It’s inferring that the components were made inferior when they weren’t. The specs are different because it’s a different vehicle built for a different purpose.That is literally what the video shows.
These 250 series should be compared to the 120/150 series, not the 300.
I wasn't very clear in my post. It would be the part time 4x4 models with the hybrid. The AWD models have the 8.2" rear axle because power is split front/rear all the time.
I think what that means in practice is that it's a very small subset of trims that are part time 4x4 and also hybrid. I can't remember for sure - but it may be as limited as only the TRD Pro and/or TrailHunter trims. Apparently there now exists 2 different 9.5" category differentials as well that are not interchangeable. I don't know what vehicles get which one or what the difference is. Why that makes sense - I have no idea.
2WD 4Runners do exist. I'm also not sure why anyone would buy them. Do the buyers not know that the Highlander exists? Much better option if you don't need 4WD for almost every other use case. About 20 years ago I didn't know they existed and I went to a dealer who had a great price on a 3rd gen 4Runner and I was looking for one. I test drove it and it seemed too good to be true. I just wanted to run through the systems to make sure everything worked and couldn't figure out how to engage 4wd. That's the first and only time I've ever seen a 2wd one in person. Almost got tricked.
I would rather have the 9.5 as a nice intermediate axle size. But the 8.2 might be considered superior if it is strong enough to not bend or break and lighter. Just needs to be fit for purpose. I don't think anyone would want a Rockwell under there. Even the Tundra 10.5 probably would be worse for a 300 or LC250.
I hope this channel will share some real information on things like axle stiffness, minimum force to bend, cycles to failure, etc. It would just be super interesting to know how much difference the different materials and designs make to the capability of the components. Is the 300 axle 20% stronger? 50%? 200%?
turbo8
Supporting Vendor
Toyota made the lower control arm frame mounting points different.
The Tundra\Sequoia arm mounting points were like an inch wider than the 250.
Last edited:
It can be superior or inferior. The size or strength isn't determinative of that without an application. A Rockwell axle isn't superior to a Jimny axle. It's just different. In this case the 8.2 has more ground clearance and weighs less. Both are objectively better if the axle is strong enough otherwise.
That would be such a better point if that's what was being compared. But it's not so it's irrelevant. Making the case that it's good enough may however be relevant if that's was the topic of the conversation. But it's not. The only relevance here is the two very specific things being compared and there one is obviously superior to the other.
bjowett
Supporting Vendor
Toyota made the lower control arm frame mounting points different.
The Tundra\Sequoia arm mounting points were like an inch wider than the 250.
Suppose we’ll need to compare the actual arm length along with several other parameters… a +1.0 or 1.5” arm may still be useful.
The 9.5 is stronger. For an LC250 - I would choose the 9.5 over the 8.2 because I would want to use it in a lot of ways Toyota does not intend it to be used. I'm still a bit skeptical of the 8.2 on a 5500lb SUV with 465 ft lbs (although I suspect it's not really 465 in any of the lower gears).
But if there's a rock in the trail that is 1/2" too high for the LC300 to clear and the LC250 does clear it - superior to have the 8.2. 34" tires on an LC250 have the same clearance as 35's on a LC300. There are some real benefits to the smaller diff.
