The Toyota Land Cruiser has for the longest time been a one-of-a kind off-roader unlike anything else in the Toyota Portfolio. For decades, it has offered a bank vault-like cabin filled with luxury, all atop a chassis designed to withstand anything short of a direct hit from a nuclear bomb. The new Toyota Land Cruiser, though, is different; its platform is no longer unique in the U.S. market, and is instead shared with the new Toyota 4runner, Toyota Tacoma, Toyota Tundra, Toyota Sequoia, and Lexus GX. So does the new top-dog Toyota SUV feel as special as the outgoing one? The answer is no, but it’s still thoroughly compelling as an SUV.
Whether the new Toyota Land Cruiser is a “Real Land Cruiser” is a highly contentious topic, because the Land Cruiser name means a lot of things to different people in different markets. For those used to the Land Cruiser “Prado” — the cheaper Land Cruiser offered overseas, the new vehicle feels as legit as anything. But in the U.S., where we’re used to the Land Cruiser 200 Series and 100 Series before that and 80 Series before that, it feels a bit different — unless you think of it as a replacement to the Lexus GX (which was built on the Prado platform sold overseas), in which case it feels fitting.
[Full Disclosure: Toyota flew me from a wedding in Vancouver to LA, where I hopped into my girlfriend’s Lexus RX350 and drove to Catalina Island, where Toyota put me up for a night and fed me food that I’d never spend my own money on. Not because it was bad, but because it was delicious, and therefore expensive. I’m cheap, which is why I let Toyota pay for all the gas I used driving the new Land Cruiser. -DT].
People are passionate about this discussion. Just read this comment from Autopian commenter “I drive a boring SUV”:
I don’t see what all the fuss is about with this not being a “real” Land Cruiser. The Land Cruiser range has been split in three branches for over 30 years – the original 40 series got replaced by the 70 series before the 90s and Toyota decided to have a lighter duty version of it which it called the Prado in some markets. In 1990 they introduced the [80] series as a top-of-the range kind-of-japanese-range-rover vehicle. By the late 90s, the Prado had been replaced by a standalone model rather than a version of the 70 series and thus the 3-car range of Land Cruisers was born that has lasted to this day.
You’re getting (just as we are in Europe) the new middle-of-the-range Land Cruiser. The 300 series is not sold here either, only in Gibraltar, Moldova, Russia, Belarus and Ukraine. Toyota has decided the target market for the 300 are oligarchs, arms traffickers, drug lords and Arab sheiks, Americans and Europeans are now too poor for it.
As for the 4Runner, the fact that it is still sold in the US is an anomaly in Toyota’s product strategy. It is, like the Mitsubishi Pajero Sport (or Shogun or Challenger), a way for Toyota and Mitsu to put a midsize SUV on the market for as low a cost as possible, just slap an SUV body onto a crude pickup truck chasis (Hilux/L200) and sell it in developing markets. In the US and Europe it conflicts with the Prado so it was never sold here past its second generation, and you can bet it will disappear in the US soon if Toyota thinks they can sell this new Land Cruiser in its place at a higher price.
So that’s what every reviewer at last week’s Toyotathon had to face: How do you review this Land Cruiser? Do you review it in the context of the Land Cruisers that recently came before it or do you review it simply as a new mid-size off-road SUV available in the U.S. market? I did both.
What Is The New Land Cruiser?
A few years ago, Toyota found itself facing a dilemma. “Is there a place for body-on-frame vehicles” in the face of increasingly stringent emissions requirements? It was, as Toyota Tacoma chief engineer Sheldon Brown put it to me during an interview, “an existential crisis [for] the company” as pressure mounted to meet global Corporate Average Fuel Economy requirements (CAFE, as it’s called stateside). “We had to make sure we [developed our body-on-frame vehicles] in a way that was smart,” he told me, with a focus on minimizing total investment, which the company may need for electrification during these rather uncertain times. “If we’re going to make this work, we need to make this as efficient as possible,” he told me about Toyota’s body-on-frame strategy.
