Towing with a 200-series Toyota Land Cruiser (1 Viewer)

[MikeDeadly]

Our first trip towing with the LC. Sunlite 16BH, TowPro Elite, one friction anti-sway controller. Just a quick jaunt out to the Guadalupe River which is conveniently close for us. Longer trips to come, but so far I'm digging how the LC tows this little guy.

 

[Jetboy]

True. None of this takes anything away from the Tundra as it's capable in its own right. It's a truck after all and that inherently makes it better at truck things, including towing on account of its longer wheelbase. Just makes for interesting observations when comparing and contrasting.

Looking at GAWR, the axle splits are interesting.

	200-series	Tundra 2nd gen
Front GAWR	3595 lbs	4000 lbs
Rear GAWR	4300 lbs	4150 lbs

Knowing the front structure and suspension components of both 200-series and Tundra, and where there are shared parts and different parts. It would be hard to say the 200-series has less structure in front. Cursory observation says the 200s got beefier elements and LCAs. Very similar to same bearings, steering, uprights, etc. Perhaps that's not true, but perhaps it is and the GAWR is not established by surface level thresholds we understand.

At the rear, the Tundra axle diff housing is obviously bigger. Don't know about the rest of the axle housing. 200-series utilizes a more advanced 5-link suspension whereas the Tundra uses leaf springs. The 3rd gen Tundra, and all high performance off-road specials from Ford and Dodge use 5-links. Whether that's better for weight bearing is probably different factors, but the 200-series is built to a higher standard.

I'm interested if anyone else can read into this and provide insights.

Interestingly the gen2 Sequoia is 4000 front 4280 rear. Higher than Tundra or LC. Whatever the rating is based on, it's not obvious to me. Doesn't appear to be based on any obvious axle related component. Tundra and Sequoia front are the same arms and coilovers. But Sequoia shares the same transfer case and AWD system from there forward along with basically the same chassis as the LC. And Sequoia has the smallest rear end, but the highest gvwr.

5g 4runner gvwr varies by model year despite being mechanically identical. And some years the rear locking differential models get roughly 800lb capacity reduction. I'm sure there's some process to calculate the value but I have no idea what it is. It seems inconsistent and probably unrelated to highway towing or hauling.

I do know I'd feel more comfortable putting 2500 lbs in the back of a tundra than a lc200 or Sequoia. And it's not really a close call to me. Tundra has a lot of advantages: wider axle with wider spring spacing, bigger axle diff and housing, bigger transfer case, cooling system, etc. It's just built a bit heavier in a lot of places. Not better. Probably worse build quality. Just scaled up.

 

[jonshonda]

^I would be really curious to put the Tundra on scales and see just how much weight the rear axle carries when unloaded, mostly comparing an empty truck bed vs a loaded up SUV body. Meaning if there is 500lbs less weight on the Tundra rear axle then a LC/LX etc, what are the advantages for towing?

Our family could really honestly benefit from a Tundra for camping and the dogs, but man they are just huge and I fear too cumbersome to enjoy when NOT towing and hauling, and likely might not do as well in the snow for normal commuting.

 

[LX Cruiser]

Interestingly the gen2 Sequoia is 4000 front 4280 rear. Higher than Tundra or LC. Whatever the rating is based on, it's not obvious to me. Doesn't appear to be based on any obvious axle related component. Tundra and Sequoia front are the same arms and coilovers. But Sequoia shares the same transfer case and AWD system from there forward along with basically the same chassis as the LC. And Sequoia has the smallest rear end, but the highest gvwr.

5g 4runner gvwr varies by model year despite being mechanically identical. And some years the rear locking differential models get roughly 800lb capacity reduction. I'm sure there's some process to calculate the value but I have no idea what it is. It seems inconsistent and probably unrelated to highway towing or hauling.

I do know I'd feel more comfortable putting 2500 lbs in the back of a tundra than a lc200 or Sequoia. And it's not really a close call to me. Tundra has a lot of advantages: wider axle with wider spring spacing, bigger axle diff and housing, bigger transfer case, cooling system, etc. It's just built a bit heavier in a lot of places. Not better. Probably worse build quality. Just scaled up.

