I'd been considering a new(er) Land Cruiser for a year or so. Actually, my wife has been "suggesting" it was time to replace my 2006. A buddy (the one who needed a camera car) and I swapped Cruisers for a week. His '16 is perfect - never 'wheeled, wrecked, modified, etc. Only changes - bigger ATs and no running boards. I was kinda reluctant to swap - afraid I'd have a hard time going back to my 100. Turns out, the opposite happened.
To be clear, the 2016 is @%&#ing NICE. But a 2006 Land Cruiser is pretty damn nice too. The question was: Is this $45,000 nicer? We landed on "no".
Comparing the trucks is tough. For being only one generation apart, they've very (!) different.
- The 200 feels huge compared to the 100 - like a kingsize bed compared to a queen. I couldn't imagine 'wheeling the 200... but I kinda remember saying that about the 100 when I switched from an FJ Cruiser. But, at least on the East Coast, trails would leave their marks.
- The 200's 5.7 is pretty sweet. As they say "No replacement for.. "
- In stock form, the 200 floats around like a Lincoln Towncar on 33s. It's pretty clear Toyota is trying to compete with Range Rovers, Escalades... But they missed the balance. The 200's soft suspension feels like an afterthought - like they simply softened up the spring rate/shocks to de-truck it a bit. It wouldn't surprise me if the U.S. got a different spec.
- Appearance... subjective for sure, but damn - the 2016 and up 200 is just beautiful from every angle... especially the front.
- Fit, finish, feel... Feels like a modern Toyota, e.g. not quite the Toyota of old, but still pretty great. My 15-yr-old 100 actually feels a little tighter - the doors slam with more "thunk", the plastic knobs, handles, etc. feel a little thicker... But again, the 200 is a world apart from most other '16s.
The punchline: I'm keeping my 100 indefinitely. If I were to buy a new SUV in the $70k+ range, it'd be a 200 for sure. But, I don't have to... I have my '06
I had some time this weekend... felt compelled to give the 100 some love. She'd been neglected a bit. A light buff (no cutting) and a ceramic sealant, polished the headlights, the black trim, cowl back to black... you know, the stuff I should've been doing.
To be clear, the 2016 is @%&#ing NICE. But a 2006 Land Cruiser is pretty damn nice too. The question was: Is this $45,000 nicer? We landed on "no".
Comparing the trucks is tough. For being only one generation apart, they've very (!) different.
- The 200 feels huge compared to the 100 - like a kingsize bed compared to a queen. I couldn't imagine 'wheeling the 200... but I kinda remember saying that about the 100 when I switched from an FJ Cruiser. But, at least on the East Coast, trails would leave their marks.
- The 200's 5.7 is pretty sweet. As they say "No replacement for.. "
- In stock form, the 200 floats around like a Lincoln Towncar on 33s. It's pretty clear Toyota is trying to compete with Range Rovers, Escalades... But they missed the balance. The 200's soft suspension feels like an afterthought - like they simply softened up the spring rate/shocks to de-truck it a bit. It wouldn't surprise me if the U.S. got a different spec.
- Appearance... subjective for sure, but damn - the 2016 and up 200 is just beautiful from every angle... especially the front.
- Fit, finish, feel... Feels like a modern Toyota, e.g. not quite the Toyota of old, but still pretty great. My 15-yr-old 100 actually feels a little tighter - the doors slam with more "thunk", the plastic knobs, handles, etc. feel a little thicker... But again, the 200 is a world apart from most other '16s.
The punchline: I'm keeping my 100 indefinitely. If I were to buy a new SUV in the $70k+ range, it'd be a 200 for sure. But, I don't have to... I have my '06
I had some time this weekend... felt compelled to give the 100 some love. She'd been neglected a bit. A light buff (no cutting) and a ceramic sealant, polished the headlights, the black trim, cowl back to black... you know, the stuff I should've been doing.
Last edited: