would toyota go irs with the 200 ?

[GX-R]

i was thinking , do you think toyota would consider an IRS model in the upcoming years as part of the mid model makeover for the 200 ? and keep the rear solid axle for standard models , just like they did with the 105 ?.

I for one am suprised the lx570 has a solid rear axle , considering its rarely used offroad !

 

[Jacket]

They already have that setup with the Sequoia. The Cruiser is a world platform and I wouldn't expect Toyota to modify it for the States. Discontinue? Maybe. But not change the suspension.

 

[rhllc]

If Toyota isn't willing to upgrade the head lamps, my guess is that a suspension change is out of the question. If an independent suspension design is not done well it might be worse than the current solid axle set up.

Solid axles designs have many strengths. They provide better travel. They are significantly stronger per lb. than a independent suspension. They have many fewer parts to break and those parts are much better sealed from the environment. CV joints are a notorious weak point off-road. It is great to have a couple axles without CV's so there is a chance one can get home when they start popping.

Solid axle designs are well understood. It took most manufactures a couple tries to get independent front suspensions at all right. Not sure I'd buy a first generation independent suspension design from anyone.

Down sides to a solid axle suspension are un-sprung weight and a coupling of the wheels motions. These result mainly in ride comfort issues and possible handling issues at the limits of performance.

There is a reason that all HD trucks and large pickups still use solid axles. Durability, load capacity and low cost are more important than a smooth ride to their owners.

That being said, modern engineering techniques can probably, at some cost, produce an adequate independent suspension design for a 200 series class vehicle. It is possible Toyota views the Sequoia rear suspension as an experiment that if successful may lead to a 200 series class design at some point in the future. But not something they where willing to risk their world wide reliability reputation on for their flagship SUV.

This isn't intended as an insult, but if the solid axle is keeping one from buying a 200 Series, they really should be considering something else. The 200 Series has many other tradeoffs for durablility and hard use that add both cost and weight, decreasing comfort and erogonomics, providing little value to the average NA SUV owner relative to mini-van or cross-over like 4x4 designs. (Edit, most people I've driven around in my LX570 find it one of the the most comfortable vehicles they have ever been in. I've had friends doing cross-word puzzles in the back seat at 40 MPH+ for miles on washboard dirt roads. Comfort for the 4 primary passengers is pretty incredible.)

I'm at work, otherwise I'd post another picture of my LX570 off-road.

 

[rhllc]

I would add that a large reason that solid axles have such a bad reputation is that they tend to be associated with leaf springs. From a ride quality and handling perspective, typical leaf spring designs are hideous. A modern, multi-link, coil suspension like the 200 series has, eliminates most of the horrific problems in wheel hop and wierd pathing associated with leaf spring designs. Coils also enable much more effective mult-rate spring designs.

Going independent with coil, rather than solid axle with coil, would eliminate some un-sprung weight, isolate the side to side wheel motions a bit and perhaps allow the suspension engineers to play more sophisticated camber/caster games. All of which in my experience are of somewhat marginal benefit in a heavy truck like vehicle with very large off-road/mud and snow tires and large heavy brakes.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

CV joints are a notorious weak point off-road. It is great to have a couple axles without CV's so there is a chance one can get home when they start popping.

It is possible Toyota views the Sequoia rear suspension as an experiment that if successful may lead to a 200 series class design at some point in the future. But not something they where willing to risk their world wide reliability reputation on for their flagship SUV.

CV joints are "weak" and they start "popping"?

Have you researched your vehicle data about this? CV failures are extremely RARE on the 100 and 200 series because the axleshafts are so stout. It's a near non-issue for aggressive wheelers on these trucks and ones that run 35-inch tires.

And Toyota isn't learning anything from the Sequoia's IRS. The Sequoia is not meant or equipped for applications where severe durability require a solid rear axle. It's a light duty SUV made for hauling folks so the build demands are less. IRS was contemplated early on by the Toyota Team for the 200-series. They said for this series that they could not give up the added durability. What will happen in the next series...who knows but eventually IRS is on it's way. It's working for Land Rover.

 

[pagemaster]

The solid axle of the current Land Cruiser/LX and the current set up in the 4runner/GX are cost cutting features. End of story!

Its just a matter of time as to when the LC200 gets a IRS. I believe that it will be the 200 LX570 before the 200 LC.

To compete head on with Range Rover/Infiniti QX56, the LX will eventually need an IRS.

Toyota's SUV world vehicles are sometime behind in some things. Its very rare for Toyota to not have the latest technology in some of their vehicles. For example, an I-Drive like controller was a major omission on their Lexus brand. Also, Toyota never offered dual front HVAC on their Tundra/Sequoia or Land Cruiser from 98-06.

The 100 was using a torsion front while the first gen Sequoia had the double wishbone. The first gen Sequoia also had 5 links in the rear while the 100/200 have four. Toyota has finally upgraded the Land Cruiser to a double wishbone front.

Toyota worldwide will finally upgrade to a IRS. Now that the Nissan Patrol uses an IRS, the Land Cruiser/Lx is the last one to change.