Tundra’s rear end is 10.5”, Sequoia‘s 10, and LC’s 9.5. And the LC has the highest rear axle rating @ 4300 lb. Only 20 lb more than Sequoia. It really is kinda funny how much wiggle room there is in each platform, and how Toyota even uses that sometimes. The biggest head scratcher for me is the significantly lower rated LC front axle (3595 lb). Maybe due in part to the 200’s weak factory brakes?

The 07-21 Tundra’s GVWR also changes depending on features. Bare bones trucks get 6900 lb; the more decked out crewmaxes get 7200 lb. But all of them have the same 4k/4150 axle ratings. My Tundra has never felt anything but absolutely confident when loaded up. I was a bit over GVWR when we did Imogene Pass two summers ago. Didn’t know that till I decided to hop onto some CAT scales in Kansas after driving 10 hours from Tennessee.

^I would be really curious to put the Tundra on scales and see just how much weight the rear axle carries when unloaded, mostly comparing an empty truck bed vs a loaded up SUV body. Meaning if there is 500lbs less weight on the Tundra rear axle then a LC/LX etc, what are the advantages for towing?

Our family could really honestly benefit from a Tundra for camping and the dogs, but man they are just huge and I fear too cumbersome to enjoy when NOT towing and hauling, and likely might not do as well in the snow for normal commuting.

I love mine. I don’t know the axle weights when empty, but curb weight is just shy of 6k lbs. My only complaint for long trips is the lack of a 3rd row. All three of our kids sit elbow-to-elbow-to-elbow. We can space them out in the LX with one in the 3rd row, and everyone gets along much better. But if I tried to make the LX our dispersed camping rig, we’d have less room for the dog and all our gear.

In the Tundra, I can carry all 5 of us, our 65-lb dog (she has ample room on the floor of the 2nd row), tent, camping gear, plus a dual battery setup, dometic fridge, and tools/recovery gear. The retractable bed cover, skids, and 285/75R18 Duratracs push us just north of GVWR.

Regarding the size, they aren’t any bigger than any other half ton. And they have the best visibility, shortest front end, best ground clearance, and tightest turn radius in the segment. Speaking of the 2nd gen (07-21), of course. A lot of those features went out the window with the 3rd gen. It has a far longer nose, worse visibility, significantly larger turn radius, and worse ground clearance.

 

[Jetboy]

Tundra’s rear end is 10.5”, Sequoia‘s 10, and LC’s 9.5. And the LC has the highest rear axle rating @ 4300 lb. Only 20 lb more than Sequoia. It really is kinda funny how much wiggle room there is in each platform, and how Toyota even uses that sometimes. The biggest head scratcher for me is the significantly lower rated LC front axle (3595 lb). Maybe due in part to the 200’s weak factory brakes?

The 07-21 Tundra’s GVWR also changes depending on features. Bare bones trucks get 6900 lb; the more decked out crewmaxes get 7200 lb. But all of them have the same 4k/4150 axle ratings. My Tundra has never felt anything but absolutely confident when loaded up. I was a bit over GVWR when we did Imogene Pass two summers ago. Didn’t know that till I decided to hop onto some CAT scales in Kansas after driving 10 hours from Tennessee.

I love mine. I don’t know the axle weights when empty, but curb weight is just shy of 6k lbs. My only complaint for long trips is the lack of a 3rd row. All three of our kids sit elbow-to-elbow-to-elbow. We can space them out in the LX with one in the 3rd row, and everyone gets along much better. But if I tried to make the LX our dispersed camping rig, we’d have less room for the dog and all our gear.

In the Tundra, I can carry all 5 of us, our 65-lb dog (she has ample room on the floor of the 2nd row), tent, camping gear, plus a dual battery setup, dometic fridge, and tools/recovery gear. The retractable bed cover, skids, and 285/75R18 Duratracs push us just north of GVWR.

Regarding the size, they aren’t any bigger than any other half ton. And they have the best visibility, shortest front end, best ground clearance, and tightest turn radius in the segment. Speaking of the 2nd gen (07-21), of course. A lot of those features went out the window with the 3rd gen. It has a far longer nose, worse visibility, significantly larger turn radius, and worse ground clearance.

