Based on a 4Runner or Land Crusier Prado. I think its a hard call.
Should a GX470 be considered a LC clone or not? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter NMuzj100
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
NorCalDoug
problems solved daily...
As I understand it, the GX 470 is a Land Cruiser in other parts of the world...that's Land Cruiser enough for me.
And...I think the 4Runner is based on this particular series LC (the 120), not the other way around.
And...I think the 4Runner is based on this particular series LC (the 120), not the other way around.
NorCalDoug said:
These 3 are the same except different sheet metal. The 120 is the base unit that can be built-up with a wider range of engines and trim. The 4runner is more like the LC is in the USA and the GX is more plush like the LX. It will be interesting to see if Toyota changes all of the sheet metal for the LX and LC for the next generation making them appear different.
I believe the GX is just a Land Cruiser Prado rebaged for the US market. In Australia, the LC Prado are very popular and look exactly like the GX. I mentioned this to the Lexus dealership and they kinda laughed at me, but i bet that's what it is.
120 was designed first, than used as the base for the other two.
120/GX/4R=same frame,mechanical triplets (4R&120 even share the same alloy wheels & rr reflectors)
120/4R=4.0L V6
GX/4R=4.7L V8
120/GX=same body except entire front clip (forward of A-pillar) and rr hatch (120 reinforced w/ tire carrier- GX non-reinforced). GX is a full-boat lux version of the 120 w/ V8.
JPN 4R available w/ factory elec. rr diff lock (no idea why not in NA) and diesel.
I like the 120's front design better than the GX though...
120/GX/4R=same frame,mechanical triplets (4R&120 even share the same alloy wheels & rr reflectors)
120/4R=4.0L V6
GX/4R=4.7L V8
120/GX=same body except entire front clip (forward of A-pillar) and rr hatch (120 reinforced w/ tire carrier- GX non-reinforced). GX is a full-boat lux version of the 120 w/ V8.
JPN 4R available w/ factory elec. rr diff lock (no idea why not in NA) and diesel.
I like the 120's front design better than the GX though...
nrea said:
I have come to the strong conclusion that the dealers have NO IDEA what they are talking about. If you want the 411 about Cruisers, come to this site. Someone will know the truth. I drove a GX470 2 weeks ago and it has LC written all over it. All the rednecks who read (loose term in this case) Four Wheeler magazine raised a stink when it was named "4X4 of the year" 2 years in a row. Its a small Cruiser, that's why it won! We understand that, the rednecks don't.
Very good points Diggler!
- Thread starter
- #9
Hey I like Four Wheeler's "Trail Lex" features but can still understand the rage over a $40,000 plus feature truck. Most enthusiasts can't afford to drive a vehicle like that on the trails. Most "readers rigs" are older beaters cause that is what people really wheel. The reason the "rednecks" (I don't really qualify as one but wouldn't be ashamed if I did) didn't know it was just a fancy "cruiser" is because the magazine had no coverage of it's cruiser roots and it's extensive overseas field testing as a LC Prado. Actually they said it was a based on the 4Runner.
The reason Lexus dealers know nothing about the plebian roots of their fine 4wds is not just the fact that selling cars requires little knowledge of the actual product. But also a coporate image that is bent on seperating themselves from their toughest competitor in the minds of their customers. That competitor is Toyota. If they were to admit that their cars are just toyotas with better leather and different headlights who would buy one.
The most obvious result of this strategy is the linking of the GX470 and LX470 as if the LX470 was just a longer/pricier GX470 when it is much further from a GX than from a LC100.
OK - So should there be a GX470 Tech forum to bring in these owners ?
The reason Lexus dealers know nothing about the plebian roots of their fine 4wds is not just the fact that selling cars requires little knowledge of the actual product. But also a coporate image that is bent on seperating themselves from their toughest competitor in the minds of their customers. That competitor is Toyota. If they were to admit that their cars are just toyotas with better leather and different headlights who would buy one.
The most obvious result of this strategy is the linking of the GX470 and LX470 as if the LX470 was just a longer/pricier GX470 when it is much further from a GX than from a LC100.
OK - So should there be a GX470 Tech forum to bring in these owners ?
Last edited:
NMuzj100 said:
It would be a very empty forum... I know of one serious wheeler/GX owner and he is waiting for the warranty to expire before modding it out. I have asked others and NO GX will wheel with me. It's going to take a few years, imo.
Maybe a "120" forum to umbrella all the triplets? OK I'm sure this topic is pissing off the LC purists so I'll stop there!
Let me qualify by what I define as a "redneck". There are 4-5 guys who are regulars at the local offroad park. Each has spend over 10K modifying their rigs. Mostly Broncos and Blazers. Yet, not one of them has more than 5 teeth! No joke.
I took a friend one time, who happens to black, and the rednecks acted like I just punched their mother. That is a redneck imho.
These are the people who hate seeing the GX named 4x4 of the year. I understand the cost issue, but that doesn't mean it isn't a great offroad vehicle.
ps- My favorite pastimes are Bass Fishing and Four wheelin'. Some may consider me a redneck, but definitions vary.
