GTV
SILVER Star
Like the Land Cruiser everywhere else in the world.
This is probably going to be very unliked, but this is just like my opinion man. This is my issue with the LC250
- Thread starter dbbowen
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
Like the Land Cruiser everywhere else in the world.
Ford sells 750,000 F-series trucks per year in the US. With that many sales, they can afford to have a very broad product line. The last year of 200 Series sales in the US was less than 4,000 vehicles. It simply isn't economical to sell many different trim levels with that small sales.
The Land Cruiser has never been (and will never be) a high volume seller in the US market. The US isn't the UAE or Australia.
I'm also a fan of no-roads, just with my belongings on my backRednexus, it really is about one’s individual needs. And there is no blanket statement or “review” that can account for all our uses and needs. These modern 70s are utilitarian “utility” vehicles as in “sports utility vehicle.”They are neither Range Rover luxurious or supremely comfortable. That being said, in the Aussie video the family of four is quite comfortable and the driver notes how quiet the truck is. I would be very disappointed if the new 70 has been gentrified; but like you I would have to book a flight to OZ to find out.
I have never driven a F250 PSD, and I had to google it to even find out what it is, but I guess it is a very spartan ball buster of a work truck that you can clean the vinyl interior with a Karcher. People who need that kind of truck probably love them. (I will have to go test drive one now.)
For my use, I always have had a couple cars to transport me on pavement and the 70 for my work where there are no roads. I am not talking about forestry dirt roads. That is dirt road driving, it is not off road driving. To me off road driving means no roads at all and that is what I have to contend with on my ranch and why I use a 70 series. I originally bought my 70 for work, but then I grew to love the driving experience so much, it kinda stuck with me. Yesterday I was up in the hills here in AZ for half a day and had a blast on dirt roads. Fun is a good reason to own something too.
. Coming from a backpacking/bikepacking background, I'll never truly "get" decked-out overlanding rigs or even off-road campers. I guess that comes from the process of shaving handles of toothbrushes and tallying up the weight and calories of my food vs. daily expenditures to get my back down to ~35 pounds when having 6 days between resupply points .I like my rigs light, nimble, and fast to get me to the trailhead or the camping spot. That's not really any SFA rig. If things get rougher than that, I'm using my feet. For years I got by just fine with Subarus, and never broke a single component on the trails (just sliced up a couple of tires). However, they had some major limitations in fording depth and articulation, hence moving into a 120 platform instead.
GTV
SILVER Star
What I’m getting at is that they would have undoubtedly sold more units if they weren’t only available in top spec trim. Kinda like the 250LC is offered now, in three trim levels.
Yes, they would have sold more units. But would it have been enough to amortize the additional engineerings, production, and support costs?
Toyota isn’t stupid. Toyota has access to a great deal of market research that we don’t have. I’m sure that Toyota considered that and came to the conclusion that it wasn’t worth the investment. Here on the internet we all think we know better than Toyota but really we don’t.
Toyota sells over 100k 4Runners and 200k Tacomas in the US per year. That kind of volume supports multiple trim levels.
When was the last time Toyota sold over 20k Land Cruisers in the US?
Agreed that Toyota isn’t stupid but they definitely make mistakes- like all humans- The 200 series is proof of that. And their abrupt change of course with the 250 is their acknowledgment of their blunder in the USA.
The 200 is really great- but too damn expensive, which was it’s downfall.
The 200 is really great- but too damn expensive, which was it’s downfall.
GTV
SILVER Star
I'm guessing that would have been 2000, right before the Sequoia showed up and decimated LC sales.
I don't disagree with you. But I don't see how costs could be so much higher when all they had to do is take an already existing production vehicle, make the necessary changes for the US market and at least consider promoting it. The ability was there and they chose not to. They must be smarter than me. But then I look at the absurdly overlapped 250 lineup and I think, WTF are you thinking Toyota?
I wonder how many LC250's they'll shift this year.
Last edited:
I'm also a fan of no-roads, just with my belongings on my back
I like my rigs light, nimble, and fast to get me to the trailhead or the camping spot. That's not really any SFA rig. If things get rougher than that, I'm using my feet. For years I got by just fine with Subarus, and never broke a single component on the trails (just sliced up a couple of tires). However, they had some major limitations in fording depth and articulation, hence moving into a 120 platform instead.
Well said. This is now--more and more--my preferred operational attitude as well. Less is more.