The result was the TNGA-F platform, which now underpins the five Toyotas you see above — the Sequoia, Tacoma, 4Runner, Tundra, and Land Cruiser, as well as the Lexus GX — and which, among other things, leverages Tailor Welded Blanking to allow a single frame to function for a multitude of use-cases without adding too much unnecessary weight. (You can read more about that here; it involves welding in thicker/stronger pieces of steel in localized parts of the frame as needed).
“Every time we redid a platform, you really need to look at the life of that platform,” he said, noting how long the last-gen vehicles stuck around (the 4Runner, Tundra, and Sequoia were around for ~15 years, and the Taco was around since 2016 but those bones were fairly old). Those platform investments clearly paid off, but these days, it’s unclear what political or technical changes might necessitate a shift towards EVs, and so to mitigate risk, Toyota built One Platform To Rule Them All.
It’s a steel body-on-frame platform with a coil-sprung double-wishbone independent front suspension and coil-sprung (leaf sprung, in the base Tacoma’s rear suspension) five-link solid rear axle. The two pictures directly above show the Tacoma TRD Pro’s frame, but the Land Cruiser’s is similar — same frame pitch (width), same front and rear suspension design, same powertrain, and on and on.
Here’s a look at the Land Cruiser’s front suspension:
And here’s the rear five-link:
As for the engine, it’s the same 2.4-liter turbocharged hybrid engine offered in the Tacoma and upcoming 4Runner; it makes 326 horsepower and 465 lb-ft of torque, and sends that through an eight-speed automatic transmission. (The hybrid system’s electric motor is wedged between the engine and transmission).
So with the same powertrain as the 4Runner, the same basic frame setup, and the same suspension, what’s the point of the new Land Cruiser compared to the 4Runner?
“There is some brand loyalty,” the Tacoma’s chief engineer Sheldon Brown told me, saying folks love the Land Cruiser brand. Plus, the mid-size segment is huge, with another Toyota rep saying there’s plenty of room for two offerings and that the company “[doesn’t] see cannibalization, per se.”
The Land Cruiser is meant to be more refined, offering unique styling to a different, perhaps older customer than the 4Runner. And for the most part, I get that. Except, then I got into the 1958 model.
Why I Would Avoid The Cheapest Toyota Land Cruiser Even Though It Looks Better
When the Toyota Land Cruiser’s pricing came out in February, I wrote the article “The New Toyota Land Cruiser Starts At $57,345. Here’s How I’d Option Mine,” and I found myself in a dilemma. You see, I am a cheap bastard; I absolutely thought I’d want the round-headlight base-model “1958” trim shown on the right in the photo above. So I wrote that the Land Cruiser for me was the standard 1958:
Still, I’m not spending $63,000 (this includes the $1350 fee on top of the MSRP) on what I’m not yet convinced is that much more than a Toyota 4Runner in disguise (even $57,000 is going to take a little convincing), so I’m going with the base model, which like all Land Cruisers, gets a 326 horsepower, 465 lb-ft i-FORCE MAX hybrid turbo four-cylinder powertrain mated to an eight-speed auto hooked to a full-time four-wheel drive transfer case with a locking center and rear diff. And I guess I’ll get it in gray with the only interior color available — black:
Then, mid-article, I changed my mind:
Actually, you know what? I can’t do it. That black interior is just so damn boring. I guess I’m spending $63 grand and getting a sway bar disconnect and a fancy camera system, plus better exterior colors and this nice interior:
Damn this Modern Toyota FJ-Cruiser just got expensive. Will it be worth it? We’ll see in April when I get to drive the thing.
And so now it’s April and I’ve “driven the thing,” and I can say that my instincts were right. The base 1958 model is absolutely not worth your time, and it has nothing to do with styling. It has to do with quality and the overall “vibe,” as I describe in this clip below:
View this post on Instagram
Let me begin as I do in the clip above: I have no problem with cloth seats; in fact, I dig them — they’re comfortable, durable, and they don’t burn your thighs after they’ve sat in the sun. But it’s not the seats I have a beef with.