I'm not sure how I transposed the numbers in my head. Doh.

It is even more curious that the GVWR in the rear goes from smallest to largest diff size in reverse order to axle GVWR. The Tundra base model in some versions had the 9.5 rear axle, so possibly that was why it had the lower rating? But why would it be lower than the LC? It could also be the smaller tires on the base models, but I think they have the same load rating.

The 3rd gen Tundra is FR 4080 RR 3860. And the LC300 is FR 3590 RR 4255. It's hard to make any inferences of whether it's a torque limit or a load bearing ability limit. I tend to think it's due to the max torque some component is rated for, but that doesn't explain the LC front rating unless the CVs are different and lower rated. And it doesn't appear to change on the Tundra with or without the rear locking diff. It also doesn't change on the LC300 with the front locker in the GR Sport that would presumably have much higher torque on the front CVs. So that seems to rule out the CV as the weak link.

And the 4Runner is FR 3000 RR 3440. Makes sense that the front is a good bit lower than the LC or Tundra. Yet it still has a higher payload capacity than either the LC200 or the Tundra due to lower vehicle weight. Okay. But the axle ratings still don't really match up well in my mind. The rear axle being only 420lbs less than the Tundra seems odd. In the real world the Tundra hauls weight far better. And the 4Runner rear axle GVWR being closer to the 3G tundra than the 3G tundra is to the LC200 which is as close to identical as it gets as far as both sharing nearly identical axles, suspension design, etc. is hard to understand.

My tundra empty with just my basic tool kit in the back that might be 75lbs, a full tank of fuel -38 gallons (225lbs) and me in the driver's seat (200lbs) at the scale this weekend was 6340lbs. 2016 Crewmax Ltd 4x4. Only mod is a front receiver hitch that weighs maybe 50lbs. Heaviest I've actually weighed it was 8,020 with 3380 front and 4640 rear. Felt perfectly comfortable at that weight for ~500 miles pulling a 16 foot enclosed trailer with another ~6k lbs behind it. I'm not sure the front GVWR on either the LC or Tundra is much of an issue. At least with a CM tundra it would be really hard to load it in such a way to exceed the 4k lb front axle rating. Short of a pair of 500lb riders up front and some very heavy tools in the middle row, I don't know how else you'd get that much weight up front in any practical way other than putting a snow plow on it. The same is probably true for the LC200. Other than a snow plow, you'd have to park a side by side on the roof rack to exceed the front GVWR.

 

[linuxgod]

I'm not sure how I transposed the numbers in my head. Doh.

It is even more curious that the GVWR in the rear goes from smallest to largest diff size in reverse order to axle GVWR. The Tundra base model in some versions had the 9.5 rear axle, so possibly that was why it had the lower rating? But why would it be lower than the LC? It could also be the smaller tires on the base models, but I think they have the same load rating.

The 3rd gen Tundra is FR 4080 RR 3860. And the LC300 is FR 3590 RR 4255. It's hard to make any inferences of whether it's a torque limit or a load bearing ability limit. I tend to think it's due to the max torque some component is rated for, but that doesn't explain the LC front rating unless the CVs are different and lower rated. And it doesn't appear to change on the Tundra with or without the rear locking diff. It also doesn't change on the LC300 with the front locker in the GR Sport that would presumably have much higher torque on the front CVs. So that seems to rule out the CV as the weak link.

And the 4Runner is FR 3000 RR 3440. Makes sense that the front is a good bit lower than the LC or Tundra. Yet it still has a higher payload capacity than either the LC200 or the Tundra due to lower vehicle weight. Okay. But the axle ratings still don't really match up well in my mind. The rear axle being only 420lbs less than the Tundra seems odd. In the real world the Tundra hauls weight far better. And the 4Runner rear axle GVWR being closer to the 3G tundra than the 3G tundra is to the LC200 which is as close to identical as it gets as far as both sharing nearly identical axles, suspension design, etc. is hard to understand.

