The nastiest Land Cruiser review ever

[chimyz]

Unfreaking believable !! Are you kidding me ?? Pull your head out of the clouds for 5 minutes, please !!

Geez !! Ok, I will admit whole heartedly that Rovers are not the best built, reliable trucks out there..But, for once, could one of you please just admit that maybe, just maybe the damn LC is not the vehicle to end all vehicles. That while it is an excellent vehicle, there are some areas (the 200 included) that could be done better !!! Hell, I have owned 6 of the things, I like them tremendously, but I also will admit that they do stand room for improvement in some areas.

We were talking about equipment, materials, etc. For a vehicle priced as high as it is, some of the materials just are not befitting a $70,000+ vehicle. Reliability has nothing to do with that issue. Oh, I could see one of you people paying $80,000 for a 4 cylinder Camry with cloth seats and manual windows and saying ...Yeah, maybe it doesn't have a V-12 or real fine interior fittings. But by golly, it's reliable !! That is arrogance and ignorance !! God, what are some of you smoking ????

Nothings perfect...everything could be improved, including you and me!

All I was saying was $70,000 of engineering is money better spent than $70,000 of "LOOK AT ME!!!"

 

[twstrchasr]

Nothings perfect...everything could be improved, including you and me!

All I was saying was $70,000 of engineering is money better spent than $70,000 of "LOOK AT ME!!!"

To each his/her own, I guess !!
Good grief, it's silly to banter over such a trivial thing !!

 

[dtt255]

Unfreaking believable !! Are you kidding me ?? Pull your head out of the clouds for 5 minutes, please !!

Geez !! Ok, I will admit whole heartedly that Rovers are not the best built, reliable trucks out there..But, for once, could one of you please just admit that maybe, just maybe the damn LC is not the vehicle to end all vehicles. That while it is an excellent vehicle, there are some areas (the 200 included) that could be done better !!! Hell, I have owned 6 of the things, I like them tremendously, but I also will admit that they do stand room for improvement in some areas.

We were talking about equipment, materials, etc. For a vehicle priced as high as it is, some of the materials just are not befitting a $70,000+ vehicle. Reliability has nothing to do with that issue. Oh, I could see one of you people paying $80,000 for a 4 cylinder Camry with cloth seats and manual windows and saying ...Yeah, maybe it doesn't have a V-12 or real fine interior fittings. But by golly, it's reliable !! That is arrogance and ignorance !! God, what are some of you smoking ????

HEY I PAID $71,000 for MINE!!

 

[chimyz]

HEY I PAID $71,000 for MINE!!

What, no discount?

 

[sdtash]

Hey ! I paid $85,000 for my LC 200 GXL TTD in OZ, and we do not get the extra's like you fella's. KDSS, Satnav & Leather seats all optional extra's.

But the grunt of the twin turbo V8 Diesel is Awesome . Who cares about the woodgrain ( the white ants would probably eat it anyway.

 

[pagemaster]

some of the materials just are not befitting a $70,000+ vehicle

I would rather skip on the real wood and RR leather and take 381 hp, Torsen limied slip, KDSS, 8500 tow capacity, strongest Toyota frame ever built, 4 zone climate, pre crash system.

The money on the 200 series is spent on hardware and not cosmetics.

Oh yeah..The 100 series LAND CRUISER never had real wood either so whats the big deal....the 100 series didn't have 300hp either ....I mean 381 horses.

 

[pagemaster]

and we do not get the extra's like you fella's. KDSS, Satnav & Leather seats all optional extra's.

The OZ 200 series has all the options that you can get in USA

 

[Atticus]

I would rather skip on the real wood and RR leather and take 381 hp, Torsen limied slip, KDSS, 8500 tow capacity, strongest Toyota frame ever built, 4 zone climate, pre crash system.

The money on the 200 series is spent on hardware and not cosmetics.

Oh yeah..The 100 series LAND CRUISER never had real wood either so whats the big deal....the 100 series didn't have 300hp either ....I mean 381 horses.

That's all well and good, but there's no place for fake wood on a vehicle of this standard. It would be better to have no wood at all, and just the rubberized plastic dash. Fake wood is lame. The 200 may be one hell of a vehicle, but using fake wood at all is a weak move.

 

[twstrchasr]

That's all well and good, but there's no place for fake wood on a vehicle of this standard. It would be better to have no wood at all, and just the rubberized plastic dash. Fake wood is lame. The 200 may be one hell of a vehicle, but using fake wood at all is a weak move.

X2...Exactly

Some of you just "don't get" the point that is trying to be made here. You just don't want to, I guess. You are just "elated" to have something with the word "Land Cruiser" stuck on the back of it.