No, my qualms lie with the interior plastics, which are LEGO-hard, and not just in places where it doesn’t matter — on touchpoints like the door armrests. The dash, the doorscards, the center tunnel — it’s all rock-hard. And while one might normally think “Well, this is an off-roader, so if it’s more durable, who cares?” one very quickly follows that question up with: “Why buy a Land Cruiser over a 4Runner at this point?”
I get that styling is important, but the new 4Runner looks great, too. And if I’m dropping $56,000 on a Land Cruiser, I expect that Land Cruiser to not have a Playmobil-quality interior, and for it to have features like a front-facing camera and a sway bar-disconnect, and the base “1958” model does not.
I love the idea of a back-to-basics Land Cruiser, but this new Land Cruiser isn’t cheap enough to be that, and isn’t the cheaper version of a mid-size TNGA-F-platform Toyota SUV supposed to be called a 4Runner?
The base Land Cruiser just doesn’t make sense to me, even if I love its round headlights. Here’s hoping Toyota eventually offers that nice face not just on the $56,000 1958 base model and the top-dog $75,000 First Edition, but also on the $62,000 standard Land Cruiser.
Otherwise, The Interior Is Borderline Flawless
Ditch the 1958 model and its hard plastics, and you end up in an interior that is almost perfection. The materials are soft and feel top-quality, the space inside is perfect, and the switchgear is A+ elite.
The Land Cruiser above, with its incredible brown leather interior, costs about $75,000, and it is worth every penny over the base vehicle. But if you don’t want to spend that, and ~$62,000 is more your speed, you can go with fake leather (which Toyota calls “SofTex”). It’s nice, too:
Slide into the second row, and you quickly realize that the Land Cruiser could make for a solid family SUV, with loads of rear legroom:
On top of that, the cargo area is positively humongous:
It’s a good thing there’s so much area back there, because the floor is rather high due to the Nickel-Metal-Hydride battery pack residing under the cargo area. This makes lifting things into the cargo area difficult; the height of the floor above the ground is no joke!
And the fact that seats don’t fold flat, but rather tumble, isn’t ideal for a vehicle meant to be an overlander; don’t expect to sleep behind that second row, and even if you can, you unfortunately have a step right in the middle of the floor (Random note: You can see a plastic grate on the bottom right of this image — that’s for air-cooling of the battery pack):
Still, this section’s title is about how flawless the non-1958 Land Cruiser’s interior is, and — aside from that raised cargo floor — it really is. It’s huge, it’s high quality, and the switchgear — oh my is it nice. Here’s a clip showing some of Toyota’s elite-level switchery:
View this post on Instagram
Other automakers take note: This is how you do switchgear in 2024. You put the volume button — a physical button — right next to the steering wheel. You make sure all the HVAC and seat-heater buttons are physical and well-labeled, and you integrate it all beautifully into the center stack like so:
It’s not just radio and HVAC — the driving-related buttons are also nicely done, with the locking differential, sway bar disconnect, and stability control switches all physical and clearly labeled on the center tunnel. The front-facing camera is a nice one-touch, easily-labeled button right ahead of the shifter, allowing for quick access when the driver is cresting a hill.
As you can see, Toyota absolutely nailed it.
I’d have preferred a column-mounted shifter to save space, but I get that I may be in the minority. Otherwise, I was very happy with the switches. The vents are amazing, the HVAC buttons on the center stack are amazing, and that low-range button is fantastic — you push it down into the center console, then after it plunges, you move it forward for high-range or backwards for low-range. It’s a knurled little lever, and it’s a joy to use (even if I’d rather have an old-school mechanical lever for an off-road machine, though I get that doesn’t make sense for a luxury off-roader).
Anyway, the Land Cruiser has a great, high-quality, somewhat chunky interior if you don’t get the base model. It’s a fantastic place to spend time.
It’s Good Off-Road, Not Amazing
The new Toyota Land Cruiser is good off-road, but not great — putting it in the same category as the outgoing Land Cruiser, which was limited by its geometry.