 

[pagemaster]

And Toyota isn't learning anything from the Sequoia's IRS. The Sequoia is not meant or equipped for applications where severe durability require a solid rear axle.

Toyota Sequoia IRS is fine. With a tow package, it can haul up to 9,800 lbs all day long. It was well-designed and made for long term towing use.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

The solid axle of the current Land Cruiser/LX and the current set up in the 4runner/GX are cost cutting features. End of story!

Its just a matter of time as to when the LC200 gets a IRS. I believe that it will be the 200 LX570 before the 200 LC.

To compete head on with Range Rover/Infiniti QX56, the LX will eventually need an IRS.

Toyota's SUV world vehicles are sometime behind in some things. Its very rare for Toyota to not have the latest technology in some of their vehicles. For example, an I-Drive like controller was a major omission on their Lexus brand. Also, Toyota never offered dual front HVAC on their Tundra/Sequoia or Land Cruiser from 98-06.

The 100 was using a torsion front while the first gen Sequoia had the double wishbone. The first gen Sequoia also had 5 links in the rear while the 100/200 have four. Toyota has finally upgraded the Land Cruiser to a double wishbone front.

Toyota worldwide will finally upgrade to a IRS. Now that the Nissan Patrol uses an IRS, the Land Cruiser/Lx is the last one to change.

I don't ever see the 200-series getting IRS. Next one maybe (eek, or even probably).

Toyota Sequoia IRS is fine. With a tow package, it can haul up to 9,800 lbs all day long. It was well-designed and made for long term towing use.

I'm sure the Seq IRS is fine for that rig...though it's not an "experiment" for Toyota in which to learn about future LC/LX tech as another postee said.

 

[patrickfinley]

I certainly don't see IRS on the 200 series. Perhaps the next generation 300 LC (6 years out??) could move to IRS but they may still offer a Solid Axle 305 for the countries that need them. Or perhaps in 6 years there will be enough RD to develop a capable IRS for all conditions.

Land Rover has made the move, but they are extremely quick to add any technology or gadget wether it works or not. They let the vehicle owners do the RD.

My 100 series is amazingly comfortable with it's Solid Axle, the 200 is even more so.

 

[IslandTimes]

Toyota Sequoia IRS is fine. With a tow package, it can haul up to 9,800 lbs all day long. It was well-designed and made for long term towing use.

Hahaha, yeah, we already all know that you think the sequoia is the greatest vehicle ever built. But seriously, the trolling is getting annoying.

But I agree, I think toyota will stick with the solid rear axel for at least the 200 series product cycle. Will we see it in the next series? With toyota, you really can't know... if we do, I'd imagine it'll be the most bulletproof IRS setup out there though.

 

[pagemaster]

I..though it's not an "experiment" for Toyota in which to learn about future LC/LX tech .

Don't take it as an insult to the all mightly LC, I've been seeing a trend that Toyota Land Cruiser owners are a very sensitive bunch. Toyota has a solid axle bacause it is cheaper than to have an IRS. Toyota tests news tech on certian vehicles all the time. Lexus was famous for getting new technology which would then filter down into the Toyota products.
The dealer installed navigations present on many Toyotas first debuted on Lexus. Side airbags, power telescoping steering, VG steering, all started on high end Lexus stuff. So did VVTi.

Trends have reversed in some cases and all the more recent as Toyota USA designs there own tech. Toyota Tundra/Sequoia debut VVTi, before the LX470 recieved it. Toyota also debut Dual VVTi on the USA designed Avalon. Toyota Avalon also debuted laser dynamic cruise.

We can thank the Tundra/Sequoia for the 5.7 as that is what is was intially designed for. LX/LC200 are secondary afterthought applications.

Back to suspensions, Toyota USA Tundra/Sequioa debuted the double wishbone fronts, Land Cruiser 200 took a long time to add this as they were still using 80s tech torsion fronts.

Toyota increased the length of the 200 series, this leads me to believe that IRS will be added mid cycle as the 200 will go at least 10 years before a full redesign

My 100 series is amazingly comfortable with it's Solid Axle, the 200 is even more so.

It would be even more comfortable with an IRS. It would handle even better as well.

Nissan, Range Rover all have gone IRS, its only time when Toyota upgrades to the worldwide standard.

Only Toyota Land Cruiser and the pathetic Tahoe/Yukon still use the obsolete solid axle. How pathetic to be with the Tahoe as having an IRS

 

[patrickfinley]

Toyota [LC] has a solid axle bacause it is cheaper than to have an IRS.

Yes, Pagemaster that is correct. Toyota was trying to cut corners on its most luxurious, highly engineered flagship vehicle so it didn't use IRS. You honestly believe this?

 

[pagemaster]

Yes, Pagemaster that is correct. Toyota was trying to cut corners on its most luxurious, highly engineered flagship vehicle so it didn't use IRS. You honestly believe this?

Yes!

The Land Cruiser is not Toyota's most highly engineered flagship vehicle.

