Landcruiser VS Prado component strength comparison (1 Viewer)

[Phillyd2]

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.

LOL on the second paragraph. And sometimes the mean ugly smelly one legged wife can cook a better meal if all you have in the house is a can of tuna and some Tabasco sauce. Some real benefits there? Sure but......

Unless you're getting paid per word the first paragraph would have been enough. Hell, could have put a fork in it after the first sentence.

 

[hoser]

What I noticed about the LC250 rear axle is the trussing underneath the axle is almost a straight line from the diff to the coil spring. A bit of loss of clearance in those areas. The 300 is more of a hyperbolic curve.

And then compare that to a GX460.

 

[Jetboy]

There's a difference between 8.9" and 9.4" of ground clearance.

It's an interesting observation about the shape of the lower axle housings. The GAWR for the 300 is 1930kg vs 1860kg for the LC250. Both are a decent jump over the 1560kg of the old 8.2. But 70kg (154lbs) is a relatively small difference in weight capacity if it's 25% thinner material. Although I think the axle rating is tire (pressure) limited, so it may not mean anything other than what pressure is recommended. I hope they share more information about the stiffness and failure strength of both axle housings if they do flex them until they bend. According to what I can find from the Aussie GVM upgrade companies - to upgrade GVM past a certain point of around 2,600kg on the rear axle of the 300, they swap the rear axle housing to a stronger one. I'd love to learn how they make that determination and what the rules are in Australia for upgrading GVR.

 

[APIOQM]

I’m 90% sure the 9.5 is only on the TRD Pro and Trailhunter.

 

[turbo8]

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.

Sorry if there was confusion, I'll try to reword it. The Tundra arms won't bolt into the 250 frame. The 250 frame mounting points are about an inch narrower than the Tundra.

 

[joseywales]

Who buys a 4Runner without 4WD?

Two words: more Rons

 

[bjowett]

Sorry if there was confusion, I'll try to reword it. The Tundra arms won't bolt into the 250 frame. The 250 frame mounting points are about an inch narrower than the Tundra.

Got it.

 

[MRego]

These 250 series should be compared to the 120/150 series, not the 300.

Nor to the 200. In this we agree 100%. One is clearly less-heavy-duty than the other two.

 

[Jetboy]

Another observation:

Interesting that there's a ring gear clearance cut out on the backside of the diff housing where it mates to the diff cover. It would have no purpose in that spot - but possibly the blanks used to make the housing are made to be non-direction specific. I think the housing is direction specific or you'd have drain plugs randomly located on left or right hand sides.

Another observation is that the ring gear cut out area is not present on the 8.2" diff. It's at least possible if the clearances are similar between ring gear and axle housing that the 9.5 and 8.2 actually have the same ground clearance because the ring gear on the 9.5 is significantly closer to the axle housing than the 8.2.

The older 8.2 (2010-2024) was a fit similar to the 9.5 in the 300 where the housing and 3rd member carrier are notched for ring gear clearance to have a close fit. The new 8.2 appears entirely non-interchangeable unless possibly the ring and pinion parts may swap.

Old 8.2 (non-elocker housing:

New 8.2 Housing:

Old 8.2 vs new 8.2. - I tried to roughly scale the ring gears to match, but it's pretty obvious that the new 8.2 housing is enough larger that the ring gear fits entirely inside the mounting flange diameter where it did not on the old one. It also looks from the image like the carrier assembly (part in the middle of the ring gear) is significantly wider than the old one, the bearing caps look quite a bit further apart, and you can see how the ring gear mounting flange of the carrier has stiffening ribs and is also a lot more robust than the old one. It also is locating the ring gear mounting face quite a bit further inboard. Visually from this image it also appears that the bearing caps are potentially smaller - meaning possibly smaller carrier bearings? The old 8.2 Elocker had significantly larger dia carrier bearings due to the e-locker mechanism, so maybe that's just a result of the change in locking design.

 

[jay3253]

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?

I have a thread asking this question so everyone can have the information. I would rather have the trd pro tacoma half shafts and control arms. But what ever fits on which ever just so we know.