Media LC 250 & GX550 Picture Thread (7 Viewers)

Photo/Video/Audio threads

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

According to the state department importing a car to Slovakia requires a 19% VAT deposit and another 19% customs deposit. That would make roughly 38% of the vehicle price if that applies to the listed retail price if those are for various taxes and fees. That makes the 90k euro price roughly $60k USD. Seems to be roughly inline with expected USD pricing. That also fits pretty well with the existing Prado 150 that would translate to $40k USD as a starting price. Pretty close to normal global pricing structure.
 
Rednexus said:
I watched that video and it kind of turned me off on both the 2nd and 3rd gen Tundra. That crazy amount of frame flex in the 2nd gen shows why they always had midsize truck payload, and the 3rd gen seems to have some pretty big compromises for off-road use (although it's probably good as a pavement/towing rig).
Click to expand...
I don't see the issue with frame flex. It's by design and seems to work pretty well. No one complains about the Unimog that has a ton of engineered frame twist. I tend to think the 2nd gen is a better truck in many (not all) ways compared to the 3rd gen. I'm not seeing broken or cracking frames. Semi trucks also seem to handle loads pretty well despite pretty flexible frames.
1702422307988.png
1702422391617.png


I also think the payload is hard to explain. I've yet to read or see any engineering guide on how they come up with payload. I can say from experience that the Gen2 tundra has a lot higher real-world payload capacity than a J150 in spite of the MFG listed values. With air bags - 2500lbs of payload in my Tundra is easy with confident highway handling. 2500lbs in a 4Runner or GX even with airbags would start to be challenging to manage.

I was surprised that Toyota appeared to really cut corners on the base model tundra front suspension and front diff setup. Looks like they just re-used the LC300 front diff assembly and off-set to the left hand side, then put a longer axle on the other side to widen the track width. If it's a bespoke differential setup for the model - why would they not keep matching axle lengths? That's weird. And - the basic CV on the interior is a real disappointment. Fragmenting the parts between various models makes everything more complicated for later owners who have to start searching for specific models and trims. It was nice in my other Toyota's to only carry one spare CV shaft instead of two.

The steering is also really strange to make a weak link in the tie rod assembly, but then have a collar that fixes it for some versions. I can only think that it has something to do with crash testing and that the tie rod has to fail for the tire to deflect correctly or something like that. Otherwise why?
 
Jetboy said:
I don't see the issue with frame flex. It's by design and seems to work pretty well. No one complains about the Unimog that has a ton of engineered frame twist. I tend to think the 2nd gen is a better truck in many (not all) ways compared to the 3rd gen. I'm not seeing broken or cracking frames. Semi trucks also seem to handle loads pretty well despite pretty flexible frames.
View attachment 3505555View attachment 3505558

I also think the payload is hard to explain. I've yet to read or see any engineering guide on how they come up with payload. I can say from experience that the Gen2 tundra has a lot higher real-world payload capacity than a J150 in spite of the MFG listed values. With air bags - 2500lbs of payload in my Tundra is easy with confident highway handling. 2500lbs in a 4Runner or GX even with airbags would start to be challenging to manage.

I was surprised that Toyota appeared to really cut corners on the base model tundra front suspension and front diff setup. Looks like they just re-used the LC300 front diff assembly and off-set to the left hand side, then put a longer axle on the other side to widen the track width. If it's a bespoke differential setup for the model - why would they not keep matching axle lengths? That's weird. And - the basic CV on the interior is a real disappointment. Fragmenting the parts between various models makes everything more complicated for later owners who have to start searching for specific models and trims. It was nice in my other Toyota's to only carry one spare CV shaft instead of two.

The steering is also really strange to make a weak link in the tie rod assembly, but then have a collar that fixes it for some versions. I can only think that it has something to do with crash testing and that the tie rod has to fail for the tire to deflect correctly or something like that. Otherwise why?
Click to expand...