My tundra empty with just my basic tool kit in the back that might be 75lbs, a full tank of fuel -38 gallons (225lbs) and me in the driver's seat (200lbs) at the scale this weekend was 6340lbs. 2016 Crewmax Ltd 4x4. Only mod is a front receiver hitch that weighs maybe 50lbs. Heaviest I've actually weighed it was 8,020 with 3380 front and 4640 rear. Felt perfectly comfortable at that weight for ~500 miles pulling a 16 foot enclosed trailer with another ~6k lbs behind it. I'm not sure the front GVWR on either the LC or Tundra is much of an issue. At least with a CM tundra it would be really hard to load it in such a way to exceed the 4k lb front axle rating. Short of a pair of 500lb riders up front and some very heavy tools in the middle row, I don't know how else you'd get that much weight up front in any practical way other than putting a snow plow on it. The same is probably true for the LC200. Other than a snow plow, you'd have to park a side by side on the roof rack to exceed the front GVWR.

The Tundra is part time 4WD, the LC is full time. Essentially stress gets split across the diffs in a different fashion under normal load, which may explain the payloads. Probably not, though.

Assuming the Tundra and LC front weighs similar, I suspect it has more to do with spring rates, suspension travel, etc. Or maybe the Tundra front is heavier and the front axle weight rating is based on a "default axle weight + 500#" or some such calc? Really, who knows.

 

[Jetboy]

The Tundra is part time 4WD, the LC is full time. Essentially stress gets split across the diffs in a different fashion under normal load, which may explain the payloads. Probably not, though.

Assuming the Tundra and LC front weighs similar, I suspect it has more to do with spring rates, suspension travel, etc. Or maybe the Tundra front is heavier and the front axle weight rating is based on a "default axle weight + 500#" or some such calc? Really, who knows.

It's all a bit random seeming. Just for kicks, I looked at the GX460 - FR 3200 RR 3965. GX460 has a higher rear axle rating than the new Tundra. But has the same rear axle, chassis, suspension including the 180lb/in spring rate as the 4Runner. GX stock tire only has a 109 load rating, 4R is 114, Tundra and LC are 116. I think it's just a random number that's assigned for no apparent reason. There's no hardware association that I can see. Yet for some reason we're often told by "experts" not to exceed the randomly assigned value because it is written on the door jamb.

 

[TeCKis300]

It's all a bit random seeming. Just for kicks, I looked at the GX460 - FR 3200 RR 3965. GX460 has a higher rear axle rating than the new Tundra. But has the same rear axle, chassis, suspension including the 180lb/in spring rate as the 4Runner. GX stock tire only has a 109 load rating, 4R is 114, Tundra and LC are 116. I think it's just a random number that's assigned for no apparent reason. There's no hardware association that I can see. Yet for some reason we're often told by "experts" not to exceed the randomly assigned value because it is written on the door jamb.

It does seem a bit contrived and could be for a host of reasons. It's likely due to the lowest rated component that defines GAWR. Rather than the whole system not being capable. Here's another interesting datapoint for a 4.7L Tundra that came with the smaller motor, and smaller 9.5" rear diff (like ours). Front GAWR 3900, Rear GAWR 4050. Or a reduction of 100lbs per axle from the bigger motored Tundra.

If I had to point at a single limiting component that defines GAWR, it's often going to be spring rate. Just as spring rate often dictates payload capacity. At least we have several datapoints that suggest the rest of the components are up to the task of more and suspension is easy enough to tune.

 

[Catskills]

Hey guys, found the 200 towing mirror thread and promptly lost it before I finished reading it.

Has anyone found mirrors they really like? I'd like some kind of add-on that won't go flying off at 65 mph, but also an option that wouldn't make my truck look like an F-250.

 

[coleAK]

Hey guys, found the 200 towing mirror thread and promptly lost it before I finished reading it.

Has anyone found mirrors they really like? I'd like some kind of add-on that won't go flying off at 65 mph, but also an option that wouldn't make my truck look like an F-250.

I tow up to 10k miles a summer up here in Alaska and this will be my 10th summer doing so with my ‘13 LX. I’ve tried a bunch of types over the years I think this style is the best? Why, every kind come off, break, and with these they do the job and for <$20 I keep 2 spares in the camper at all times.

