- Thread starter
- #101
it’s true for the 2016+ LX, but earlier models look very close to LC.
the new design of LX feels too flashy
Why LC more expensive than LX?
- Thread starter studio19atx
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
it’s true for the 2016+ LX, but earlier models look very close to LC.
the new design of LX feels too flashy
- Thread starter
- #102
There are aftermarket shocks that will work with AHC, but I never could get those companies to respond to me.
Fox, King, Icon, etc. won't work with AHC
Tundra arms will work with AHC with some mods. Tundra arms\components increase your track width by 3".
See my threads
Disabling the AHC and AVS systems, no warning lights.
I have deleted the whole AHC, AVS, and AFS(disabled) systems and been driving around since January 2020 without problems. Today I attempted the first steps into getting rid of the AHC/AVS systems, I think I was successful. I still need to do some more testing to make sure warning lights don't...forum.ih8mud.com
LX570 to Tundra front end swap.
I went ahead and did this to my LX. Took about 15 hours over the week to do. For the Land Cruiser version see @TexAZ (Thanks Tex!) thread 200 Series Lift using Tundra front IFS and Icon shocks Got the upper and lower arms from Offer Up locally for $150 Axles from rock auto (Cardon HD for $130...
After having removed the AHC, is that’s something you recommend?
AHC is not of much issue for me as it will be mostly driving in city and ranch.
however I do want to take the running boards off and install LC cover.
Agree that a used Toyota has a premium compared to other brands, but so do Lexus vehicles compared to other "lux" brands.
Generally the depreciation is too little for me to ever consider used, but the LC is the one exception with Toyota. I was able to get a 16 with 32k miles and a platinum warranty last year for $53k. 38% over 3 years (from original purchase date) puts me in the used market. I couldn't find a LX for that price anywhere. We test drove a 16 LX that was $62k with no 3rd row or back seat entertainment (was the base LX that had an 89k sticker) but my wife and I both walked away not liking it as much. It would have been for her, but she didn't like it. I agree that at a point, the Lexus is much more affordable. At the 3 year mark, the Lexus (based on prior year pricing) will start depreciating more, making net ownership cost be more.
I don't know why I'd compare coffee prices when analyzing apples to apples comparisons of the cost to own and operate a vehicle. When I did my research I found:
Cost to insure: Lexus was close to $400 more per year.
Cost for gas: $5,000 every 100k miles
This doesn't take into account the cost of maintenance if you use a dealer, which Lexus is generally 15% more more.
Then there is the aftermarket support. Limited slider options, which takes time and money to figure out if you can ever get them. Limited front bumper options likely adds cost or you'll pay for fab or an ugly bumper.
So maybe an extra $9,000 over 10 years minimum with less aftermarket support. Not a huge cost, but still a cost. If one were to do all dealer maintenance, that cost goes up a lot more.
If you take your rig offroad, the 20 or 21" wheels will not be a good option, so add cost there.
And while I agree driving a Land Cruiser isn't low-key for people who know what they are, but having owned them for a number of years, the large majority of the people I give rides to, or those that detail my LC don't know what it is. And when I've gone in for recalls even the damn Toyota service advisors look at it and think it is a highlander or 4Runner (less so with the 16 update). The Lexus with its contemporary design sticks out, and is flashy (design may not age well).
And it is much more low-key than a Lexus, which is known as a luxury brand.
I think you're missing the point. Your sales numbers you quoted are only in regards to sales/purchases and not leases. If that is true and the leases are not taken into consideration in those figures and they lease more LX's than they sell then those numbers are false and low. No one is arguing about releasing a vehicle after it is used as a statistic towards these sales, but we are arguing that leases do qualify as units being moved and those numbers are much higher than a straight purchase and should be taken into consideration regarding how many total new units are moved annually.
Have you considered that we aren't buying premium because it's simply not necessary in this vehicle? For myself it's not a monetary decision and I would assume that it's not for most but when it's the same exact motor found in the LC, Tundra, and Sequoia but with a slightly different tune to wring out a whopping four more crank HP then to me spending the extra money is a joke. The internals aren't different, the performance if it suffers at all is not discernible by feel or sound and it's simply not a high performance vehicle or motor. So where is the benefit of that extra money spent? For years I've been running 91 and sometimes even 87 in every Lexus I've ever owned and there have never been any ill effects. This is a lot more common than you think, further illustrated by others here claiming that they do the same.