I took a friend one time, who happens to black, and the rednecks acted like I just punched their mother. That is a redneck imho.
These are the people who hate seeing the GX named 4x4 of the year. I understand the cost issue, but that doesn't mean it isn't a great offroad vehicle.
ps- My favorite pastimes are Bass Fishing and Four wheelin'. Some may consider me a redneck, but definitions vary.
Call the GX what you want. It won't bug me. From what we're used to seeing Toyota do with the Land Cruiser here in the US, the GX does NOT follow suit. The prograssion from the 60 to the 80 and to the 100 shows the model getting slightly larger each time and well as being more luxorious while not degrading it to a on-road SUV.
The GX takes 2 steps back from the current 100 by:
1. Reduced vehicle size and comfort
2. Reduced/lesser-grade suspension design which compromises ground clearance and ability to run large tires (35-inch) without extreme mods.
While the GX is a super SUV, it does not in any way make a 100 owner to want to "upgrade" their Land Cruiser to the new "Land Cruiser" (GX). Does that make sense?
The GX takes 2 steps back from the current 100 by:
1. Reduced vehicle size and comfort
2. Reduced/lesser-grade suspension design which compromises ground clearance and ability to run large tires (35-inch) without extreme mods.
While the GX is a super SUV, it does not in any way make a 100 owner to want to "upgrade" their Land Cruiser to the new "Land Cruiser" (GX). Does that make sense?
NorCalDoug
problems solved daily...
I might be misinterpreting your post, but it seems to me that you're thinking that the progression of the series numbers are always upgrades from the previous -- e.g. 40 is an upgrade from the 25, 62 an upgrade from the 60...100 an upgrade from the 80...
While this may be the case in the example above, It doesn't seem to be the method used by Toyota for naming their model/series Land Cruisers. If it was, the 55 would be an upgrade to the 40 and the 75 an upgrade of the 62. This simply is not the case.
The 120 is simply another model of Land Cruiser. It shouldn't be considered an upgrade of the 100 series.
While this may be the case in the example above, It doesn't seem to be the method used by Toyota for naming their model/series Land Cruisers. If it was, the 55 would be an upgrade to the 40 and the 75 an upgrade of the 62. This simply is not the case.
The 120 is simply another model of Land Cruiser. It shouldn't be considered an upgrade of the 100 series.
NorCalDoug said:
True. Well put and noted. J
- Thread starter
- #16
I for one don't think that going bigger and more luxurious is always an improvement. I don't want the next LC to be Suburban sized (1987 Suburban for Sale - Send me a PM). I like my luxury but consider reserves of capability more important than more wood trim and leather lined glove boxes. I wish we could get the rock solid mechanicals of the LC with fabric seats and rubber floor mats. Then I could afford to move up to a 2000+ with the traction control, stronger front diff ect.. that I value.
Toyota could do worse than moving the Landcruiser towards the 4wd purist and away from the Luxury Flagship at odds with the Lexus brand . I can see the next LC as the "Rubicon" version of the 120 platform.
I concur that a GX board would be empty but how about a 120 series board. Thats a lot of folks and if it was called a 120 board even purists would approve. Anyone know if the 4r frame is still labled a 120 by Toyota?
Random thought- Does Prado actually mean something or have a history?
Toyota could do worse than moving the Landcruiser towards the 4wd purist and away from the Luxury Flagship at odds with the Lexus brand . I can see the next LC as the "Rubicon" version of the 120 platform.
I concur that a GX board would be empty but how about a 120 series board. Thats a lot of folks and if it was called a 120 board even purists would approve. Anyone know if the 4r frame is still labled a 120 by Toyota?
Random thought- Does Prado actually mean something or have a history?
NMuzj100 said:
lol- working in that subliminal sale, haha
I think it literally means "Land Cruiser Family"... but I could be wrong.
Here are a couple good reviews that describe the Prado and it's place-
tech applies to 4R and GX(even better, GX gets KDSS)
http://www.overlander.com.au/pg/vehicle_search.php?id=216
http://www.overlander.com.au/pg/vehicle_search.php?id=208
Last edited:
NMuzj100 said:
The 120/GX/4Runner is not an ideal platform for a "Rubicon-ish" type of vehicle. The unrderside was designed to provide more room inside the truck. This compromises ground clearance especially the very low slung gas tank on the driver's side. Then there's the small tire issue. Bottom line: You'd really have to change the entire truck to successfully "Rubicon" the thing.
Look under an 80 or 100. EVERYTHING is tucked WAY UP away from the ground. This is not the case in the 120/GX/Runner. The ground clearance "spec" is very misleading. If you want a ToyRubi, then Rubi the 100.
I agree, comparing my 2004 4runner with my FZJ80, there is more stuff hanging down. I think the GX/4runner is a highway cruiser/snow/slick roads, with the ability to go on some rough logging roads, no rock crawling. It does ride real nice compared to the old FZJ80 Like Clint said a man's got to know his limitations and I think the same thing goes for SUV's
Like Clint said a man's got to know his limitations and I think the same thing goes for SUV's
NorCalDoug
problems solved daily...
heh heh heh...this sounds almost like the arguements people made against the 100 series a few years back...
