- Thread starter
- #41
Your right, but you get the drift, tomato/tomato
What are pro/con of 200 versus 100?
- Thread starter SWUtah
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
Your right, but you get the drift, tomato/tomato
The 100 series needs the front wheel bearings lubricated at around 30k and there after. Also the AHC fluid needs replacement at 60k. Only the 06-07 (optional) LC have the AHC...the new 200 series is maintenence free for suspension on LC trim.
Toyota recommends changing transmission fluid if you are towing only. Can't remember when.
Last edited:
Oh please, you just had to get a jab in about the RRC didn't you ? Let's see, I also have an FJ62 and a 100. Maybe I just like very capable 4X4's !! I purchased the RRC because I like it..Not to impress anyone. It has been an excellent vehicle BTW. I know the differences in the LC vs the LX. I actually think the LX470 is a better deal than the LC (especially on the used mkt). As I would respond to you in that you have a Lexus..I have a LC which is much less of a status symbol than the LX. Also, you have a nice and trendy SL..I have a much rarer (EXPENSIVE, and FASTER) AMG CL which most people don't even know what it is. I like that. Every TOM, Dick and Harry has an SL. SL's are definitely more of a "status" symbol than a CL. I was actually giving the 200 kuddos and I still think the LX570 is hiddeous..Poser mobile deluxe, the 200 LC is the real deal.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #44
Oh please, you just had to get a jab in about the RRC didn't you ? Let's see, I also have an FJ62 and a 100. Maybe I just like very capable 4X4's !! I purchased the RRC because I like it..Not to impress anyone. It has been an excellent vehicle BTW. I know the differences in the LC vs the LX. I actually think the LX470 is a better deal than the LC (especially on the used mkt). As I would respond to you in that you have a Lexus..I have a LC which is much less of a status symbol than the LX. Also, you have a nice and trendy SL..I have a much rarer (EXPENSIVE, and FASTER) AMG CL which most people don't even know what it is. I like that. Every TOM, Dick and Harry has an SL. SL's are definitely more of a "status" symbol than a CL. I was actually giving the 200 kuddos and I still think the LX570 is hiddeous..Poser mobile deluxe, the 200 LC is the real deal.
Everything is specific to you and you group everyone else into your generalized boxes. Where do you get off thinking you know why someone else bought a specify vehicle? You talk about not being into status symbol vehicles and you then talk about owning a more expensive and rarer AMG CL? I like old AMG's but I would never ever own a highend Mercedes without it being under warranty.
- Thread starter
- #45
Whatever...Without being a hypocrite, when you get into vehicles priced that high there is definitely a bit of "one-upsmanship" involved. No one really NEEDS an SL or CL, etc.. I just know that I personally don't consciously buy something to "impress" the neighbors. BTW, I like SL's very much. My family has owned a number of different SL models. I just wanted a CL because it was less common than an SL, but not as ostentatious as say a Bentley or a Maserati. Unless you are Bill Gates, there is always going to be someone with more $$$$ !! I do know people who are very conscious of material things. To me, that is a sign of insecurity. Apparently you took some sort of offence to my not being a "lexus" person. That's interesting though because in the next sentence I did say that if there were a lexus product I liked I would consider getting it. Lexus builds fine vehicles but aside from the LX470, there hasn't been a Lexus that has interested me very much. Where my RRC came into this, I'm not real sure ?? I think you were insinuating that I have one because it is a "status" symbol ? Rubbish, I have always liked LR's (LC's too for that matter). Whether you like it or not the RRC was a very significant vehicle when introduced in the 1970's. It was way ahead of its time compared to virtually all 4X4's at the time ! British cars have never been "known" for their reliability but I will say that my RRC has been no more trouble to maintain than my FJ62. I like them both actually. It is interesting how different the two are from each other. As for the LX, please don't forget that without the Land Cruiser, there wouldn't be an LX as it exists now !!
Now then, back to the original question asked in this thread...