IslandCruiser23
2018 LC
I thought, To a dealer, a lease is no different than a regular sale. Leasing is just a financing mechanism.. do I have this wrong?
Here we go again.
As an engineer, engine tuner, engine junkie, please don't pose these assumptions as fact. They are simply your layman interpretation.
My informed opinion says to follow the manufacturers requirements as documented in the manual.
Last edited:
My point is just that when buying high-end, expensive autos balking at premium gas seems to be a very strange place to save a buck. Esp. in a vehicle that gets 15 mpg, I just don't get it.
The LX manual state 91 is minimum octane so it seems that you have been running the correct gas. The manual also says you can run 87 but should throw 91 in at the next fill up. I don't why Lexus would insist on 91 if it wasn't necessary, maybe that is what gets the extra 3HP over the LC engine? I am sure 87 would be fine.
You are correct. When you lease a car you pay sales tax, registration fees, insurance, maintenance etc. I title is issued, either to the leasing company or dealer. Once titled it is a sale.
This puzzles me as well, especially after recently acquiring an LX. As stock with only bigger tires/free sensor adjustment, you are getting 5" extra clearance when in high mode. The thought of spending 5k+ on the initial purchase price for an LC, and then spending 5-10k to achieve that kind of lift for 34s, just sounds crazy unless i had a ton of money (which i don't). Even if i had the ton of extra money to statically lift an LC that high, it still wouldn't match the LX because you can't lower it back down to get your nice geometry/handling back after leaving the trails.
Like someone said earlier an LC is only better if you go nuts on upgrading the suspension, and even then it is only better on certain trails and even worse off in other areas like highways. AHC gives you some of the best of both worlds, which is perfect for someone like me who wants to go in and out of civilization as i please. I like that i won't stick out as much when i go back on the pavement.
I could side with @TeCKis300 all day on this just on the AHC part alone, but i think the only thing that hasn't been pointed out is that for someone like me with a lower budget than most, that it's either i go LX or i can't afford a 200 series. I paid 18k for mine and with 2k more in tires/rims upgrades, it will still beat a 25k LC with 5k more in suspension mods. That's before you get into the world of extra luxuries that is found in the LX. 20k for a base vehicle then just add overland mods, i can manage. 30k for a vehicle then add overland mods is too much for me, especially if you consider that the cheaper one is still the better vehicle.
With that said, i'm guessing the biggest reason is that one carries the "Land Cruiser" name, and one does not. I don't think the average person knows that the LX570 is essentially a Land Cruiser, and even the ones that do fall victim to undervaluing it by underestimating the AHC system. Many people have looked specifically for "Non-AHC" LXs and LCs for the same reason, and because of that something that should add value to the vehicle actually ends up bringing down the value.
Overseas where people have the option of adding AHC to their LCs, many do and many pay a lot of extra money for it. I think people are right in that Lexus Depreciation and quantity sold does have a big part, but ultimately i think it is a fluke that is a result of the average person not knowing/not understanding that the AHC LX570 is not just a 200 series, but an upgraded 200 series; and definitely not a downgraded 200 series. I think people are mistaking an upgrade for a downgrade because they assume many things like worse reliability/less capability, but as time passes people are waking up to the fact that AHC is very much reliable and very much capable.
Another thing to consider is the kind of people who look for used LCs; they obviously don't have the kind of money for a new one so money is a concern. When money is a concern, Lexus isn't usually a place where people look as opposed to Toyota. Also many used LC owners likely have been fans of the "Land Cruiser" name for a long time as well, which reiterates the point about one being a "Land Cruiser" and one being an "LX570". The Land Cruiser name has developed such a big following that there are always people specifically looking for used Land Cruisers, but nowhere near the case for LX570s; assuming the average person does not know Lexus makes a Land Cruiser.
Also, the kind of people who buy LX570s new are likely really rich. You can buy an LC as a fanatic and not be wealthy, but i don't picture the average fanatic spending his life savings on a Lexus. When it's wealthy owners, there is a better chance they will just trade it in/price it to sell quick when its time to sell it. I can see an LC owner wanting to get the most out of selling their LC and taking their time, and i can see an LX570 owner just wanting to sell it quick. This is another thing that to me adds to the value, is that LX570 owners not only are less likely to off road/ride it hard, they can also afford to properly maintain/send it into Lexus frequently. It is very important that many LX570 owners don't look at their cars as a Land Cruiser, and because of that many LXs never leave the pavement. It's very hard to find LCs that has been babied/kept on pavement, compared to an LX.
