Your Thoughts on the LC 250? (3 Viewers)

[2021 LC200]

I agree. I don’t understand Toyota’s thought process to make a hybrid that doesn’t increase efficiency, rather just a temporary torque boost, which then makes it so they can’t offer AWD due to the increased torqued when practically all of their competitors do.

Speculating that in many big companies finance, marketing, HR and near term stock results go over solid Engineering and Manufacturing. Mercedes went through this change in the nineties and I would not buy one anymore today. I am afraid Toyota is down this path now. A non Toyoda CEO is the result together with near term stock market focus. I hope I am wrong.

 

[Jetboy]

I agree. I don’t understand Toyota’s thought process to make a hybrid that doesn’t increase efficiency, rather just a temporary torque boost, which then makes it so they can’t offer AWD due to the increased torqued when practically all of their competitors do.

FWIW the competitor AWD options are not capable of off-road use. They're light duty clutch mechanisms that can't be engaged for extended use off-road. So those are not something you'd want if you ever intended to go off road with it.

 

[M1911]

I agree. I don’t understand Toyota’s thought process to make a hybrid that doesn’t increase efficiency, rather just a temporary torque boost, which then makes it so they can’t offer AWD due to the increased torqued when practically all of their competitors do.

Huh? The Land Cruiser 250 has full time 4WD, with a lockable, limited slip, Torsen center diff and a lo range. It acts as AWD on the road with the center diff unlocked.

 

[Zill]

Huh? The Land Cruiser 250 has full time 4WD, with a lockable, limited slip, Torsen center diff and a lo range. It acts as AWD on the road with the center diff unlocked.

I was talking about the sequoia

 

[Gr8Daneger]

I’m frankly sick of hearing that the “new” LC is smaller and returning to its roots. It’s smaller because it’s a Prado not the next gen 300. ALL vehicles have gotten relatively bigger over the years, why doesn’t Toyota return the Taco, 4R, and Corolla back to their roots? Because it’s a joke of a marketing statement. The Prado 250 is still bigger than the 150. The “smaller” gimmick Toyota is playing is all a farce to make the average 4R and GX fans in the states think they are getting the real deal.

We still haven’t heard from Toyota why they didn’t bring the 300 over in all its trims instead giving us this name plate garbage. One can only hope they wise up and give us what we wanted to begin with.

Lastly, just keep remembering that 30k price drop had to come from somewhere!

 

[M1911]

I’m frankly sick of hearing that the “new” LC is smaller and returning to its roots.

It’s not smaller. It is virtually the same size as a 200.

 

[Zill]

It’s not smaller. It is virtually the same size as a 200.

With a lot less interior cabin space

 

[OSS]

The 300 wasn’t brought to the USA because it costs even more than the 200 did.
The 200 basically failed in the USA because it was too expensive.

The 250 base model brings a little price sanity to a vehicle that’s going to get a bit beat up offroad.

Let’s see… I’m going to take my $92K 4WD off road? Or I’m going to take my $52K 4WD offroad?

The 300 didn’t fix any of the 200s biggest problems (namely price).

 

[Zill]

The 300 wasn’t brought to the USA because it costs even more than the 200 did.
The 200 basically failed in the USA because it was too expensive.

The 250 base model brings a little price sanity to a vehicle that’s going to get a bit beat up offroad.

Let’s see… I’m going to take my $92K 4WD off road? Or I’m going to take my $52K 4WD offroad?

The 300 didn’t fix any of the 200s biggest problems (namely price).

But you fail to mention that the higher cost actually got you something in the form of very high quality and durable parts through and through. That’s what made the Land Cruiser special lol.

If I wanted a cheaper rig to wheel, I would buy the 4Runner, which is something we already have here.

 

[M1911]

I was talking about the sequoia

If you are talking about the current Sequoia, Toyota USA developed it on a shoestring budget. The bigger miss than the part-time 4WD system is the solid rear axle. This results in terrible third row room compared to its competitors. People buy full-size SUVs because they want three usable rows.

 

[Zill]

If you are talking about the current Sequoia, Toyota USA developed it on a shoestring budget. The bigger miss than the part-time 4WD system is the solid rear axle. This results in terrible third row room compared to its competitors. People buy full-size SUVs because they want three usable rows.

The Sequoia was largely influenced by the Tundra team which did not have a small budget (developed together and built on the same assembly line). They should have thrown a better transfer case in both the Tundra and Sequoia.

I am not a huge fan of independent rear suspension. Yeah solid axle cuts into the cabin space a little bit but there's still plenty of headroom in the 3rd row with the solid axle. Plus have you driven behind the new Tahoes with the independent rear? They look like minivans with their low ground clearance in the back.