$70,000+ for a frapping Toyota is hard to stomach in the first place. They can make it the the most reliable freaking car ever made. Great!! If they outfit the thing with lowish grade appointments I feel that's decreasing the "worth" of the price of the vehicle. For a vehicle that is as expensive as it is, some of its interior appointments are not up to the standard befitting a $70,000 car !! THAT has nothing to do with its reliability or capability. The LC "mistique" can go just so far. That is partially why I have been vocal in my opinion of the new Sequoia. For the huge price difference, I'm not too sure the LC is "worth" it any more ! I guess, the hiddeous LX570 has messed the whole thing up in a way. In my opinion the LC should have the exact leather, wood trim, carpet grade, etc that the LX currently does (not the awful front and rear treatments though---YUK !!). To me, that would be more befitting a vehicle priced as the LC is now. As it is, I think the 200 LC is priced about $10,000--$15,000 too high for what it brings to the table. REMEMBER... Toyota IS NOT a luxury brand but they are asking a lux brand price for it. As far as I am concerned, with the new 200, they came up short in a few areas ...;p

Gosh, from the way I sound you'd think I don't like LC's at all !! That isn't the case at all. I just feel that, in the case of the 200 especially, they could have done a much better job. It is still an excellent vehicle and I still, in all likeliness, am going to get one within the next 4-6 months. I'm just not "blinded" and "in love" with the whole LC mistique as some on here obviously are. What irritates me the most, especially on this forum are those who will not accept any degree of critism of the LC. "Gung ho" doesn't even begin to describe it. It seems that they will defend the bloody things even when there is clearly a valid argument to be made. Ignorance is bliss, I guess. Anway, I am just as critical of my other vehicles as I am with my LC's !! As I have said many times before, there is no perfect car. Everone has different likes/ dislikes and priorities so, as always, it all boils down to to each their own. However, a little dose of realism wouldn't hurt a few of ya !!

 

[sdtash]

The OZ 200 series has all the options that you can get in USA

Yes you are correct ! Here's the but- For $85 K We get a standard Diesel LC with out KDSS ( 2.5 K option)and to option up to US spec its more money. Thats what I was indicating in my last post.
Anyway our Aussie dollar is probably only equal to 2 flat rocks and a packet of gravel.

 

[pagemaster]

For a vehicle that is as expensive as it is, some of its interior appointments are not up to the standard befitting a $70,000 car

I woud like you to delve into this a little more. The 100 series Toyota was $61,000 car without certain options and lacked interior amentities such wood of any kind, driver seat memory, 2nd row heated seats, pre crash, 10 airbads.

In my opinion the LC should have the exact leather, wood trim, carpet grade, etc that the LX currently does

Absolutely not. The Land Cruiser leather is thicker in my opinion and more comfy...that might just be me. I also like the design and interior layout way better than the LX..same goes for styling too.

 

[dtt255]

Absolutely not. The Land Cruiser leather is thicker in my opinion and more comfy...that might just be me. I also like the design and interior layout way better than the LX..same goes for styling too.

I drove the 570 for about 2 weeks and the only thing that really GOT ME was the steering wheel. I loved the feel of the buttons.

 

[twstrchasr]

I woud like you to delve into this a little more. The 100 series Toyota was $61,000 car without certain options and lacked interior amentities such wood of any kind, driver seat memory, 2nd row heated seats, pre crash, 10 airbads.



Absolutely not. The Land Cruiser leather is thicker in my opinion and more comfy...that might just be me. I also like the design and interior layout way better than the LX..same goes for styling too.

I agree about the 100 not having certain options. My '99 Grand Cherokee actually had a few more "convenience" features than my '01 LC has (memory seats, multi zone HVAC, trip computer, etc..). The GC was a lemon though. Couldn't wait to dump it. The 100, especially in LC form had gotten pretty long in the tooth IMO. I still like certain things about it over the 200 though. All of these likes/dislikes are really of each individuals personal taste. To me, the removable 3rd row seats in the 100 are a better design than the 200's..To someone else, it might not matter at all. I really don't want to get into a long laundry list of things I like or dislike on the 200. Certainly you catch my drift by now. If not, sorry.

Besides, we have gotten a little off track on the thread topic..

 

[pagemaster]

I agree about the 100 not having certain options. My '99 Grand Cherokee actually had a few more "convenience" features than my '01 LC has (memory seats, multi zone HVAC, trip computer, etc..). The GC was a lemon though. Couldn't wait to dump it. The 100, especially in LC form had gotten pretty long in the tooth IMO. I still like certain things about it over the 200 though. To me, the removable 3rd row seats in the 100 are a better design than the 200's..To someone else, it might not matter at all. I really don't want to get into a long laundry list of things I like or dislike on the 200. Certainly you catch my drift by now. If not, sorry.

Besides, we have gotten a little off track on the thread topic..

I agree that the seats should be able to be removed or at least they should offer a Land Cruiser third row seat delete option or something along those lines.

All of these likes/dislikes are really of each individuals personal taste.

You are right about that. For me..I actually like the faux wood of the Land Cruiser over the rear wood of the LX. I do like the real wood of the 100 series over the LX.

I also like the materials and the design of the Land Cruiser over the LX but it was LX470 or 100 series Land cruiser before the re design.

 

[dtt255]

ok ok ok ....lets try to bring this around back to topic...this has gotten way off track.