I think as people become more educated on just how capable the LX is and that it is essentially an LC, that they will learn to appreciate it more as well as value it more. Until then, i would highly suggest that anyone still looking consider an LX if you have not already done so.
Like someone said earlier an LC is only better if you go nuts on upgrading the suspension, and even then it is only better on certain trails and even worse off in other areas like highways. AHC gives you some of the best of both worlds, which is perfect for someone like me who wants to go in and out of civilization as i please. I like that i won't stick out as much when i go back on the pavement.
I could side with @TeCKis300 all day on this just on the AHC part alone, but i think the only thing that hasn't been pointed out is that for someone like me with a lower budget than most, that it's either i go LX or i can't afford a 200 series. I paid 18k for mine and with 2k more in tires/rims upgrades, it will still beat a 25k LC with 5k more in suspension mods. That's before you get into the world of extra luxuries that is found in the LX. 20k for a base vehicle then just add overland mods, i can manage. 30k for a vehicle then add overland mods is too much for me, especially if you consider that the cheaper one is still the better vehicle.
With that said, i'm guessing the biggest reason is that one carries the "Land Cruiser" name, and one does not. I don't think the average person knows that the LX570 is essentially a Land Cruiser, and even the ones that do fall victim to undervaluing it by underestimating the AHC system. Many people have looked specifically for "Non-AHC" LXs and LCs for the same reason, and because of that something that should add value to the vehicle actually ends up bringing down the value.
Overseas where people have the option of adding AHC to their LCs, many do and many pay a lot of extra money for it. I think people are right in that Lexus Depreciation and quantity sold does have a big part, but ultimately i think it is a fluke that is a result of the average person not knowing/not understanding that the AHC LX570 is not just a 200 series, but an upgraded 200 series; and definitely not a downgraded 200 series. I think people are mistaking an upgrade for a downgrade because they assume many things like worse reliability/less capability, but as time passes people are waking up to the fact that AHC is very much reliable and very much capable.
Another thing to consider is the kind of people who look for used LCs; they obviously don't have the kind of money for a new one so money is a concern. When money is a concern, Lexus isn't usually a place where people look as opposed to Toyota. Also many used LC owners likely have been fans of the "Land Cruiser" name for a long time as well, which reiterates the point about one being a "Land Cruiser" and one being an "LX570". The Land Cruiser name has developed such a big following that there are always people specifically looking for used Land Cruisers, but nowhere near the case for LX570s; assuming the average person does not know Lexus makes a Land Cruiser.
Also, the kind of people who buy LX570s new are likely really rich. You can buy an LC as a fanatic and not be wealthy, but i don't picture the average fanatic spending his life savings on a Lexus. When it's wealthy owners, there is a better chance they will just trade it in/price it to sell quick when its time to sell it. I can see an LC owner wanting to get the most out of selling their LC and taking their time, and i can see an LX570 owner just wanting to sell it quick. This is another thing that to me adds to the value, is that LX570 owners not only are less likely to off road/ride it hard, they can also afford to properly maintain/send it into Lexus frequently. It is very important that many LX570 owners don't look at their cars as a Land Cruiser, and because of that many LXs never leave the pavement. It's very hard to find LCs that has been babied/kept on pavement, compared to an LX.
I think as people become more educated on just how capable the LX is and that it is essentially an LC, that they will learn to appreciate it more as well as value it more. Until then, i would highly suggest that anyone still looking consider an LX if you have not already done so.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #110
What year and miles yours had when you bought it?
2008 - 180k, no accidents, little rust, serviced solely by Lexus since new, great interior and yeah i could go on and on but best way to put it is i feel very blessed/lucky. I did spend months looking and looked at thousands across the country though, so it did not come easy but ultimately worth every hour spent.
My 2008 LX570
Fuel octane has been covered ad nauseum.
There is no -direct or documentary evidence- the LX has a different tune, just people claiming it does because lexus states it needs a different octane. This is called circumstantial evidence... of which there is also a fair amount to support the tune being the same.
Despite the likely thousands (tens of thousands?) of people running RUG in their lexus from day one, and strangely we don't hear about engine problems from them any more than we do run of the mill toyotas.