I’ve seen this point made often since I stumbled upon Land Cruisers and this forum and while I agree with you I have to ask the question “How many more?” I’m not sure it would have been enough to change the overall big picture of the last decade or so and the now current market conditions here in North America as it relates to the LC. The 200 was expensive yes but Americans have no problem overextending themselves. What I’m trying to say is I think more people would have ponied up for the 200 specifically had they known what it was, had Toyota gave it a few QOL updates, and had Toyota actually made an effort to market the vehicle and it’s history and capabilities like they are now doing with the 250.
*Edit to add, it kind of feels like they wanted the 200 to just get to EOL here or didn’t reallycare about it anymore post 2016 refresh which would have been around the time the 300 Series started coming together behind the scenes. Of course based on paltry 200 sales Toyota NA decided not to bring the 300 here so it’s this odd case of “Hey sales are down so we are not sending the 300 to NA because we don’t think it will sell.” I reckon they did actually look at consumer feed back about us wanting a less expensive, smaller, back to basics LC and made the decision that the 300 wasn’t going to fit the bill. So they gave us the the new Prado to see how it would do and personally I’m here for it. It is modern, it is smaller, it is (in 1958 spec) one of the most stripped down vehicles for sale in our market (excluding work/fleet vans and trucks) and yet people still complain about it because it’s light duty and has 4 cylinders.
Last edited:
And yet amazingly, other truck manufacturers who sell more somehow manage to offer many different variations. The only real issue here is that Toyota doesn't want to become they feel that they don't have to. Some of that is from arrogance. Some of it is from capacity.
I feel like this is in fact what Toyota is doing with TNGA-F. Everything is very similar and in some cases identical but each model/trim has its own flavor or style to suit one’s taste.
And while they are buying lipstick by the truck load, the reason again is cost savings and to make it easier for them. Fine and smart enough in terms of efficiency but with that big chunk out of the way they certainly could be far less lazy and complacent when it comes to outfitting the trims.
Watching a YouTube 4x4 channel the other day, they had a "race" to complete a 1 mile rock crawling trail. In 2.4 hours. It looked gnarly and something my GX would require tens of thousands in mods and probably a RCLT or SAS and 40s to tackle. Or, one could hike the whole trail in around 35 minutes in a $100 pair of trail runners
.
Whenever you think that Toyota has a crystal ball of the market - remember that it's the same corporation that siloed the Tacoma engineering teams for the 3rd gen Tacoma and didn't have anyone working on the drivability of the truck (meaning the combination of the engine/transmission/axle gearing and how that would work in the real world). Toyota screws up products all the time. I could probably name a dozen engineering an marketing failures off the top of my head. They are usually easy to identify looking backward, probably not as obvious at decision making time.
The main point being that Toyota's choice not to offer the LC300, or to build 3 midsize SUVs and no small ones isn't necessarily backed by some well thought through planning process. It's a complex system that can't be predicted very well. And I think we can see pretty clearly that Toyota didn't predict a lot of market changes. I think toyota does the best manufacturing and engineering in the business. I don't think Toyota does as well at product development at times - this includes the lack of a Jeep/Bronco, the failure of the FJ Cruiser, the market failure of the LC200, the watering down of the LC250 vs the GX, and the new Tundra/Sequoia designs.
The main point being that Toyota's choice not to offer the LC300, or to build 3 midsize SUVs and no small ones isn't necessarily backed by some well thought through planning process. It's a complex system that can't be predicted very well. And I think we can see pretty clearly that Toyota didn't predict a lot of market changes. I think toyota does the best manufacturing and engineering in the business. I don't think Toyota does as well at product development at times - this includes the lack of a Jeep/Bronco, the failure of the FJ Cruiser, the market failure of the LC200, the watering down of the LC250 vs the GX, and the new Tundra/Sequoia designs.
I'm not interested in any "off road trail" stuff - going over huge rocks, through waist deep pools of water / mud, none of it. IMO the idea of paying over $60k for a brand new Toyota to do any of this is insane.
Besides pavement life, we take our Cruiser on crappy, unpaved, gravel and dirt roads. And as crappy as they get, they are still roads, designed for vehicular travel - just requiring 4wd, careful maneuvering, and good tires.
Ultimately my family and I want to reach our destination so that we can GET OUT of the vehicle - whether it's getting to a hiking trailhead, a fishing spot, a camping spot, or a remote cabin.
I guess it depends on what your interested in and physically capable of, but the idea of sitting on my ass in a driver's seat all day with the "4 wheeling" itself being the destination just doesn't appeal to me at all.