 

[Beeker]

I tow up to 10k miles a summer up here in Alaska and this will be my 10th summer doing so with my ‘13 LX. I’ve tried a bunch of types over the years I think this style is the best? Why, every kind come off, break, and with these they do the job and for <$20 I keep 2 spares in the camper at all times.

View attachment 3306770

View attachment 3306774

How much does that blackrock weigh? I'm still up in the air about just how much I can tow before I trade in my 1500

 

[coleAK]

How much does that blackrock weigh? I'm still up in the air about just how much I can tow before I trade in my 1500

Loaded and ready to go I’ve had it on scales 3-4 times and it is ~7k lbs. it’s a 22’ almost 25’ hitch to bumper.

 

[Beeker]

Loaded and ready to go I’ve had it on scales 3-4 times and it is ~7k lbs. it’s a 22’ almost 25’ hitch to bumper.

Thanks - I feel more confident now. ORV we have is similar size. Maybe a touch lighter

 

[coleAK]

Thanks - I feel more confident now. ORV we have is similar size. Maybe a touch lighter

About to start our 8th summer with the ORV. It’s a great camper. We Had an airstream before this.

 

[dubyahard]

I really like the ORVs but they don't have a layout that I like better than my Lance 2185. If only the Lance had bigger freshwater, I'd be happy.

Hey guys, found the 200 towing mirror thread and promptly lost it before I finished reading it.

Has anyone found mirrors they really like? I'd like some kind of add-on that won't go flying off at 65 mph, but also an option that wouldn't make my truck look like an F-250.

Are you referring to the Clearview mirrors? These seem like the most functional, albeit more permanent, option. They now offer smaller versions.

I've been thinking of these since my mirrors don't stay out at highway speeds when using the ones @coleAK referenced.

 

[NKP Garage]

I tow up to 10k miles a summer up here in Alaska and this will be my 10th summer doing so with my ‘13 LX. I’ve tried a bunch of types over the years I think this style is the best? Why, every kind come off, break, and with these they do the job and for <$20 I keep 2 spares in the camper at all times.

View attachment 3306770

View attachment 3306774

Great setup. I'll say it over and over, the LX570 is one of the most capable gasoline powered trucks or SUV's around for towing. I've towed just about everything with our old one and it never had an issue. Keep your tongue weight in check and balance your load on the trailer properly, and the rest takes care of itself.

 

[Catskills]

I really like the ORVs but they don't have a layout that I like better than my Lance 2185. If only the Lance had bigger freshwater, I'd be happy.

Are you referring to the Clearview mirrors? These seem like the most functional, albeit more permanent, option. They now offer smaller versions.

I've been thinking of these since my mirrors don't stay out at highway speeds when using the ones @coleAK referenced.

Yes. I like how the factory mirrors look and want a removable option.

 

[Nothinghead]

Hey guys, found the 200 towing mirror thread and promptly lost it before I finished reading it.

Has anyone found mirrors they really like? I'd like some kind of add-on that won't go flying off at 65 mph, but also an option that wouldn't make my truck look like an F-250.

I have used these on my GX and they were fine.

Amazon product ASIN B001AJH1HK
I tried using them on the LX and the mirrors kept folding in above 60 MPH. Maybe my mirrors are worn or out of adjustment somehow but the amount of drag they cause is a problem so I, too, am looking for a good solution with less drag. Clearviews are too expensive and ugly for me.

 

[Catskills]

I have used these on my GX and they were fine.

Amazon product ASIN B001AJH1HK
I tried using them on the LX and the mirrors kept folding in above 60 MPH. Maybe my mirrors are worn or out of adjustment somehow but the amount of drag they cause is a problem so I, too, am looking for a good solution with less drag. Clearviews are too expensive and ugly for me.

Gracias! Just bought em.

 

[coleAK]

I have used these on my GX and they were fine.

Amazon product ASIN B001AJH1HK
I tried using them on the LX and the mirrors kept folding in above 60 MPH. Maybe my mirrors are worn or out of adjustment somehow but the amount of drag they cause is a problem so I, too, am looking for a good solution with less drag. Clearviews are too expensive and ugly for me.

My driver side folds in from time to time when I pass a semi going fast on a 2 lane. But without that they stay out with no issues.