And don't forget all the pundits and "press" on YouTube, including the "engineer" from Automotive Press parroting the Toyota NA folks that all TNGA-F vehicles are "the same" or "basically the same" underneath.

I don't buy it. Toyota will save money where they can and will make money where they can. This isn't the rising tide that lifts all ships but rather a race to the bottom.
 
TheLCProject said:
And don't forget all the pundits and "press" on YouTube, including the "engineer" from Automotive Press parroting the Toyota NA folks that all TNGA-F vehicles are "the same" or "basically the same" underneath.

I don't buy it. Toyota will save money where they can and will make money where they can. This isn't the rising tide that lifts all ships but rather a race to the bottom.
Click to expand...
They didn’t say it was the same. They said it was the same architecture and that the frame can be adjusted in strength as needed, with thicker or thinner sections. The frame is also adjusted in length of wheelbase. They never said the suspension was the same.
 
M1911 said:
They didn’t say it was the same. They said it was the same architecture and that the frame can be adjusted in strength as needed, with thicker or thinner sections. The frame is also adjusted in length of wheelbase. They never said the suspension was the same.
Click to expand...





2024 TOYOTA LAND CRUISER CHIEF ENGINEER EXPLAINS DEVELOPMENT PHILOSOPHY - https://youtu.be/5FokG09NGuA?si=XNHTADi7xzqVwK4A&t=196

I'm sure there's more but I have already spent too much time and there is a lot more to gather on the Tundra and Tacoma commentaries.

Ok, cool, so the frame between the 250 and 300 is "similar", and the "suspension architecture" is identical, but the ultimate design is weakened for the LC250 so that, along with the reduced luxury, can be more accessible and affordable to more people. That means thinner and weaker control arms, thinner CVs, thinner tie-rod ends, removal of KDSS from the 1958 and LC and only a disconnecting rear sway bar on the LC and First Edition, and on and on.

This is the exact same play that Toyota ran when they introduced the Prado as it diverged from the heavy duty line.

It's fine and I get it, but it's not a 300 series chassis with a 250 body. And I'd highly suspect that the same legendary design robustness (25 year design life in the harshest environments) will apply to this vehicle. But I guess the same could be said for the 300.
 
TheLCProject said:
And don't forget all the pundits and "press" on YouTube, including the "engineer" from Automotive Press parroting the Toyota NA folks that all TNGA-F vehicles are "the same" or "basically the same" underneath.

I don't buy it. Toyota will save money where they can and will make money where they can. This isn't the rising tide that lifts all ships but rather a race to the bottom.
Click to expand...
It probably depends on which vehicle we're comparing. The lC250 and Tacoma get a major upgrade as a result. They share lots of stuff with they LC300 - axles, diffs, etc. I think the LC250 shares the same chassis with slight changes to the LC300. When we finally get to see them in real life we can measure the frame material gauge and confirm. I'll bet a dollar they are the same. Tundra, Tacoma, and Sequoia are likely heavier gauge than LC300 and LC250. They almost have to be due to the longer wheelbases. That's a big upgrade for the Taco and LC250. The tundra had a heavier duty chassis so that's probably a bit of a downgrade.

At the end of the day, the proof will be in the results. Are they as durable and/or perform as well as the outgoing versions? I think in case of Tundra it's a mix. Suspension flex is significantly reduced, but on-road handling, payload, and towing are improved. It became more of a street truck and less of a farm truck. For the Taco - I think it'll be a big win.
 
Jetboy said:
I don't see the issue with frame flex. It's by design and seems to work pretty well. No one complains about the Unimog that has a ton of engineered frame twist. I tend to think the 2nd gen is a better truck in many (not all) ways compared to the 3rd gen. I'm not seeing broken or cracking frames. Semi trucks also seem to handle loads pretty well despite pretty flexible frames.

