Enough better looking, more capable and durable second hand LC200's around with more reasonable GVWR of 7385 lbs and with rear seats removed around 7385 - 5750 = 1635 lbs of cargo/people/tow hook load capacity.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
That seems odd. Hybrid 4Runner gets the 9.5 rear axle i thought. It should have a higher payload than the LC both because it's lighter and has a larger axle.![]()
An Inside Look into the 2025 Toyota 4Runner, Tacoma, and Land Cruiser
Toyota’s lineup of mid-size trucks all share the same platform. We tease out why you should choose one over the other.www.outsideonline.com
This article references a 6th gen T4R payload of 895lbs on the hybrid. Makes the LC's 1100 look even more likely to be legit across all trims.
A locked 5th Gen 4runner was mid 800s as well. Some lager ORPs show a high of 1165. Not sure where you're seeing 1500-1700That seems odd. Hybrid 4Runner gets the 9.5 rear axle i thought. It should have a higher payload than the LC both because it's lighter and has a larger axle.
And the 5th Gen 4Runner was 1500-1700. Dropping to 895 seems odd unless they've changed how they calculate it. 895lb trailer tongue weight seems more inline with what I would expect.
Or it's supposed to be 1895lbs and it was missing a digit. If gvwr is the same as the gx550 since it also has the 9.5 the payload will be about 2k lbs because of the lighter curb weight.
The “Heavy Duty” LC76 has a load capacity of 1289 lbs for that dinosaur. Seeing that the LC250 is designated by Toyota as a “Light Duty” Landcruiser, its load capacity is actually very good for what it is.
View attachment 3616955
It is indeed odd what Toyota is putting on the door stickers.Is it possible Toyota is understating the numbers on the stickers and being conservative? It seems there's a universal discrepancy between sticker payloads and GVWR-Curb.
Tires and inflation pressures may also be coming into play here.It is indeed odd what Toyota is putting on the door stickers.
Payload should be GVWR - Curb Weight (= car + fuel). I have checked many sources and they all point to that.
Those calculations from available curb and GVWR weights do not equate to the occupants and cargo weight stated on the door sill stickers shown, for the 250 and other Toyota's mentioned (like for the 200 series or the 4Runner). This appears good news for the 250, yet it certainly is confusing.
What is going on? Almost seems they have added to curb weight two occupants already (driver + say front passenger) and then indicate the rest for rear occupants and cargo. I have tried to think whether individual axle capacities (GAWR's) and position of the occupants and cargo plays into this. Be nice to get inside information on this from Toyota. One way to support over landing payloads is to add airbags in the rear coil springs. It certainly allows leveling under heavier loads and helps out the factory coils to manage the same. As long as you do not go over total GVWR that should be fully legit as well.
Yes, their load rating and keeping them at say > 30 psi for highway driving is certainly recommended as well.Tires and inflation pressures may also be coming into play here.
It is indeed odd what Toyota is putting on the door stickers.
Payload should be GVWR - Curb Weight (= car + fuel). I have checked many sources and they all point to that.
Those calculations from available curb and GVWR weights do not equate to the occupants and cargo weight stated on the door sill stickers shown, for the 250 and other Toyota's mentioned (like for the 200 series or the 4Runner). This appears good news for the 250, yet it certainly is confusing.
What is going on? Almost seems they have added to curb weight two occupants already (driver + say front passenger) and then indicate the rest for rear occupants and cargo. I have tried to think whether individual axle capacities (GAWR's) and position of the occupants and cargo plays into this. Be nice to get inside information on this from Toyota. One way to support over landing payloads is to add airbags in the rear coil springs. It certainly allows leveling under heavier loads and helps out the factory coils to manage the same. As long as you do not go over total GVWR that should be fully legit as well.
The payload determination is unclear.View attachment 3617141
Here's the example given from the a 200 series owners manual. This implies that the given 1235lb payload does not include passengers or cargo.
I would agree that how Toyota does the math between stated total load capacity, GVWR and GAWR is unclear. I'd guess that each axle is rated independently for instances of uneven weight distributions (snowplow/heavy trailer tongue weights), and GVWR is used as a total upper limit due to some other limitation (regulatory, or downstream mechanical).
Amazing the complex explanation that load capacity = occupants + cargo...View attachment 3617141
Here's the example given from the a 200 series owners manual. This implies that the given 1235lb payload does not include passengers or cargo.
I would agree that how Toyota does the math between stated total load capacity, GVWR and GAWR is unclear. I'd guess that each axle is rated independently for instances of uneven weight distributions (snowplow/heavy trailer tongue weights), and GVWR is used as a total upper limit due to some other limitation (regulatory, or downstream mechanical).
I like this view, have you figured out why? I really like to know. Because everywhere else the explanation of how this works is per GVWR = Curb Weight + Load Capacity.As has been alluded to here before - we be thinking that Toyota’s load capacity recommendation is their recommendation, not simply GVWR minus Curb Weight.
I think it is us who are calculating Load Capacity incorrectly.