It doesn’t snow very often here in North Carolina, but when it does, you can count on the good people of this beautifully damp and verdant state to positively shit themselves in icy terror and absolutely forget how to drive, not just in ice and snow, but at all. This was the situation I found myself in – well, for about a day and a half – when I was handed the keys to a chunky new Toyota Land Cruiser, the base model they call the “1958” because it has a few – but appreciated – retro touches. So I got to drive this off-road beast in some fairly tricky slushy/snowy/icy conditions, but then, more importantly, I got to just use it as an absolute, borderline-abused workhorse.
You see, while I had this Land Cruiser as a press car, our Editor-in-Cheap David Tracy came down to visit and help me (help in the sense of doing most of the work) wrench on this 375,000-mile taxi project that we’ll be writing lots more about here quite soon. That project of cab-wrenching required an awful lot of driving around and hauling stuff. David and I used the Land Cruiser as our mobile headquarters as we drove all over the middle of North Carolina getting parts from junkyards and telling lies to tire shops and eating way too much gross fast food in there. We spent a lot of time in that Land Cruiser, and I think we got to know it pretty well, in what is perhaps the most realistic, least-glamorous way possible.
I didn’t take it off-roading, at least not in any serious way. I didn’t photograph it on majestic vistas, I didn’t take it on some incredible road trip across America where I wrestled with my demons until my demons and I decided fighting was useless, so we made love, dangerous, passionate demon-love, the kind that leaves scars and rashes for days later, but in the end you realize that perhaps the real destination were the friends you made along the way, or that’s when I was carrying you, or something like that. I didn’t do anything like that.
Instead, I used this thing as a box on wheels that I could haul crap around in, eat meals in, a shelter from the cold, and a way to transport myself and some other people from one location to another. You know. A car. Or truck or SUV or whatever you want to call it. A motor vehicle. And, in this role, the Land Cruiser did its job wonderfully. And I got it really filthy, as you can see above there, next to Bent David.
What It Is, My Man
The Toyota Land Cruiser is something of a legendary name in the off-roader/SUV world, renowned across the globe for its ruggedness and reliability and just plain ability. Back around 2021 or so, we thought the Land Cruiser was going to be gone, at least here in America, but last year Toyota gave us a nice surprise and introduced this new generation of Land Cruiser. And, unusually for pretty much any car, this generation is smaller, lighter, simpler, and cheaper than the previous generation, and I think each and every one of those adjectives is fantastic.
Even better, the particular Land Cruiser I got to test is the 1958 version, which is what Toyota is calling their base-model Land Cruiser. The higher-spec Land Cruiser is just called the Land Cruiser, because there are people who work at Toyota who get all kinds of sick pleasures from making things confusing and hard to Google, the sick bastards. Even though this is the base model, it’s still a machine that Toyota won’t give you unless you give them – or one of their authorized agents – 59,979 American dollars, at least in the case of my particular press vehicle. It starts at $58,150 and the higher trims go to about $63,000, which is a lot of money, because we live in stupid times.
Honestly, though, I really prefer the look of the 1958 model with its round headlamps and all-black bumpers and cloth interior, much more than the higher spec models. I mean, look at them – here’s the 1958 one:
…and here’s the higher-spec Land Cruiser one:
I mean, the cheap one looks like a pal who’s down for whatever, and the fancy one looks like it’s judging you with thinly-veiled contempt, and that’s the kind of shit I just don’t need from my SUV. Sure, it has ventilated front seats, some kind of overkill 10-speaker stereo system, a bigger 12.3-inch center screen, and wider all-terrain tires, but, let’s be honest, do you really need all that crap? I mean, who are you anyway, God’s dad’s boss’ life coach? I sure as hell know I’m not that. I’ve seen my search history, I know what I’m dealing with when it comes to me, and I can tell you for a fact I do not deserve ventilated seats or even a 5-speaker stereo system.
Let’s Talk More About The Look
Since we already started talking about the look of this thing, we may as well keep going. Toyota seems to have finally freed themselves from their overly-ornate cybaroque period of design, and are now re-embracing some simplicity. The Land Cruiser is pleasingly boxy, with satisfyingly chunky proportions, and just the right amount of surface detailing, mostly sticking to a diagonal-line-cutoff-corner sort of theme.
That undercut in the lower third of the doors I think is especially effective at reducing visual bulk, and I think the whole package feels purposeful and rugged without edging too far into look-what-a-tough-boy-I-am territory, the bane of so many modern SUVs.
Just to compare, take a look at the previous generation of Land Cruiser:
There’s just way too much shit going on here: too much chrome, too many vents and slats and strakes, the hood’s too high, everything is just too bulky, too ongepotchket, too much of everything. Taking everything down a few notches – size, weight, ornamentation, everything – is the best choice that Toyota could have made.
This feels much more like what a Land Cruiser should be: an unassuming but confident tool that gets jobs done.
My only real exterior design complaints are pretty minor, really. Like, this tow hitch cover is strangely bulky and silly; why not just let the hitch receptacle be exposed, without shame?
Oh well. This isn’t that big a deal, and I suppose it’s more forgiving if you back into someone’s car, and that’s something I can get behind.
I’m fond of the lighting design; not just the round headlights with their horseshoe-shaped DRLs, but also the additional DRL/Sidelights forming that = sign in the indicator unit. I think those add a nice bit of visual interest there. That fog/driving lamp is strangely tiny, though; I wouldn’t have minded seeing a larger round lens down there. Especially in yellow.
Oh, there is one thing I’d enjoy bitching about: the colors. Or, I should say, the lack of colors. The one I tested was “meteor shower,” which you probably know as “gray.” Just gray. If you don’t want the dazzling chromatic orgasm of Meteor Shower, you get to pick from, let’s see, black or white, just like the colors the first seasons of The Andy Griffith Show were broadcast in. This is embarrassing. If you want to spend more money and get the higher-spec one with the face that looks like it just caught you picking your nose, you can get a blue and a sort of gold-ish color, but that’s it, in addition to more boring-ass grays.
Why can’t you get one of these in a yellow, or vivid blue, or forest-service green or, hell, any color? This is stupid.
What’s On The Inside?
You know what the big thing about the interior of the Land Cruiser 1958 is? Cloth. And lots of it! You may have forgotten about just nice cloth, because it’s become pretty rare on modern cars, which are all suckling greedily at the teats of Big Leather or Big Vinyl, also known as Big Vegan Leather. The cloth inside the Land Cruiser is decidedly retro, feeling a bit like a church basement rec-room sofa, but also feeling undeniably comfortable and friendly and warm.
Like all of the best parts of this car, the interior feels unpretentious and welcoming, and I like that an awful lot in a car. Is there lots of plastic around in the door trim and on the dash and everywhere else? You bet your ass there is. And that’s, honestly, just fine! Well, maybe not just fine, since this thing does clock in at almost $60 grand, but still, I have no problems with honest plastics.
Some of the dashboard plastics are pleasingly squishy, and some feel more like the finest products that Fisher-Price has produced. But nothing feels actually flimsy, just plasticky, and, again, I’m fine with that. I’m not some pampered sultan that must needs only touch the finest mother-of-pearl and bat silk upholstery – plastics get the job done, and they’re more than welcome on my dashboard.
Despite being a body-on-frame vehicle that also needs to store a whole big hybrid battery, the interior is quite roomy. That big, flat battery forms the floor of the cargo area, which is extremely roomy. Voluminous, even, and nicely flat-floored and box-like.
The battery does add a few inches of lift-over when you’re shoving things back there, but it’s an understandable trade-off.
At the forward edge of the cargo area, there is a little compartment to hold the toolkit and a small compartment, perfect for hiding your ultra-valuable sandwiches or perhaps an heirloom chalkboard eraser.
The rear seats fold in a split 60/40 way, and they kind of Pac-Man themselves closed and can then be rotated forward, getting them at least somewhat out of the way and freeing up a good bit more cargo area.
We loaded the Land Cruiser up with all sorts of crap as we were working on the taxi, and even a full set of tires was no problem, even without any real planning. I should also note that the process of buying new tires for the taxi was somewhat embarrassing, because I got caught in a lie.
You see, the tires we wanted didn’t show up as being rated for our taxi-spec Nissan NV200, even though they would be just fine. So after they refused to sell the tires to David, I went up and said David made an error, we want these for a Nissan Sentra! He ha, that David, always mixing up his Sentras and vans. What a kook!
This ruse went okay for a while until it was revealed that Sentra wheels had a different bolt pattern, and so I was caught in an outright lie. My usual tactic when caught lying, flinging a smoke bomb to the ground and making a run for it, was stymied by a door that, it turns out, opens inward, not outward, landing me on the floor with a bloody nose when the smoke cleared. In the end, we did manage to talk them into selling us the tires, but first I had to apologize for my subterfuge, which was humbling.
Anyway, the interior is great on the Land Cruiser 1958 – roomy, hard-wearing, and comfortable. You don’t need the fancier spec, trust me.
How’s It Drive?
I know a lot of purists did some underpants-bunching when it was revealed that this Land Cruiser has not a V8, but instead a 2.4-liter four-banger engine, paired with two electric motors to make up Toyota’s i-FORCE MAX Hybrid system, which is a name you say in a dumb, gruff voice. The whole shebang makes 326 horsepower and 426 pound-feet of torque. It’ll get from a stop to 60 mph in about 7.7 seconds, which is, let’s be honest here, just fine.
A manual transmission sure would have been more fun, but you’re stuck with an 8-speed automatic that’s um, unobtrusive, I suppose.
If you like fat hoses and wires, all ribbed for someone’s pleasure, then you’ll love looking in the engine compartment, which is absolutely full of them.
The girthy orange wires are for the hybrid system, which does an admirable job of keeping the fuel economy decent on this nearly 5,500-pound vehicle, with the official numbers coming in at 22 city, 25 highway, and 23 mpg combined. My real-world driving found these numbers to be pretty accurate; I got in the low-to-mid 20s throughout my time with the Land Cruiser.