Besides pavement life, we take our Cruiser on crappy, unpaved, gravel and dirt roads. And as crappy as they get, they are still roads, designed for vehicular travel - just requiring 4wd, careful maneuvering, and good tires.
Ultimately my family and I want to reach our destination so that we can GET OUT of the vehicle - whether it's getting to a hiking trailhead, a fishing spot, a camping spot, or a remote cabin.
I guess it depends on what your interested in and physically capable of, but the idea of sitting on my ass in a driver's seat all day with the "4 wheeling" itself being the destination just doesn't appeal to me at all.
man, this is exhausting....to my knowledge, nobody on this forum has yet to put their hands on a new LC. Why not see what it does before you s*** completely on it. I mean, imagine how the discussions went over the years as the LC morphed and the different Toyota models became what we've known.
Also, we're talking about a brand that hasn't appreciably changed a damn thing with most of their products for over a decade...now we have the new Tundra, RAV, Tacoma, LC and 4Runner...what says this next iteration of vehicles hasn't been intelligently designed and engineered?
Fact is, the LC is a brand in and of itself. Toyota is smart enough to know that people will buy that brand, just like people will buy a Lexus branded Toyota that is equally as capable and only drive it to Menards and then the soccer field because they want to be seen in a lexus.
This forum is the anomaly and not the norm...people here wrench and push vehicles past limits...Toyota isn't building for that as much anymore...they're building for people who can afford it and will buy it...and then letting the aftermarket world help with the other stuff.
Just be thankful we get 4 cylinders instead of all batteries.
Whether naive or just stupid, I trust Toyota to build me a quality product. Let's have some fun with it and rip it apart when it deserves it, not before it arrives.
Also, we're talking about a brand that hasn't appreciably changed a damn thing with most of their products for over a decade...now we have the new Tundra, RAV, Tacoma, LC and 4Runner...what says this next iteration of vehicles hasn't been intelligently designed and engineered?
Fact is, the LC is a brand in and of itself. Toyota is smart enough to know that people will buy that brand, just like people will buy a Lexus branded Toyota that is equally as capable and only drive it to Menards and then the soccer field because they want to be seen in a lexus.
This forum is the anomaly and not the norm...people here wrench and push vehicles past limits...Toyota isn't building for that as much anymore...they're building for people who can afford it and will buy it...and then letting the aftermarket world help with the other stuff.
Just be thankful we get 4 cylinders instead of all batteries.
Whether naive or just stupid, I trust Toyota to build me a quality product. Let's have some fun with it and rip it apart when it deserves it, not before it arrives.
I’m with you on use case. I did some mild wheeling in my 4Runner but it was enough for me to figure out I’m not about that life lol. I do find myself on the occasional gravel or dirt road and tbh some of the roads where I live are in bad shape. I do like to take the scenic route sometimes as well. I really appreciate having a hitch integrated for my bike carrier and covered storage for my gear, golf clubs, or whatever else I’m out doing.
If I’m honest with myself I could do all of this in a sedan. It just wouldn’t be as convenient when it comes to utility. Modern full size trucks are too big for my liking so the mid size bof suv segment is what I’m currently into. Unless wagons make a return in popularity one of these days.
… because in 2035 all new vehicles sold in California USA must be 100% electric. No gasoline engine powered vehicles can be sold new.
11 years guys. Enjoy the gas fumes while we got ‘em.
This is what I used from 2009-2020 to get me into the woods. It was great for me as a single guy and did OK after getting married. It started getting tight with Kid 1; with Kid 2 we were bursting at the seams. For this particular trip, all 4 of us and our gear crammed into the rig (hence the squat in the back). I dropped my family and the canoe off at the put-in, drove downriver to the take-out, and rode back up to meet them. We picked up the bike on the way back.
I partially got the GX cuz the Subie was just too darn small, and also got it becuase there were some places it would just not go. One of my favorite things to go is go hiking or riding, and then wheel afterwards. A whole day spent in the woods, either on my feet/bike saddle, then in the rig. That was fun in my Subie - blasting down gravel - and fun in my GX as I can wheel other places.
My kids do really enjoy the wheeling - which usually takes us to an awesome swimming hole or scenic spot - and they are not yet big enough to go on the bigger hikes and rides with me. Having the bigger rig also let us get a camper to pull, which means even more outside time (though the camper almost never leaves pavement).
The rig is just one of the pieces for an outdoor-focused lifestyle. If the lifestyle focuses too much on the rig, the other pieces of the lifestyle will suffer. But I do really love my rig
.
Last edited:
We're bored and have nothing else to talk about.