I also think the payload is hard to explain. I've yet to read or see any engineering guide on how they come up with payload. I can say from experience that the Gen2 tundra has a lot higher real-world payload capacity than a J150 in spite of the MFG listed values. With air bags - 2500lbs of payload in my Tundra is easy with confident highway handling. 2500lbs in a 4Runner or GX even with airbags would start to be challenging to manage.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree that the Tundra probably can go above the rated payload, it just involves some legal risk for the driver if there is an accident and the vehicle was loaded above the payload. Toyota rated with with a low payload for some reason - who knows if it's the frame or something else.
 
TheLCProject said:
I'm sure there's more but I have already spent too much time and there is a lot more to gather on the Tundra and Tacoma commentaries.

Ok, cool, so the frame between the 250 and 300 is "similar", and the "suspension architecture" is identical, but the ultimate design is weakened for the LC250 so that, along with the reduced luxury, can be more accessible and affordable to more people. That means thinner and weaker control arms, thinner CVs, thinner tie-rod ends, removal of KDSS from the 1958 and LC and only a disconnecting rear sway bar on the LC and First Edition, and on and on.

This is the exact same play that Toyota ran when they introduced the Prado as it diverged from the heavy duty line.

It's fine and I get it, but it's not a 300 series chassis with a 250 body. And I'd highly suspect that the same legendary design robustness (25 year design life in the harshest environments) will apply to this vehicle. But I guess the same could be said for the 300.
Click to expand...
You could have save a bunch of time since the 'same' argument has been made locally more than once.
 
Press release

pressroom.lexus.com

A NEW LEGEND IS BORN: THE ALL-NEW 2024 LEXUS GX - Lexus USA Newsroom

PLANO, Texas (Dec. 13, 2023) – The wait is over. The much-anticipated 2024 Lexus GX is finally here and ready for adventure with an unparalleled combination of elegant features, off-road capability and luxurious quality. Reimagined from the ground up, the all-new GX was designed to inspire...
pressroom.lexus.com pressroom.lexus.com
 
TWILLY said:
Source?
Click to expand...

global.toyota

Toyota's New Land Cruiser "250" Makes World Premiere | Toyota | Global Newsroom | Toyota Motor Corporation Official Global Website

Toyota Motor Corporation (Toyota) has unveiled the new Land Cruiser "250" Series to the world, with the launch planned for the first half of 2024 in Japan. Also announced today is the heavy-duty Land Cruiser "70", which will make its return to Japan this coming winter as a regular model in the...
global.toyota global.toyota

"The new 250 Series is a core Land Cruiser model with the same GA-F platform as the 300 Series to dramatically improve basic performance as an off-roader."


"At the heart of this is the GA-F platform.
Reliability and durability are built-in, and performance over rough terrain is on par with the flagship Land Cruiser 300."


"If the 70 is the essence of Land Cruiser...
then the flagship Land Cruiser 300, is the pinnacle.
But today...
I want to talk about what lies between those two worlds...
Today is all about defining the CORE of Land Cruiser."


The proof will be when we can have a GX550 and Prado side by side with a LX600 and get some direct measurements and comparisons. But there's a reason that there are price differences between the vehicles and it's not just badging.

They leverage the GA-F platform to say they are the same while at the same time differentiating them and saying that one is flagship (300) whereas the other one is core land cruiser (250)...but the heavy duty one is the essence (70) of land cruiser.

Confused?



Let's get back to the news today. 21 MPG for the GX550. Makes me think the Prado 250 will be a good bit higher than that. 21 mpg on a 21 gal tank - 400 mile range.
 
TheLCProject said:
global.toyota

Toyota's New Land Cruiser "250" Makes World Premiere | Toyota | Global Newsroom | Toyota Motor Corporation Official Global Website

Toyota Motor Corporation (Toyota) has unveiled the new Land Cruiser "250" Series to the world, with the launch planned for the first half of 2024 in Japan. Also announced today is the heavy-duty Land Cruiser "70", which will make its return to Japan this coming winter as a regular model in the...
global.toyota global.toyota

"The new 250 Series is a core Land Cruiser model with the same GA-F platform as the 300 Series to dramatically improve basic performance as an off-roader."


