Out with the new, in with the old (1 Viewer)

[1NTRANSIT]

After 6 months and 8800mi my 250 journey has ended.

I felt I needed to air out why the 250 ultimately had to go as it could help future buyers.

There is A LOT to love about the vehicle and at this point the pros have been well aired on this forum - 11/10 styling, build quality, feature rich, excellent ride.

The 250 replaced our beloved 460 as the primary family wagon. We had 7 stellar years with the 460 and loved it until the day we passed it to a family member. Jumping to the next gen of the platform was easy. We mulled over GX vs LC, drove both and settled on the LC based on the classic styling.

We had a solid 4 month honeymoon. Then something really started to eat at me…

**WARNING**Fussing below***

The IForce NVH is absolutely atrocious, IMO. It flat out sounds like a lawn mower or best case a 20yo Corolla. Its a complete mismatch for the vehicle. Proper sound deadening could have helped tremendously, I presume engineers debated and it was struck down in efforts to save weight. I could go on and on. I’ll stress that power is great with this system, zero issues there, it’s peppier than the 460 V8.

Last month I came to grips that I wasn't going to keep $70k+ tied up in a vehicle I didn't LOVE.

You will be thinking, ok whino go get the GX w/ V6 and problem solved. We ultimately made the decision to go bigger. We’re on 6hr trips once a month at least, as the family has grown so has the amount of crap my kids cram into the vehicle, as of late I’ve longed for a little more space, but it wasn't a huge consideration until the urge overtook me to get out of the 250.

Yesterday a ‘21 LX in silver came home with us. Luckily on trade we only took a $1500 hit on the 6m 250 test drive, the FE held value well.

Overall bummed the 250 didn’t work out as I had high hopes it was going to be a long term vehicle for us. I believe the GX has a bright future but in time the LC will struggle without a V6 option OR a rethink on how to quiet down the NVH.

 

[Jetboy]

Thanks for the review! Space was the reason I sold my 4R and ended up in a Tundra. The volume of stuff we need for traveling with kids never ceases to amaze me.

I'm curious how you feel like the cargo area compares. It's a little surprising just how small the LC250 cargo volume is vs older models. Toyota spec on LC250 is 37.5 cf. vs LX570 at 54 cf. That's a big difference - especially with similar exterior dimensions. Even a 5th gen 4Runner has about 1/3 more room with 47.2 cf behind the middle row.

I'm also a bit confused how it is so little compared to a 6th gen 4Runner that's basically the same thing re-skinned. But it has 48.4cf behind the middle row and 90.2cf max. More than a Sequoia - probably says more about the poor design in the sequoia, but still a bit of a head scratcher.

Does it feel like it's 50% less cargo capacity than the LX570? Or is something not translating from the calculated volume to real world use?

I have similar questions about how it ended up with such an unbalanced engine and why they didn't opt for a 3.5L N/A v6 with the hybrid. Seems like that would have resulted in a much quieter and smoother powerplant with similar performance and lower costs and Toyota already has that powertrain in other vehicles.

Hope you love the LX a little more!

 

[1NTRANSIT]

460 w/3rd row platform to the 250 w/ hybrid battery platform is about apples and apples for usable cargo space. Really no gripes there.

The 200 may be 50% larger on paper but it doesn’t work out to quite a 50% advantage in utility. The usable depth of the 250 box vs the 200 box is very similar, BUT the width is where the big body shines. We travel with a dog and he takes up half of the cargo area and likes to stretch out. The 570 is a 2 row so tons of usable space overall.

The back seat has a little more extra leg room and a flat floor (to house kid crap) and the extra width keeps them a little farther apart when in a backseat skirmish.

We’ve had a 100 for many years so the interior dims are familiar.

Historically LC and Lex equivalents have shared a common engine and it would have made total sense to V6 the LC and leave the 4cyl in the new 4R for differentiation.

 

[Jetboy]

460 w/3rd row platform to the 250 w/ hybrid battery platform is about apples and apples for usable cargo space. Really no gripes there.

The 200 may be 50% larger on paper but it doesn’t work out to quite a 50% advantage in utility. The usable depth of the 250 box vs the 200 box is very similar, BUT the width is where the big body shines. We travel with a dog and he takes up half of the cargo area and likes to stretch out. The 570 is a 2 row so tons of usable space overall.

The back seat has a little more extra leg room and a flat floor (to house kid crap) and the extra width keeps them a little farther apart when in a backseat skirmish.

We’ve had a 100 for many years so the interior dims are familiar.

Historically LC and Lex equivalents have shared a common engine and it would have made total sense to V6 the LC and leave the 4cyl in the new 4R for differentiation.

For us it was the 2nd kid that ended up not having enough space for kids + dogs + stuff. It wasn't necessarily a complete deal breaker. We still do road trips regularly in our RX350 that is a bit smaller. But for camping when we want to tow a travel trailer and take along more toys, the truck started to make more sense. Would be amazing to have AHC from the LX in a Tundra. The ride, comfort, tech, etc of the LX is a significant over the Tundra.

The V35A looks good on paper and feels pretty good driving. But thermal efficiency is on par with 2000's era NA engines. As much as I like the idea of the v6 base model the 17mpg is probably a dealbreaker for a lot of buyers. I'd rather have a N/A v6 hybrid with 25mpg. Or just balance and isolate the 4cyl. There are plenty of great 4cyl turbo engines that are well balanced and isolated from the cabin.

 

[rexington14]

For us it was the 2nd kid that ended up not having enough space for kids + dogs + stuff. It wasn't necessarily a complete deal breaker. We still do road trips regularly in our RX350 that is a bit smaller. But for camping when we want to tow a travel trailer and take along more toys, the truck started to make more sense. Would be amazing to have AHC from the LX in a Tundra. The ride, comfort, tech, etc of the LX is a significant over the Tundra.

The V35A looks good on paper and feels pretty good driving. But thermal efficiency is on par with 2000's era NA engines. As much as I like the idea of the v6 base model the 17mpg is probably a dealbreaker for a lot of buyers. I'd rather have a N/A v6 hybrid with 25mpg. Or just balance and isolate the 4cyl. There are plenty of great 4cyl turbo engines that are well balanced and isolated from the cabin.

Agreed. How much NVH from the turbo 4 is worth putting up with for the increase in fuel economy (~6 mpg) over the V35A? I'm sure a lot of folks genuinely prefer the turbo 4 for fuel economy.

Toyota is stuffing the T24A into pretty much everything at this point. Sedans, crossovers, BOF. Even their luxury lines - the bread and butter RX350 which has had the T24A-FTS for a couple years now. The same powertrain NVH complaints can be found in this latest RX, but folks are still scooping them up. Though I suspect the RX likely has better noise insulation relative to the LC and therefore stock NVH isn't as bad.

This is the last year to snag an ES350 with a 2GR before that more than likely gets T24A'd next year as well. The 2025 ES350 probably the best -new- car to buy at the moment if you want to know what you're getting into long term.

 

[Jetboy]

In general larger engines have relatively similar efficiency at similar power output. This should be even more true with each generation of engine and especially with turbo engines. But in this case the V35A is burning around 25-30% more fuel. That's pretty unusual. A non-hybrid LC250 would probably be around 21 or 22mpg vs 17mpg in the GX. That's 25% difference in fuel efficiency. I'd rather have a turbo V6, but maybe just not this particular V6.

 

[OSS]

The I4 in thr 250 today gives them room to upgrade the engine several years from now

 

[1NTRANSIT]

In general larger engines have relatively similar efficiency at similar power output. This should be even more true with each generation of engine and especially with turbo engines. But in this case the V35A is burning around 25-30% more fuel. That's pretty unusual. A non-hybrid LC250 would probably be around 21 or 22mpg vs 17mpg in the GX. That's 25% difference in fuel efficiency. I'd rather have a turbo V6, but maybe just not this particular V6.

I haven't brought up MPGs as a pain point but we couldn’t stay above 18mpg mixed at 1k mi intervals over 8k mi. A few times I reset the clock and made a point to drive like a granny and managed to get it to touch 20ish but it would always settle back down to 17-18. Thats nearly 20% off mixed estimates. This is with the dumb aero wings removed and the OEM rack. Our 460 would get 19-21 hwy on premium all day long.

The MPGs had to have been evaluated with a 58 running smaller tires, bare roof and eco mode.

 

[bicycleagent003]

Thanks to those who are sharing on this thread. That is very helpful information for us future buyers.

 

[HeadacheManNYC]

After 6 months and 8800mi my 250 journey has ended.

I felt I needed to air out why the 250 ultimately had to go as it could help future buyers.

There is A LOT to love about the vehicle and at this point the pros have been well aired on this forum - 11/10 styling, build quality, feature rich, excellent ride.

The 250 replaced our beloved 460 as the primary family wagon. We had 7 stellar years with the 460 and loved it until the day we passed it to a family member. Jumping to the next gen of the platform was easy. We mulled over GX vs LC, drove both and settled on the LC based on the classic styling.

We had a solid 4 month honeymoon. Then something really started to eat at me…

**WARNING**Fussing below***

The IForce NVH is absolutely atrocious, IMO. It flat out sounds like a lawn mower or best case a 20yo Corolla. Its a complete mismatch for the vehicle. Proper sound deadening could have helped tremendously, I presume engineers debated and it was struck down in efforts to save weight. I could go on and on. I’ll stress that power is great with this system, zero issues there, it’s peppier than the 460 V8.

Last month I came to grips that I wasn't going to keep $70k+ tied up in a vehicle I didn't LOVE.

You will be thinking, ok whino go get the GX w/ V6 and problem solved. We ultimately made the decision to go bigger. We’re on 6hr trips once a month at least, as the family has grown so has the amount of crap my kids cram into the vehicle, as of late I’ve longed for a little more space, but it wasn't a huge consideration until the urge overtook me to get out of the 250.

Yesterday a ‘21 LX in silver came home with us. Luckily on trade we only took a $1500 hit on the 6m 250 test drive, the FE held value well.

Overall bummed the 250 didn’t work out as I had high hopes it was going to be a long term vehicle for us. I believe the GX has a bright future but in time the LC will struggle without a V6 option OR a rethink on how to quiet down the NVH.

Couldn't agree more. 15K on my FE and one of the few enduring complaints is the absurd NVH from the 2.4. I drove a '24 SR5 tacoma a few weeks ago that seemed better isolated from the engine room. To be fair, there are circumstances where it really isn't an issue - highway driving for one - but I wouldn't recommend one until Toyota comes up with a fix. Curious to see how the 4runner fares in this regard.

 

[Biff]

Thank you for sharing your insight. Info like this is one of the main reasons I have kept my 22 4Runner. I have been eyeing a FE 250 but will most likely wait a few years to see if engine performance improves.

 

[MOTOV8R]

Thanks for the review! Space was the reason I sold my 4R and ended up in a Tundra. The volume of stuff we need for traveling with kids never ceases to amaze me.

I'm curious how you feel like the cargo area compares. It's a little surprising just how small the LC250 cargo volume is vs older models. Toyota spec on LC250 is 37.5 cf. vs LX570 at 54 cf. That's a big difference - especially with similar exterior dimensions. Even a 5th gen 4Runner has about 1/3 more room with 47.2 cf behind the middle row.

I'm also a bit confused how it is so little compared to a 6th gen 4Runner that's basically the same thing re-skinned. But it has 48.4cf behind the middle row and 90.2cf max. More than a Sequoia - probably says more about the poor design in the sequoia, but still a bit of a head scratcher.

Does it feel like it's 50% less cargo capacity than the LX570? Or is something not translating from the calculated volume to real world use?

I have similar questions about how it ended up with such an unbalanced engine and why they didn't opt for a 3.5L N/A v6 with the hybrid. Seems like that would have resulted in a much quieter and smoother powerplant with similar performance and lower costs and Toyota already has that powertrain in other vehicles.

Hope you love the LX a little more!

Interesting cargo numbers, big difference between the 4R and 250. They messed up the 3rd gen Sequoia, our 2nd gen has 66.6 cf behind the 2nd row and 120 cf behind the front seats. It would be hard to go down to the 250 at near 50% less.