Electric-only driving is possible, but I only had it happen while creeping through a parking lot or when slowly riding in my neighborhood. It’s quiet and novel, but it doesn’t really last long.
Handling isn’t too bad for a tall, heavy, boxy machine like this; the smaller size definitely helps, compared to the outgoing model. It’s fairly easy and undemanding to drive, with good acceleration, strong brakes, and quite good visibility.
The only time I really got to put the full-time 4×4 system to the test were during the day-and-a-half of snow and ice and slush, and the 1958 proved quite stable and capable, even at highway speeds on a slick road, and on un-plowed back roads, where I was able to test out the 4-Low setting to get up some steeper, snowy hills. And all this on all-season tires! I’m sure in the right hands and right conditions, this would prove to be a very competent off-road machine.
Those were not my hands, though, at least not this time, as my hands were too tired and greasy and clutching the occasional taco.
What About All The Tech And UX Stuff?
One of the things I like best about Toyota’s on-screen UX is that I could just about ignore it completely. The Land Cruiser supports CarPlay and Android Auto, and wisely leaves most of the essential controls off the screen, so you barely need to interact with Toyota’s UX, which I think was showing some ad trying to get me to sign up for their nav system subscription or something like that. How about no, fuck off, ad-on-the-screen? How about that instead?
Happily, there are physical buttons for most controls, and I generally like these piano-key type buttons, especially when they move both up and down to, say, raise and lower temperature. The problem is that some of these don’t do that, and it’s a little jarring. This shape wants to move up and down, and I think the buttons that don’t do that should have another form. Also, the buttons above the piano-type keys read like labels for the keys more than buttons themselves, which is confusing.
Still, I’m happy to have all of these physical controls. And plenty of USB-C ports is nice, too, and good HVAC vents that you can operate with gloves on, and also I’m pleased with the separate HVAC controls in the rear, along with a 2400W/120V wall-type outlet, which is also duplicated in the rear cargo area for your shoe buffer and rock tumbler needs.
One unexpected tech-related thing has to do with the LCD instrument cluster, which is generally pretty conventional:
What makes this instrument cluster odd is that the angle of viewing is quite narrow, for a modern LCD display. You really can’t see anything on it unless you’re head-on, so the passenger only sees this when they peek over:
Now, I suspect for a lot of drivers, this may be considered a plus. People can’t complain about you speeding if they have no idea you’re speeding!
Of course, the Land Cruiser has dynamic cruise and lane keeping and road sign recognition and all of the sort-of Level 2 driver-assist stuff that’s part of Toyota Safety Sense 3.0, which you can read about here, because, I’ll be honest – I didn’t pay any of that stuff all that much attention. I mean, I noticed it had automatically dimming headlights and I could feel the lane assist trying to tell me what to do and beeping at me, but for things like the Proactive Driving Assist? I didn’t care enough to mess with it. I was too busy driving manually, like a filthy animal.
What’s The Punctum Of The Toyota Land Cruiser 1958?
So here we are, at the real question: What’s the punctum of this car? What’s its point? Why should you care?
I think the punctum of the Land Cruiser, especially in this 1958 version, is the return to simplicity (in most ways, though maybe not in the powertrain). This is a very capable box on wheels, and that’s all it ever needed to be. The brand of retro styling Toyota is employing here is quite minimal and subtle, but it’s appreciated, and it just adds to the straightforward character of the Land Cruiser. The cloth interior is notable for its basic, honest appeal, and the car has the overall sense of an entity that’s your partner, there to help, without asking too much.
That’s how I used and treated this thing for the over-a-week I had it. I demanded it do things I needed, and it did them. It did them with ease and comfort and confidence, and more than a little bit of style. David and I spent a lot of time in this thing, driving, loading, eating, taking meetings and calls, and for the most part it disappeared into its own utility, the way any good tool does, like a nice pair of shears or an X-acto knife or a hammer of just the right size and heft.
I really can’t think of any higher praise than that. Wish it were cheaper, though.
“The whole shebang makes 326 horsepower and 426 pound-feet of torque. It’ll get from a stop to 60 mph in about 7.7 seconds, which is, let’s be honest here, just fine.”
I realize that in 2025 these are middling numbers at best, but I would KILL for these numbers in my Land Cruiser, especially the 23 mpg part. Power, torque, speed and mileage in a Land Cruiser? Dream come true.
Yeah, I thought the new Prius was bragging about 7 seconds flat…ish.
But also, I sat in one recently and they really compromised on its ethos to get the good looks.
“The one I tested was “meteor shower,” which you probably know as “gray.” Just gray.”
Toyota is quite fond of naming lame colors. My Land Cruiser is Antique sage. or “old brownish”
The barely greenish (in the right light) gray of the Rav4 is named Lunar something or other. I guess they’ve figured out that most of outer space looked gray to the naked eye.
Our family’s ’86 Van was “Burnt Sienna” i.e., beige
That would be an unfortunate color on a current Toyota van.