"At the heart of this is the GA-F platform.
Reliability and durability are built-in, and performance over rough terrain is on par with the flagship Land Cruiser 300."


"If the 70 is the essence of Land Cruiser...
then the flagship Land Cruiser 300, is the pinnacle.
But today...
I want to talk about what lies between those two worlds...
Today is all about defining the CORE of Land Cruiser."


The proof will be when we can have a GX550 and Prado side by side with a LX600 and get some direct measurements and comparisons. But there's a reason that there are price differences between the vehicles and it's not just badging.

They leverage the GA-F platform to say they are the same while at the same time differentiating them and saying that one is flagship (300) whereas the other one is core land cruiser (250)...but the heavy duty one is the essence (70) of land cruiser.

Confused?



Let's get back to the news today. 21 MPG for the GX550. Makes me think the Prado 250 will be a good bit higher than that. 21 mpg on a 21 gal tank - 400 mile range.
Click to expand...

I was asking for you to provide the source for your assertion about "thinner and weaker control arms, thinner CVs, thinner tie-rod ends."

Do you have data about those components?
 
Watch the tinkerers adventure video on comparing the tundra second and third gen. There's some LC600 comparison in there too. It proves that the same platform really only means the basic frame and chassis design approach is similar and that there can be significant variation of all other chassis and suspension components.

And as I said before, we will have to wait to have both products in hand. There are people in this forum and thread that currently have access to all the vehicles but you'd have to ask them for the comparison details.

I'm going off my hunch that Toyota is in this to make money and that there are no free rides. Maybe I'm wrong. I'm done arguing on the internet. PM me if you want to continue this Twilly.
 
TheLCProject said:
Watch the tinkerers adventure video on comparing the tundra second and third gen. There's some LC600 comparison in there too. It proves that the same platform really only means the basic frame and chassis design approach is similar and that there can be significant variation of all other chassis and suspension components.

And as I said before, we will have to wait to have both products in hand. There are people in this forum and thread that currently have access to all the vehicles but you'd have to ask them for the comparison details.

I'm going off my hunch that Toyota is in this to make money and that there are no free rides. Maybe I'm wrong. I'm done arguing on the internet. PM me if you want to continue this Twilly.
Click to expand...

I'm not arguing. I'm simply asking if you have data that the rest of us don't.

So, no, you don't.
 
TWILLY said:
I'm not arguing. I'm simply asking if you have data that the rest of us don't.

So, no, you don't.
Click to expand...

Here's one example. There are more to be made but I'm not going to do your homework for you. I'm sure that even if there are differences between then flagship and the 250/550, either will make a fine remote tourer for you.

Tie-rod ends

GX550 from OC Auto Show (posted above)
1702481874576.png


Tundra (Third gen (GA-F) on top and 2nd gen on bottom)
1702482115146.png



LC 300
1702481988188.png


LX600
1702482322836.png



Inner tie-rods appear similar between TNGA_F Tundra and GX but the outer tie-rod on the GX seems a better match to the LC and LX.
 
Last edited:
Good headroom figures for those taller folks and a bit more confirmation that we might see some Overtrails without a moonroof:

Nearly 42" headroom for first row sans moonroof.

1702483221271.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

doc5339
Used LC 250 Prado / GX550 Post-Liberation Day Current Value Tracker
2 3
Replies
44
Views
6K
Meat Head
Meat Head
doc5339
LC 250 Retrofits/Modifications for the PRADO owner
2
Replies
20
Views
5K
Masbirdies
M
VWEeplusa
Anyone else own both a GX550 and a 250?
Replies
3
Views
771
calokie
calokie
Rigger
  • Sticky
LC250 & GX550 Tire Thread
2 3
Replies
47
Views
13K
brnt
brnt

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 8 (members: 4, guests: 4)

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom