Not to that extreme, but doesn't that describe the whole line of cruisers?
Props to us here that see the value of long term quality, but most have been trained to be a throw-away-society of consumers.
Sequoia vs LC (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter MCtree
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
Not to that extreme, but doesn't that describe the whole line of cruisers?
Props to us here that see the value of long term quality, but most have been trained to be a throw-away-society of consumers.
If you took out all the ECUs and turned them into mechanical systems again, the truck would weigh 10,000 lbs LOL
Oh they are solutions alright... for the problems of public control and subjugation. Just a little bit longer until central bank digital currency is fully implemented, and then the enslavement will be complete.
More nuclear power is exactly what we need, but the public have been brainwashed with fear and doubt, so it's not going to happen any time soon.
That's why I like the 200 series: it's a wonderful middle-ground between modern tech, mechanical robustness, quality production, capability, and repair/modification accessibility.
Older vehicles frequently lack the "minimum" tech (for my wants/needs), while newer vehicles are excessively unmaintainable and unaccessible. The 200 hits the spot. If only I could have a few more...
I wanted to also add that I’m not upset about complexity in general, we owe a lot to complexity and technology when it comes to safety for example. Even mechanical safety sensors and controls. IE limp mode exists to spare things.
Does every online discussion have turn down the path paranoia and of command and control conspiracy.
Last edited:
Yep here we go.....
Last edited:
If I didn't have an LX, I'd want a Land Cruiser (honestly, I'd be relatively indifferent between the two).
If I could have those, I'd probably get a Tundra...then a Sequoia.
If I couldn't have a Sequoia, I'd probably get a 4runner.
If I couldn't have a 4runner, I'd find myself in a Highlander...then a RAV4
...and If I couldn't have a RAV4, then and only then you'd find me in a Prius.
If I could have those, I'd probably get a Tundra...then a Sequoia.
If I couldn't have a Sequoia, I'd probably get a 4runner.
If I couldn't have a 4runner, I'd find myself in a Highlander...then a RAV4
...and If I couldn't have a RAV4, then and only then you'd find me in a Prius.
The iphone 3G was released shortly before my 2009 LX was built.
The iphone also drained it's battery and became worthless just in time by the 2010 model year release...
bloc
SILVER Star
If this doesn't stay somewhat related to 200-series tech it will get wiped, and I'm totally fine with that.
To circle back, I still think the 2nd gen Sequoia is a real sleeper. Like a stripped down SR5 Cruiser with more space. Not necessarily built with with a 25-year service life in mind like a 200 series, but still extremely robust. Once again, a 15-year-old Toyota design that is still extremely reliable and refuses to die.
The Sequoia will have a tough time with that compromised 3rd row folding seat. If I want a compromised Toyota product I'll wait for a used 300 LX. If I want something in the Sequoia's price range new I'd rather have a Tahoe.
I don't mind these turbo engines if they're fitted to large enough displacement motors. The 2.0 liter 4 cylinder in my mother's GLE350 feels downright dangerous merging from a stop in traffic. It needs to be in sport mode for any modicum of safety. That being said she gets 30 mpg + on the highway cruising 70+ which is incredible for a mid size SUV.
For something like a 300 I think a 4 liter turbo v6 would have been the sweet spot.
Big displacement or turbo it always helps if the car is light. My C6 Z06 got 30-31 mpg on the highway with an extremely long 6th gear and 7 liter engine. The 4.0 V8 in the M3 just swills fuel no matter what you're doing, I think that motor is ill suited to such a heavy application but it only appears there so that's your only choice. The turbo 3 liter is definitely a huge improvement in efficiency. And in the G80 it has character and so much speed.
I don't mind these turbo engines if they're fitted to large enough displacement motors. The 2.0 liter 4 cylinder in my mother's GLE350 feels downright dangerous merging from a stop in traffic. It needs to be in sport mode for any modicum of safety. That being said she gets 30 mpg + on the highway cruising 70+ which is incredible for a mid size SUV.
For something like a 300 I think a 4 liter turbo v6 would have been the sweet spot.
Big displacement or turbo it always helps if the car is light. My C6 Z06 got 30-31 mpg on the highway with an extremely long 6th gear and 7 liter engine. The 4.0 V8 in the M3 just swills fuel no matter what you're doing, I think that motor is ill suited to such a heavy application but it only appears there so that's your only choice. The turbo 3 liter is definitely a huge improvement in efficiency. And in the G80 it has character and so much speed.
The Sequoia is currently only available in a hybrid so the lack of flat floor is due to battery space. It's not a design flaw, it's a fact of life in the Hybrid era.
LX 600 does have a nice flat floor. Though those seats have to go somewhere. Just more space (for now) with no battery pack. I wonder what this is like on the base 2-row LX600.
Compared to the 570 you can see the elevated floor, though this is somewhat of a difficult comparison with the lack of drop down tailgate on the 600. The 570, obviously, consumes that space vertically, unless you opt for a 2-row.
LX 600 does have a nice flat floor. Though those seats have to go somewhere. Just more space (for now) with no battery pack. I wonder what this is like on the base 2-row LX600.
Compared to the 570 you can see the elevated floor, though this is somewhat of a difficult comparison with the lack of drop down tailgate on the 600. The 570, obviously, consumes that space vertically, unless you opt for a 2-row.
This is definitely something that is an ongoing challenge for EVs, and would be a deal breaker for control off-road.
To your point, the latest Hummer EV test in Moab leaves a lot to be desired.
Something something GM
Well of course it is not a flaw since it was an intentional design decision. But like the Tundra they could have optioned the hybrid to certain models. I think that is what most folks are disappointed about. Hybrid delete + 3rd Row delete and I would have ordered one. Instead I keep my 21.