Great recap of the new Cruiser, Torch! I especially agree with the lack of color complaint. How hard is it really to offer some M&M colors on a fun vehicle?
Beyond that, Toyota should be chastised for not offering a more basic gas engine with a manual. The Taco has that. Why can’t the Cruiser?
I wonder what mileage it might return with a gas only drivetrain. I like the reasonable numbers of the hybrid, but at the same time having the lower load floor in the cargo area after removing that battery would be nice.
Unfortunately no one would buy it and emissions are a thing.
Pshaw!
Correct response
If it was $60,000 yesterday, does that mean it will be $75,000 very soon since it is made in Japan? I’m starting to wonder if I should buy as many new and used cars as I can afford before the 25% tariff on imported autos and parts actually hits the retail market. In a couple of months I could be sitting on a gold mine!
“Just to compare, take a look at the previous generation of Land Cruiser:”
FYI that is the Current generation of Land Cruiser. There many models that are the current generation of Land Cruiser (70 series, 250 series, 300 series). The one you reviewed is just from a different part of the family tree.
This seems marketed at FJ Cruiser owners that have moved up a social class. And that’s fine, they were/are a very devoted owner base.
I like the looks, but some of the compromises just seem so off from the “old money” status the Land Cruiser cultivated in the last few US models. If the called it the “FJ Senior” or something it’d somehow make more sense. And still be too expensive for what it is.
Funny thing is I am an FJ owner and would have loved one of these but the price just is way to damn high. I paid like 25k for my 2013 Trail Teams FJ in 2018. Brand new I think they were a little shy over 30k nowadays you cannot even get a base model 4runner for anywhere close to that let alone these land cruisers.
I like everything about it except the drivetrain. I would have gladly gotten worse mpg to have an NA v6 or v8. I just don’t see a turbo hybrid 4 cylinder being as reliable in the long run. I mean, they’re already having problems with them. I would much rather take the msrp price of this thing and get a nice used 200 series lc. The odds of this thing making it 450k miles like my 100 series did are slim to none.
These not only look super generic but they have awful looking interiors. I’m sure its reliable and all. But that price is insane.
Similar-ish vehicles I’d rather spend $60k (ballpark) on:
If I was super serious about it, it’d be hard to not spring for a Tahoe Z71 or Yukon AT4. You start talking a real price difference here, but you get a real drivetrain that doesn’t sound like a bucket of bolts.
Heck, I wonder how capable an Acadia AT4 is offroad, if that’s your sticking point. But I’d wager most buyers could be fine with any SUV when it comes down to their actual off road use case.
If I needed to replace my Wrangler today I would look at another Wrangler, Bronco, Land Cruiser, Tacoma, & Frontier. Most would option out between 50-65K sadly. My hobby is overlanding and off roading so I want at least a rear locker and BOF construction.
Please keep hating on these everyone! I want one in a few years and dealers near me already have them listed for $5,000 off MSRP. I think they look great, the hybrid powertrain and 22/25 MPG are a huge plus for me in the DC area, they have enough space for a family of 4, and more capability than the average buyer will be able to use.
Everyone complains about them being rough and old school but that’s a selling point for me. It’s a truck, it’s not supposed to coddle you. There’s a button for everything, the no frills interior will wear hard, it’ll stand up to kids and furry friends, and clean easily. I think one of these will make for a great dad car down the line and they’re not another anonymous soul sucking crossover.
I don’t mind paying 50 grand for that but that’s just me. Regardless, hate away! Prices will keep going down and I’ll get a great deal. Do the same with the 4Runner too while you’re at it. Toyota fanboys shunning these trucks is amazing for the people that just want to use them as cool all weather transportation and occasional off-roading.
Aside from styling, which this is 100% better, what would make you want the LC over the 4runner? I feel like they are incredibly similar at this point and struggle to see how this is worth more.
Once they’re discounted a 1958 and a 4Runner that’s spec’d out how I want it are basically the same price. The Land Cruiser looks cooler and has the hybrid standard rather than as a $3000 option. While real world MPG differences are more or less negligible the taxes I’d pay are not and are based of the EPA numbers. DC taxes anything that gets 20 and under city at a whopping 7.5%….that would basically make the up front delta for the LC negligible.
Oh wow I didn’t realize they were that close in price. Yeah the LC definitely wins all around then.
Just an FYI, everything I’ve seen on this powertrain is that it pretty drastically under delivers in real word fuel economy. Like C&D only managed 21mpg on their 75mph highway loop which is somehow worse than what they got with 4 cylinder Bronco that doesn’t have an engine that sounds and feels like rocks in a bucket. IDK how Toyota does it in their trucks, but they continually seem to have worse economy, worse performance, and worse experience than the competition and now aren’t even any more reliable.
I’m a big believer that most people overestimate what they spend on gas and are often too sensitive to it, but the whole point of putting up with Toyota’s rattle can is good fuel economy and it doesn’t even do that.
If I want fuel economy in this price range, give me a diesel Tahoe or even a V6 Grand Cherokee to get closer or under in price. If I want off roadiness, give me a Brocno Sasquatch w/V6. If I want a kinda combo of both, I’d take a non-Sasquatch I4 Bronco. I just don’t see the appeal of this beyond that it looks cool.