LX570 Pros
a) Beautiful interior
b) HDD
C) AHC
d) Ventilated seats
e) Excellent motor/tranny
f) Dealer experience
LX570 cons
a) AHC (some consider it a +, some a -)
b) Non removable running boards
c) No front bull bars available (at least at this point)
d) Exterior not as tasteful as LC200 (excess chrome trim, taillight design, wheel design, front end design, etc..)
e) Price
f) Same powertrain HP as LC (could have HP increase to differentiate it more from LC)
200 LC Pros
a) Tasteful (if not somewhat bland) exterior styling
b) Excellent powertrain / tranny
c) KDSS
d) Aftermarket parts availability
e) Removable running boards
f) Price (as compared to competitors)
g) Land Cruiser heritage and world wide reputation
200 LC Cons
a) No HDD
b) No ventilated seats
c) Some interior trim pieces lower grade (not cheap by ANY means) compared to 100 series and for vehicles price point
d) Price ($70K+ for a Toyota ??!!!)
e) Service experience (treated not too much better than someone in a Corolla)--Expect more for such a $$$ vehicle !!
I did this in kind of a hurry but it's pretty complete. I tried to be as subjective as possible but some things are of personal preference. I am sure someone will correct me on some of these !!
Your forgiven
Kewl !!.......Your forgiven
The original question was 200 verus 100 series
Whatever...Without being a hypocrite, when you get into vehicles priced that high there is definitely a bit of "one-upsmanship" involved. No one really NEEDS an SL or CL, etc.. I just know that I personally don't consciously buy something to "impress" the neighbors. BTW, I like SL's very much. My family has owned a number of different SL models. I just wanted a CL because it was less common than an SL, but not as ostentatious as say a Bentley or a Maserati. Unless you are Bill Gates
Now then, back to the original question asked in this thread...
LX570 Pros
a) Beautiful interior
b) HDD
C) AHC
d) Ventilated seats
e) Excellent motor/tranny
f) Dealer experience
LX570 cons
a) AHC (some consider it a +, some a -)
b) Non removable running boards
c) No front bull bars available (at least at this point)
d) Exterior not as tasteful as LC200 (excess chrome trim, taillight design, wheel design, front end design, etc..)
e) Price
f) Same powertrain HP as LC (could have HP increase to differentiate it more from LC)
200 LC Pros
a) Tasteful (if not somewhat bland) exterior styling
b) Excellent powertrain / tranny
c) KDSS
d) Aftermarket parts availability
e) Removable running boards
f) Price (as compared to competitors)
g) Land Cruiser heritage and world wide reputation
200 LC Cons
a) No HDD
b) No ventilated seats
c) Some interior trim pieces lower grade (not cheap by ANY means) compared to 100 series and for vehicles price point
d) Price ($70K+ for a Toyota ??!!!)
e) Service experience (treated not too much better than someone in a Corolla)--Expect more for such a $$$ vehicle !!
I did this in kind of a hurry but it's pretty complete. I tried to be as subjective as possible but some things are of personal preference. I am sure someone will correct me on some of these !!
WOW very nice!
Yes....but overall the lower parts are still closer to the ground compared to the 100. Let's hope we see a 4" lift for this vehicle to compensate. Then we'll see it compete (possibly).
37's take care of that
Yes....lot's of cutting!
What needs to be cut??? With the correct lift and wheels, it should be good to go?
Based on what facts?
macneill
Rollin’ on 33s
100s don't have much soul.
200s have even less.
200s have even less.
Last edited:
Well, what facts do you have that say it absolutely has to be cut? Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't, but I doubt you can say either way definitively until you've actually put 37s on it, or taken meticulous measurements...
Supposedly this one is on 37's...maybe they cut it but it sure doesn't look like it
IH8MUD™ Forums - View Single Post - Best Yet! - Artic Trucks 200
To fit 37's? Come on now................
The wheel wells in the 200 are smaller than the 100.
That Arctic Truck sure looks likes cutting plus body work, PLUS....I'm sure they bumpstopped the hell out of it. That defeats it's purpose as a wheeler. It might work in the Arctic, but not on the rocks.
The 200 will need a 6" lift minimum IMO. Where ya gonna get it?
The wheel wells in the 200 are smaller than the 100.
That Arctic Truck sure looks likes cutting plus body work, PLUS....I'm sure they bumpstopped the hell out of it. That defeats it's purpose as a wheeler. It might work in the Arctic, but not on the rocks.
The 200 will need a 6" lift minimum IMO. Where ya gonna get it?
Devil's advocate:
It would be sweet if somebody made a 6 or 8" Tundra kit that would fit the 200. Wouldn't ya luv it!
Seems like you should ask yourself the same question
Do you have the measurements under the transfer case, etc?