They should have produced a long wheel base model like the Suburan vs Tahoe to really give you more space since length is really the useable space.

 

[Zill]

I’m still peeved at Toyota for dropping the ball on the Seqouia since it was either release the Sequoia here or give us the 300 (not both). I think a lot more people would prefer the 300 over the current sequoia with its glaringly obvious drawbacks.

 

[Gr8Daneger]

The 300 wasn’t brought to the USA because it costs even more than the 200 did.
The 200 basically failed in the USA because it was too expensive.

The 250 base model brings a little price sanity to a vehicle that’s going to get a bit beat up offroad.

Let’s see… I’m going to take my $92K 4WD off road? Or I’m going to take my $52K 4WD offroad?

The 300 didn’t fix any of the 200s biggest problems (namely price).

That was all speculation and not statements directly from Toyota. Yes it didn’t sell what other Toyota models did, but they didn’t advertise it like the 250 either.

Bring all 300 trims over and advertise why the LC is priced that way, and watch to popularity increase. I still remember the first gen Tundra commercials comparing parts to the big three, and it worked. I know a lot of people that wanted an LC because of its capabilities, and had there been lower cost trim levels they would be in one today.

I’m also pretty sure that the willingness of a person to take a brand new vehicle off road is all relative to what they can afford. If all you can afford is a 30k Bronco/Jeep you bet your ass you’re probably going to baby it too.

 

[M1911]

The Sequoia was largely influenced by the Tundra team which did not have a small budget (developed together and built on the same assembly line). They should have thrown a better transfer case in both the Tundra and Sequoia.

The Tundra team had a large budget. The Sequoia team did not. Toyota had planned to cancel the Sequoia and only agreed to allow Toyota NA to do it with a limited budget.

Ground clearance simply isn’t a major concern for full-size SUVs. People aren’t taking their Tahoekonbanalislade off-road. They want three usable rows, not off-road clearance.

 

[Jetboy]

The 300 wasn’t brought to the USA because it costs even more than the 200 did.
The 200 basically failed in the USA because it was too expensive.

The 250 base model brings a little price sanity to a vehicle that’s going to get a bit beat up offroad.

Let’s see… I’m going to take my $92K 4WD off road? Or I’m going to take my $52K 4WD offroad?

The 300 didn’t fix any of the 200s biggest problems (namely price).

The issue is the trim level. LC300 starts at $47k USD in other markets. GR sport diesel version is $76k USD.

It doesn't have to be lx600 price unless it's lx600 trim level.

 

[Jetboy]

For 3 useable rows - the Grand Highlander does that role as does the sienna. Unpopular opinion, but I think most people who need AWD really should consider Highlander. If it's mostly a highway cruiser where AWD is important, the highway cruiser vehicle might be a better fit.

I'm fine with the Sequoia solid axle. It's the battery that's the problem. Plenty of solid axle 3 rows exist with adequate 3rd rows.

 

[APIOQM]

The issue is the trim level. LC300 starts at $47k USD in other markets. GR sport diesel version is $76k USD.

It doesn't have to be lx600 price unless it's lx600 trim level.

In what country are you seeing the 300 so cheap? I see the GX base model at $109,000 AUD, which is $72,000 USD as a straight conversion.

 

[TWILLY]

The issue is the trim level. LC300 starts at $47k USD in other markets. GR sport diesel version is $76k USD.

It doesn't have to be lx600 price unless it's lx600 trim level.

Exactly. It’s a matter of trim. The problem is Toyota force feeding the US market needless luxury crap. The GX 550 carried this forward from the 200; if you want the heavier duty drivetrain, thou shalt pay for useless expensive luxury crap.

Toyota refuses to give the US heavy duty base spec Land Cruisers.

 

[Jetboy]

In what country are you seeing the 300 so cheap? I see the GX base model at $109,000 AUD, which is $72,000 USD as a straight conversion.

View attachment 3589657

Australia has a bunch of tax and insurance included in that price.

Japan starting price is about $47k new.

GR sport diesel can be had used for $56k plus tax and freight: Toyota Landcruiser 300 GR Sport Diesel | Japan Car Exporter - https://easycars.jp/listings/toyota-landcruiser-300-gr-sport-diesel/

 

[Rednexus]

American's don't buy strippers, outside of a fleet/commercial vehicle use. They are the last vehicles sitting on the lot and profit margins are very low.

I certainly like the idea of a stripper 300, but it probably makes little sense for Toyota to bring it here considering how few they would move.