Your analysis makes a ton of sense for anyone who doesn’t live somewhere with a punitive fuel economy tax that is based not on reality but sticker numbers.
Where is the magical place that these people can afford a $60k SUV but can’t afford the tax penalty that comes along with it being a gas guzzler? The theorized person that needs off road capability, needs a good fuel economy rating for tax purposes, but has $60k, seems like one guy that probably can afford the tax and is just being cheap. Or they could likely just get a EV, minivan, CUV, or SUV that isn’t as off road capable.
“But it won’t look like this!” they’ll claim, which just means is they really want the look and the rest is secondary. Which is fine, but don’t hide behind some BS claim.
From the original comment.
So $4500 on $60,000. I have no idea if this is paid yearly or only upon purchase, but it would be a major point in favor of buying something just over the threshold vs under it.
Or a major point in favor of moving elsewhere, which would be my advice to a car enthusiast in DC.
I don’t believe it’s 7.5% compared to zero. It’s 7.5% (actually 9%, 10% and 11%) compared to numbers like 5%, 6% or 7% compared to weight.
Just search DC.gov Vehicle Title and Excise Tax, and there’s an entire table. So it’s likely a 3% or 4% difference, which if you can afford a $60k Land Cruiser, you can afford that tax along with it.
There are many things I “could afford” but prefer not to pay if I don’t have to.
I think it’s simplistic and wrong to dismiss perverse incentives like this as no big deal if someone reaches a sufficient (in your eyes) amount of wealth.
We see otherwise intelligent and financially secure people drive across town to save 10 cents a gallon on gas, you don’t think they would change buying behavior to save thousands in taxes, whatever the exact amount is?
I understand how incentives work; but people act like it’s a hard fast rule, when they fail to recognize it’s just a nudge. I agree with you that people make silly financial decisions; that was kind of my point. He’s quibbling over a 2-4% tax difference, on a $60k vehicle here, all because he’s created a weird set definitions that make the Land Cruiser the magical winner.
That being said, my biggest complaint was the implication it was as 7.5% tax comared to everything else having a 0% tax. It isn’t. Due to the Land Cruiser’s weight, it would be stuck with a 7.0% tax rate, while something like a Jeep Grand Cherokee L would face a 10% tax rate, but is $20k cheaper (starting). Something like a 4-door Bronco Outerbanks is ~$10k cheaper, and would face a 10% tax as well, but that still comes out cheaper than the Land Cruiser.
Heck, using their own criteria, what makes the Land Cruiser better than the 4Runner?
The idea that the Land Cruiser is magically cheaper just because it breaks a magical number in fuel economy, is not universally true here, like they touted it to be.
I’ll be able to afford a $60,000 SUV when it’s time specifically because of how cheap I am lol
I’ve got to imagine anywhere that has a fuel economy tax hurdle that the LC clears but the alternatives don’t has to be some teeny tiny percentage of the market, like less than 1% of North Americans, no? Obviously there is always going to be edge use cases for everything. You could similarly argue that getting a lower MSRP Bronco or Grand Cherokee would save others similar amounts of money in places that have excises taxes on vehicles or that real world fuel economy implications would be amplified in areas with high gas prices or or or…..
You and I are in agreement on this, I’m only passing on what you may have missed in Nsane’s original comment.
Ah, I did miss his other comment about the tax. It is surprising to see just how big of a penalty not clearing EPA 20mpg city is in DC. Personally, I think I’d spend more than that in dental work grinding my teeth to nubs with just how frustrating the LC powertrain is; but I could see others easily putting up with it to save almost $5k in taxes…. ouch. Even more so if it’s some kind of annual tax.
It really is bizarre. I can only think that trucks are a bit of an afterthought powertrain-wise? I mean, they managed to get competitive fuel economy out of a four speed Corolla long after four speeds were dead at most manufacturers, but they can’t get a truck with a more modern powertrain to even be competitive?
The iForce Max stuff is particularly puzzling. While I like this car and would be perfectly fine with the powertrain due to its efficiency benefits, the fact that the hybrid set up in the midsized TNGA-F products costs more, offers way more power, but is somehow slower than the base 4 poppers is truly bizarre.
It’s a lot of equipment and cost to improve fuel economy marginally and not really offer any other advantages. I assume it must do really well in emissions testing and be a compliance thing, because the real world benefits are pretty negligible…not to mention Toyota has alienated their customers. Truck buyers in general are fickle bunch with very strong opinions (some of which are based in reality, some of which aren’t) and Toyota truck buyers take it to another level.
They expect something to be able to make it 250,000+ miles without issue and all they want is natural aspiration. Fuel economy isn’t even vaguely a concern for 99% of them. I don’t know why Toyota would make all of their trucks turbocharged and hybridized across the board. I get that CAFE is a thing but surely they sell enough hybrids at this point that they could’ve just put the tried and true 3.5 liter V6 in these as an option if they really wanted to.