Toyota's flagship is a actually the Toytoa Prius. The Prius is the most highly engineered vehicle in the line up.

The Land Cruiser is mostly parts bin stuff developed/used in other vehicles and then eventually fitted to Land Cruiser 200

KDSS = 120 GX470
5.7 = Tundra/Sequoia
Axle = similar to Tundra, only a different version
Pre crash = Lexus
.....the list can go on.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

Don't take it as an insult to the all mightly LC, I've been seeing a trend that Toyota Land Cruiser owners are a very sensitive bunch. Toyota has a solid axle bacause it is cheaper than to have an IRS. Toyota tests news tech on certian vehicles all the time.

LOL! Me = Sensitive?

You are both hilarious and ignorant (with all due respect).

Have you not read actual press releases on the 200-Series that confirm why the LC/LX did not get IRS? Are you not aware that all indepedant setups are less durable overall compared to equal value (comparable) live setups?

You show your inexperience especially by saying the SRA exists because it's cheaper. LOL!

I see the light though...somebody pointed out you own a Sequoia. Nice big SUV and Toyota quality but don't fool yourself. Nobody at Toyota is learning how to build a better LC/LX from a Sequoia. LOL!

 

[pagemaster]

LOL! Me = Sensitive?

You are both hilarious and ignorant (with all due respect).

!

Yes you are sensitive. But that's ok.

I do not own a Sequoia.

I see the light though...somebody pointed out you own a Sequoia. Nice big SUV and Toyota quality but don't fool yourself. Nobody at Toyota is learning how to build a better LC/LX from a Sequoia. LOL

Actually, they did learn from the Sequoia. Toyota Sequioa had the double wishbone front before Landy. Landy was still using a torsion set up.

There are also a few things the Landy could learn from a Sequoia.

1. Ground Clearance (8.9 is laughable)
2. Third row seating
3. 9,800 lb towing capacity.
4. A world class rear hatch.

There entire rear from the second row back is cost cut in the Land Cruiser. Sorry to break it to you, but it really is.

SRA exists because it's cheaper.

Not that is exists, but because it is still used in the Land Cruiser 200 specifically. That why I feel the Land Cruiser is cost cut.

 

[swoosh]

Pagemaster, your logic about TLC is getting out hand. Average buyer who typically shells out $70K+ is discerning about what TLC can do for them and typically will demand the best, otherwise why not pay $15k-$20k and buy a Sequoia?

It is well know that Toyota invested more than double R&D resources on the LC 200 compared to other models. So, why would they cut corners? I believe there's a reason why Solid Axle is there.

 

[pagemaster]

Pagemaster, your logic about TLC is getting out hand. Average buyer who typically shells out $70K+ is discerning about what TLC can do for them and typically will demand the best, otherwise why not pay $15k-$20k and buy a Sequoia?

It is well know that Toyota invested more than double R&D resources on the LC 200 compared to other models. So, why would they cut corners? I believe there's a reason why Solid Axle is there.

Swoosh, most informed people will know, that the LC was not built in North America. Building the vehicle in Japan brings the cost up significantly. The Land Cruiser does have some future Toyota technology such as Pre-Crash, HVAC integration into the nav, and lexus link which adds to the cost. These techs are from Lexus models that are new.

If the Land Cruiser was built in NA, it would cost $10k-15k less to build while still having the same level of tech

 

[sptsdn]

Toyota's flagship is a actually the Toytoa Prius.

Wrong. In the Toyota brand, the Avalon is the flagship sedan and the LC is their flagship 4WD. The Lexus LS is obviously Toyota's company flagship sedan.

The Prius is the most highly engineered vehicle in the line up.

Where does that leave the Highlander hybrid then? Uses the same hybrid technology yet adds 4wd and that holy-grail of yours, an independent rear suspension. And the Highland has some additional bells and whistles that the Prius doesn't even offer.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

This is getting hilarious!

 

[pman]

Yes!

The Land Cruiser is not Toyota's most highly engineered flagship vehicle.

Toyota's flagship is a actually the Toytoa Prius. The Prius is the most highly engineered vehicle in the line up.

The Land Cruiser is mostly parts bin stuff developed/used in other vehicles and then eventually fitted to Land Cruiser 200

KDSS = 120 GX470
5.7 = Tundra/Sequoia
Axle = similar to Tundra, only a different version
Pre crash = Lexus
.....the list can go on.

Thats what people in the industry would call Beta testing......Toyota wont do anything on the LC till its been throughly proven to be useful and dependable.

Wrong. In the Toyota brand, the Avalon is the flagship sedan and the LC is their flagship 4WD. The Lexus LS is obviously Toyota's company flagship sedan.
Where does that leave the Highlander hybrid then? Uses the same hybrid technology yet adds 4wd and that holy-grail of yours, an independent rear suspension. And the Highland has some additional bells and whistles that the Prius doesn't even offer.

False, the Crown is the flagship sedan within the Toyota brand

This is getting hilarious!

I agree......and also slightly embarrassing.