Tex68w post included..
"same exact motor included in LC, Tundra, sequoia".. FACT
"the internals aren't different" Fact.
"the performance if it suffers at all is not discernible by feel or sound" Fact (according to the people that have done it)
"and it's simply not a high performance vehicle or motor" Fact. This isn't a RCF.
"but with a slightly different tune".. assumption (and yet what certain people have been claiming as fact without solid evidence for.. a long time.)
But he's called a layman by someone that has no idea what his background is.
I'll spare everyone else the extended back and forth of me requesting evidence of claims and others disagreeing on what direct evidence is.
Tons of anecdotes on here and elsewhere of people putting RUG in their LX570 without the sky falling. Take that as you will.
There is no -direct or documentary evidence- the LX has a different tune, just people claiming it does because lexus states it needs a different octane. This is called circumstantial evidence... of which there is also a fair amount to support the tune being the same.
Despite the likely thousands (tens of thousands?) of people running RUG in their lexus from day one, and strangely we don't hear about engine problems from them any more than we do run of the mill toyotas.
Tex68w post included..
"same exact motor included in LC, Tundra, sequoia".. FACT
"the internals aren't different" Fact.
"the performance if it suffers at all is not discernible by feel or sound" Fact (according to the people that have done it)
"and it's simply not a high performance vehicle or motor" Fact. This isn't a RCF.
"but with a slightly different tune".. assumption (and yet what certain people have been claiming as fact without solid evidence for.. a long time.)
But he's called a layman by someone that has no idea what his background is.
I'll spare everyone else the extended back and forth of me requesting evidence of claims and others disagreeing on what direct evidence is.
Tons of anecdotes on here and elsewhere of people putting RUG in their LX570 without the sky falling. Take that as you will.
Excellent write up. Reminds of what is happening now with older Lexus GXs. Folks have grown tired of paying premium prices for used 4Runners and have "discovered" that a Lexus GX is a Land Cruiser Prado and a very capable off roader. Expect the prices of GXs to start rising pretty quickly.
Last edited:
I don't think people are arguing over the fact that a Lexus needs premium or not. People were stating that the fact that the LC needs 87 and the LX requires premium was a factor in their decision in which 200 to buy. I find this reasoning odd, who buys a 50K truck, dumps 5-15K in lifts, bumpers, etc and worries about .50 cents a gallon at fill up, in a truck that gets 15MPG on a good day. Seems like an odd place to start worry about money.......
Thanks for this, i have been using RUG myself and sometimes get tired of explaining it to my friends. I just tell them they make these cars overseas where they only have Regular Gas, and they run just fine.
With all due respect bloc, please stick with your firefighting.
I didn't go to school all these years, spend huge investments of time and learning, tuning turbo Lexus and Porches, develop new calibration for aircraft engines, to formulate an inconsidered opinion.
Everyone of your points is inconsequential fact to octane requirements.
Software (i.e. calibration) is its own animal, independent of hardware. I could build a tune for any number of engines that would require it to use 85, 91 octane, or 100 octane. Without a hardware change whatsoever. Fortunately, good engineering always accounts for people to mis-use systems, so there are safegaurds to protect as Lexus has likely done.
Last edited:
I love how you label me a layman when you know absolutely noting about me. I have an undergrad in petroleum engineering and a masters in industrial hygiene, I guess that makes me average and uninformed by your standards. GTFO with your continually pompous attitude and label dropping, nobody is impressed. And prove me wrong on my so called "assumptions" about the engines, we will all patiently wait for your rebuttal glittered with tantalizing info such as the names of companies whose tech found its way into this decade old engine while still never proving a damn thing other than stroking your ego. We get it, you're better than us, we will crawl back into our caves and eat our crayons.
Thanks, I couldn't have said it better myself. Do you want to join the layman club and eat crayons with me while we watch paint dry?
I will let you guys know if i have any problems running regular; no point in fighting over it here and getting off topic.
I accept responsibility for the potential consequences of me being wrong here and worst case scenario i will end up with a freshly rebuilt engine XD and be out about 6k. I haven't had any issues so far but have not put enough miles on it to really know (183.5k currently!).
I accept responsibility for the potential consequences of me being wrong here and worst case scenario i will end up with a freshly rebuilt engine XD and be out about 6k. I haven't had any issues so far but have not put enough miles on it to really know (183.5k currently!).