Not only that, but the powertrain requires premium gas too. Great job Toyota, you got EPA numbers barely above a Bronco and Wrangler, but at the cost of refinement, performance, complexity, reliability, premium gas; and in practice it’s actually the same economy of competition that don’t have [most of] those downsides.
I drove a Tacoma with the iForce 2.4 engine, non-hybrid version. I have never driven a rougher sounding engine. Powerful? Yes. But everything else about it was just horrible. It was so incredibly loud and rough and abrupt. I thought maybe all the oil had been drained and replaced with sand. This is another $60k stylized toy for posers.
I just don’t see how (other than “b-b-b-but, it’s a Toyota”) this is a better choice than an Acadia Denali.
GM’s quality is still worse than Toyota? Even with Toyota’s recent issues.
The Acadia is a crossover. This is body on frame so it’s more capable and it can tow more. It gets better fuel economy than the AWD Acadia as well, it has more power, it’ll have better residuals, and it looks way cooler.
I don’t think the Acadia is a great comp to be honest. I think a lower trim Yukon is. Things get more interesting at that point depending on what you prioritize.
Well, I am thinking of it as a value proposition in relation to the way Jason tested it. The mpg is actually better in the Acadia, but you are correct that the LC tows 1000lbs more and has more torque. I just think that you aren’t buying a base LC for $65k or whatever to tow a boat. In fact, I don’t know why you would buy a base LC.
You are correct, though, that when you switch to the Yukon, it’s a way different convo. A way more expensive convo.
I’d buy a baby max Yukon over one of these every single time if the cost delta was $10,000 or less. Unfortunately it isn’t…
It very well might be after April 3rd.
I wanted a BabyMax until I saw the oil pump belt is a 120k mile interval… which requires removing the transmission!
I don’t drive enough that that would really concern me to be honest. I’m usually between 6-10,000 miles a year or so and I’d probably move on before that dreaded service came up.
…which begs the question “why the hell would you want a diesel then?”, to which I have no answer other than efficiency and liking the way they drive/thinking the engine is really cool. I’m just a powertrain nerd and the extra upkeep wouldn’t bother me in the slightest.
Nothing kills a modern diesel faster than short commutes/drives.
I think this might be overblown, but correct me if there’s info I’m not privy to. I’ve been told this a million times so I scoured the forums, YouTube, all sorts of articles, etc. The baby max is designed for light duty applications and was co-developed with Opel so it could be downsized and used in European compact cars.
It was designed mainly for efficiency and lots of folks have them in dailies that they don’t put a metric fuck ton of miles on and they seem to be perfectly fine as long as you keep up with all the maintenance. That being said it’s important to let them complete their regen cycles and if you don’t pay attention and cut them off a bunch it can spell trouble.
I’d also adjust my driving accordingly and my car would become the primary road trip car rather than my wife’s, so I’d work in the type of long haul stuff diesels love 4-6 times a year. With all that out of the way I could also just be being a huge idiot doing enthusiast math who wants a cool engine lmao.
Yeah, the big thing is that they need to complete their regen cycles periodically. Let it stretch its legs for 20 or 30 minutes on the highway every now and then and you should be fine. It’s not like one 5 minute trip to the grocery store instantly clogs the DPF. 🙂
They also like being flogged periodically and with my right foot that will not be an issue at all!
It’s not 120k. It was 150k on the first gen and 200k on the second.
I don’t disagree that it was a bad design decision, but it’s not quite that bad.
I’d be interested in the Suburban if you could get the diesel on the base model that has fabric seats, but regardless, she found the Suburban to be too large for her to handle. Maybe we should look at Tahoes.
The Yukon is a hard comparison too though because it’s bigger and has the third row, so that more competes with the Sequoia I would think. This is a weird segment and I think the 4runner is realistically it’s biggest competitor, especially against the base model. I could see Wrangler and Bronco being considered in the same space too.
Because an Acadia Denali is for dorks.
Dorks spend $60k+ on a stock truck with what appears to a “T-Mobile exclusive Tablet for children” glued into the dash for cache.
https://img.sm360.ca/images//article/humberviewgroup-941/131110/file/2024-gmc-acadia-denali-1041722385201414.jpg
Better than the whole-ass iPad Pro glued onto the Acadia dash lol.
how is it better?
It’s not, but I wasn’t gonna argue about it, lol
apples and oranges my man. These aren’t even that close to being the same kind of thing.
Sure, if you are going just on technical specs. Here’s the thing, though…
You wanna spend that kinda money on a base car to thrash about? There are better choices.
You wanna spend that kinda money on a daily driver? There are better choices.
How you like them apples? lol.
If you buys cars like you are getting trying to maximize your dollar per lb, like buying a 20 pack of mayo at Costco, then there are a lot of simple car choices out there. Its easy math.
Honestly, I like it. I think it looks great (and agree that the base model looks far better than the higher trims) and I love the basicness of the interior. I know some people will be unhappy that the hybrid powertrain doesn’t give it midsize sedan fuel economy but let’s get real, this sort of vehicle used to barely get into the high teens for the sort of driving Torch was likely doing around NC. 23 combined isn’t horrible for a large squared-off box like this.
