This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
This vehicle will replace my wife's 2011 4R Trails Edition for family hauling/grocery getting/road tripping but also will become the primary tow vehicle for my 5K gross TT. It's a single axle trailer so kind of heavy tongue weight of about 800 lbs. I also have a 3K gross utility trailer but the '99LC is adequate to tow that but may no longer need to with the newer, better tow vehicle. Also, I occasionally rent compact utility tractors and skid steers to do driveway, road and property maintenance and landscaping work at my house and it will do a lot better hauling those from the rental yard to my house.Because of J2807 standards based methodology.
The short of it is that the LX570 has a heavier curb weight due to more features, and as a result subtracts from GVWR limits.
In practice, the LX tow better because of AHC keeping loads level. With the ability to compensate in spring rate and damping for that perfect ride even laden.
If your serious about towing, the LX would be the better choice.
With some airbags installed in the coil springs (not difficult to do nor expensive) the LC suspension system does an equal fine job. Then there are the exterior and interior looks. I find the pre 16 LX dash and wood real old school. As car enthusiasts it seems taste and finding a good used one should drive your decision. And that could be an LX or an LC, whatever floats your boat.Because of J2807 standards based methodology.
The short of it is that the LX570 has a heavier curb weight due to more features, and as a result subtracts from GVWR limits.
In practice, the LX tow better because of AHC keeping loads level. With the ability to compensate in spring rate and damping for that perfect ride even laden.
If your serious about towing, the LX would be the better choice.
And all that tech can break… I think each vehicle has its pros and cons. I do not think the LX is more, just different.
Have you towed with an LX to make that comparison?
As someone who has had and towed with both an LC and a LX I completely disagree. I agree with Eat Sleep and I will do everything in my power, when the time comes, to replace my LX with a vehicle with AHC. The airbags are “okay” but they don't come close to matching the AHC, in my opinion, in ride or comfort. And the AHC doesn’t need inflating or deflating or compressors or any attention at all. And the assist in hitching-unhitching shouldn’t be discounted either. I even found that raising or lowering was a benefit loading-unloading on the ferries on the Dempster highway. Raise driving on to clear hitch and lower it to clear trailer bumper once the hitch clears the ramp.
In fact I have and I find little difference with my LC200 fitted with the HP version of the airbag man airbags. Overall very happy with the capability and tech involved. Happy you all LX brothers are pleased as well. However I would buy the LC version of the 200 any day. Like I would the LC300 series if offered states side over the LX600/700
What it appears is that in the SAE J2807 standardization of payload and towing, the engineers simply reduced towing capability by the excess weight added to the luxury vehicle from the standard or base model. For simplicity's sake, if the LX's curb weight is 100 lb more than the LC (due to AHC, etc), then that 100 lb is subtracted from the tongue weight of your trailer. Since tongue weight is 10% of trailer weight, they subtracted 1000 lb from the max trailer weight.
Thanks for the thread link, I have some studying to do. We snagged a 24 gal LRA on sale and are adding drawers and bumper to our LX. It sounds like I can utilize spacers to handle the weight.Factory, LX570 is rated for 1,385 lbs of payload. In my use, I found a healthy AHC system with fresh globes had margin to go up to 2000lbs payload before it would not be able to maintain ride height, falling back on the coil springs more.
The trick is to pre-load the coil springs so the hydraulic system has more compensation margin.
Stock rear spring rates are around 120 lbs/in. So 20mm of additional rear spacer per rear spring provided ~200-300lbs more carrying margin on the rear axle. Front spring rates and motion ratio makes it a bit harder to compute, but equally, a front spacer can be used to get about ~200lbs of carrying margin on the front axle.
So with spacer augmentation, ~2500lbs more payload handling capacity is possible, with practically no impact to ride quality, laden or unladen.
For any sensor lift, will want to compensate for that independently. So a 1" rear lift will want another ~20mm spacer.
TLDR
I'm running a 45mm total spacers in the rear to compensate for ~1" sensor lift and augment for load. 10mm spring packer between the frame and jounce stop (to better manage bump travel on 37s) and 40mm spacer between the jounce stop and spring (for sensor senor lift and load augmentation).
Running a 17mm coilover spacer in the front to compensate for a 1.25" sensor lift and augment for load.
I was visiting with a vendor a couple weeks ago that is going to do some work on a new project I have at work and they had 70-series utes, Hiluxes and even a LC300 in their shop. I was in non-US model heaven. There were diesel Toyotas with manual transmissions all around me and I was super jealous. Granted, all these vehicles will leave the US upon delivery to their customers but it was still super cool.