Unfortunately the price is borderline bonkers, and punishing customers with only grayscale exterior paint after they hand over 60+k is frankly, bullshit. I think this looks so much better than the 4Runner, but I just don’t see 15k of value here over it, for something that for the most part functions as a slightly larger 4Runner.
I’m also going to assume these base models are going to be pretty tough to find anyway. You can hardly get Toyota to build a base model Sienna. What’s the odds they’re going to flood the market with these?
I’ll skip the car with the prolapsed hitch cover and the raised deck height due to the battery shoehorned into the chassis not meant for it, thanks.
I do not understand Tacoma and Land Cruiser people. I don’t really want to understand them, to be honest. I think they are proud of overspending on a truck, and they love to flex that ability to over spend by throwing a RTT on the top of their vehicle and dressing it up with all kinds of jerry cans and recovery boards like they are participating in the Camel Trophy rally.
The truck reviewed here seems fine, but it also seems like a minivan or a used Ford Flex could do everything it does, for $40,000 less.
“I don’t really want to understand them, to be honest.”
K. They sell a shit ton of them, so its either you are right and everyone is dumb but you, or there is a really compelling reason people buy them. Even if you don’t agree with the reason, its stupid not to at least wonder what it is.
I’m dumb, no question about that.
The idea that I need a seat made out of pogo sticks strapped to Turbo Man’s jetpack though… It rubs me the wrong way and I really don’t care to investigate further. It feels extremely poseur, and the rabidity of a fandom that is willing to pay a premium for trucks that literally rust in half because “they are so well built” is a turn off for me. It is just one self-admitted dumb person’s opinion though, so don’t take it personally.
https://www.motortrend.com/news/2024-toyota-tacoma-trd-pro-isodynamic-performance-seat/
I was one of these people Toyota Overland people. There is something fun to having a vehicle that can essentially go anywhere, at any time, reliably. You can get to nature and rely on your vehicle to live in/out of as comfortably as possible without being at lame campgrounds. The mods don’t really affect the value, and the trucks are reliable.
Some people buy vehicles for what they can do and not what they use them for 100% of the time. If we did buy something that fit most of our needs 100%, most of us would drive beige, single seat econoboxes. Our culture shows that cars are an extension of one’s personality, and when living in Colorado, my personality became the guy with the turquoise single cab, V6 swapped first gen Tacoma, that was built to go dang near anywhere and did (and the person to call when one got stuck in the snow).
Another note: The Toyota Offroad community (especially in Colorado) was AWESOME. Truly a group of the nicest, most accepting people you’ve ever met. Many of them became best friends over time, and despite moving states away (and selling the Tacoma), I still keep in regular contact.
Yeah, Toyotas are overpriced. Yes, they are ancient with the latest and greatest tech and drivetrain technology. But they work, and they work well for what they are designed to do.
Even the author used it like a minivan, just a less efficient minivan but it’s “cool” and that’s all that matters or we wouldn’t be in this ‘everything must be an suv’ crazy situation we’re in now.
I first read the headline as “affordable workhorse”, then wondered what the hell is affordable in your world.
I dunno. When I look at the 73k sticker here in Canada, where I can buy a fully kitted Frontier for 21k less…I fail to see the appeal.
I doubt many people cross shop SUVs with trucks, but you’re not wrong. I don’t understand how this, the 4runner, and the Sequoia all exist.
A lot of my coworkers cross shop SUVs with trucks, as none of them actually use their trucks as trucks.
Fair enough. Most people I know with trucks wanted trucks, regardless of how they use them, and the SUV folks want the cargo area connected to the interior and rarely would consider a truck. They should consider a minivan, but that’s another argument entirely.
Some of us are mainly looking to tow and cross shop the most effective machine that can both tow and haul family.
Which is totally fine and fair. My experience is anecdotal.
$60k for this thing is batshit. Who is buying a base-model car with cloth seats and a rental car screen for $60k?
I’m no Toyota expert, but this does seem a lot like a Taco with a topper. $60k is a great sum of money for a midsize truck turned into an SUV. I feel like you’re paying a major premium for the Land Cruiser name and nothing else. Yes, cloth is wonderful, hard-wearing interior materials are great in a car like this, and we all love basic, easy to use controls, but the price should reflect that.
There’s a forest green Bronco Badlands listed near me for $61k. It’s got a great color, big chungus A/T tires, and a nicer interior. If you’re in the market for a big, chunky SUV to drop the kiddo’s off at daycare, or for actually off-roading, I can’t help but think the Ford is a better value. And before you get on me about Toyota reliability, their new forced induction engines haven’t exactly been bulletproof, nor have the transmissions.
They should have brought the FJ back and kept the LC as it was. The FJ was $27k-$37k in 2014, which in today money is ~$37k-$50k. That seems much more in line what this car actually is if you ignore the LC branding.
Tl;dr: It’s $20k too expensive.
I wish they would differentiate it from the 4runner a bit more.
Can a 6 footer sleep in the back without being on the diagonal?
I would highly doubt it. I barely fit in my 80 and I am 5’9″. pros and cons of that 112.2 inch wheelbase.
If it were not for the thick backseat headrests I could fit in my JKU at 6ft.
I like how you put that old battery in the back without a piece of cardboard or plastic.
Toyota: what’s this strange square in the back slowly getting worse in the back? Send it to R&D for testing…
Have you seen how Jason removes old batteries?
It would just pop if they dipped into the old Nissan Xterra’s bright Orange paint.
Toyota wouldn’t need to sell a lot of them to be noticed.
They’ve done it too – look up magma paint on a Toyota FJ. I hate the greyscale palette.
Magma was not a good color on the FJ.
Voodoo Blue, Calvary Blue, Quicksand, and my personal favorite, SUN FUSION were!
Maybe this and the possible Xterra reboot is the start of a a “back-to-basics” trend.
Back to basics, like a no-frills Corolla wagon with a basic 4cyl & 5MT? I could get behind that.
Handles for windows? Maybe a bridge too far.
Crank windows? This is an acceptable offer.
Sixty-ish K is a lotta’ nickels but given what $60k typically buys these days, the price isn’t unreasonable. At all.
Remember the movie Dodgeball when White Goodman used a small hand pump to inflate his erm…man piece before Kate walked into his office?
That’s what that tow hitch cover reminds me of. I don’t want anything to remind me of Ben Stiller’s groin.
I’m sure these will be popular and people will love them. But something about it just rubs me wrong.
Maybe it’s paying $60K for cloth seats.
Maybe it’s a hybrid 4 cylinder that only gets 23 mpg.
Maybe it’s the battery taking up even more of what seems like a fairly modest cargo area, and again, only giving 23 mpg in return.
The old Land Cruiser made more sense, at least to me, even though it cost more. It was the best of what Toyota could do, basically without compromise. This is fine, but obviously compromised.
It’ll sell like mad, because it’s a boxy Toyota that will assist men and women everywhere in fulfilling their off-roading fantasy façade, while they’d have been far better off in a Sienna.
I like the seats (big fan of cloth!), but between that, the greyscale paint options, the wheels which look like the Plasti Dipped wheelcovers your neighbor’s drug dealer put on their ’92 Sentra, it just feels like an overpriced relic.
Just like the previous 4Runner. Fucker’s gonna sell.
Whole Foods parking lots will be full of these.
At the risk of being contentious, I would argue that every vehicle is a compromise. I’m not saying that it shouldn’t rub you the wrong way, but I wonder if the feeling would be differently informed if we knew what they didn’t use. Another underpowered V8 that gets 18mpg?
Maybe we are getting something else for less (albeit on another vehicle) because they are reusing this powertrain.
I get it on the cloth, though.
That would be my very strong preference, yes.
Every vehicle is indeed a compromise, but this compromise appears to be especially shit.
Toyota went from an era of under-stressed naturally aspirated indirect injection engines to over-stressed turbocharged direct injection engines, all for a bump in MPG that only really exists during testing and only is useful for bringing Corporate Average Fuel Economy numbers, then to try to make the MPG improvement more worth it they shoehorn a hybrid system into a car not designed for it.
So in exchange for a minor bump in MPG you get a weaker engine (in build) that’s requires more maintenance, is more expensive to fix when it goes wrong, and if you opt for the hybrid for another minor bump in MPG you get a battery that doesn’t fit in the car and a bunch of high voltage lines.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for more MPG, but logically. I’m a BEV convert at this point but I’d rather people in the market for a vehicle like this get a vehicle that gets slightly worse MPG in exchange for better reliability, durability, ease of repair, lower maintenance, etc. Or better yet, if they want an actual hybrid they get something from Toyota that is approximately the same size that gets in the high 30s to low 40s in MPG via atikinson cycle naturally aspirated engines and planetary e-cvts.
With this new “Land Cruiser” You’ll be lucky if the engine fails just inside of the warranty and they give you a brand new one. If you’re not that lucky it’ll fail just outside of the warranty.
I would add to your list that Toyota/Lexus basically sells three versions of this vehicle in the 4runner/LC/GX. With the LC sitting in the middle. I’m sure there will be buyers, but I can’t figure out why you would chose this over the 4runner (at the lower end of hte market) or the GX (at the higher end)?
I didn’t realize the GX started in the mid 60s. That seems like a ridiculously small premium to get the V6 and a better interior.
And a bigger cargo area, and a available 3rd row, and similar fuel economy…. Honestly, the GX makes sense just because of the engine alone. The Land Cruiser does not.
I agree with everything but your point on cloth seats. I’d pay extra for cloth seats.
That being said it’s also worth noting Toyota’s Turbocharged Direct Injection engines are seemingly having the teething issues that all TDI Gas motors do (fuel in oil, overstressed, complex, etc. all for a minor bump in MPG, then they add a hybrid system to it for another minor bump in MPG.
Me too. You shouldn’t have to; it should be cheaper. But I would too.