That’s the case with the new Land Cruiser as well. It’s got available Toyo Open Country all-terrain tires and a locking rear diff making sure the vehicle keeps moving; it’s got a disconnecting front sway bar to provide more articulation to keep all four tires on the ground; it’s got CRAWL Control off-road cruise control to keep the driver feeling confident; it’s got some skid-plating to protect the underbody; it’s got low-range gearing with an integrated Torsen limited slip differential (with locker); it’s got Active Traction Control (A-TRAC), and I can go on and on.
The hardware (and software) is there, but the ground clearance and departure angle just aren’t.
To be sure, a 31-degree approach angle is straightup-decent (see the short front overhang below), as is the 25-degree breakover angle. But a 22-degree departure angle is fairly weak, and 8.3 inches of running ground clearance is Subaru Forester-like and won’t be winning anyone any awards.
And these aren’t just figures on paper, they’re deficiencies that I noticed while off-roading the Land Cruiser during the press event in California.
Have a look at the relatively modest bump in the dirt trail below:
That bump was enough to knock off the rear hitch cover, which I dearly detest:
Why does a Land Cruiser have a plastic hitch cover right in its departure angle? And why does it actually break when it gets hit rather than unclip? This part should absolutely have a quick-disconnect feature:
I’m a little confused by why this came off, because even though the Land Cruiser has a fairly low 22-degree departure angle thanks to its large rear overhang (see photo below), I don’t recall the rear end ever hitting anything.
What I do recall, however, is banging the front of the Land Cruiser hard against the dirt below. That’s because there’s really not a lot of ground clearance between the front wheels. And while old-school off-road legends with solid front axles often had differentials that hung down even lower, those differentials were unsprung, meaning they didn’t drop when the vehicle’s suspension went into compression. With the Land Cruiser, I found that, when I took the vehicle off a little dirt ledge at speed, it banged that front skid plate against the terra firma:
Speaking of skidplates, the Land Cruiser is reasonably well protected, but it’s not amazing. The front of the vehicle has a thin steel plate that you can see was doing its job over the dirt:
Update: It appears that YouTuber Throttle House also bashed that front skid plate, but badly. Look at what happened when they landed a jump:
It’s not clear to me how far that front metal plate extends (that shield under the front subframe looks plastic in the photo above), but certainly not all the way to the transmission oil pan, because that was unprotected:
The transfer case had a small steel skid plate bolted onto it, and there was a thin metal skid plate under the fuel tank (unlike the Tacoma, which does not come with a metal fuel tank skid plate):
Here’s a look at the underside of the cargo area, where you can see the fulls-size spare:
So overall, the Land Cruiser has OK underbody protection, though there’s not as much ground clearance as I’d like, especially at the plastic bits on the front of the vehicle. I think the Land Cruiser should have gotten air suspension, at the very least as an option:
Still, the sway bar disconnect worked flawlessly, and though the excellent low-range switch took a bit of time to actually get the transfer case into low, and though the lockers also took a moment to actuate, once they were on, the Land Cruiser was basically unstoppable — traction seemed endless.
So off-road, the Land Cruiser isn’t perfect. It banged its rear hitch cover off, it banged its front end on the dirt, it’s got lots of low-hanging plastic under its chin, and its underbody protection could be better.
Still, flex with the sway bar disconnect actuated is decent front an independent front suspension setup; the low-range gearing and lockers — while slow — worked well; and above all, the thing was just a joy to off-road, largely due to its forward visibility. The front-facing camera helped, but that big channel in the hood made driving the Land Cruiser off-road a real joy:
That visibility, along with what seemed like a great turning radius, contributed to the Land Cruiser feeling downright nimble. It’s really not much smaller than the outgoing 200 Series Land Cruiser, but it felt small and maneuverable, and honestly, that made the overall off-road experience downright fun.
View this post on Instagram
Click the video above to see my off-road impressions.
It’s Fine On-Road
While the Land Cruiser drive was an off-road-only component of the “Toyotathon” event that the company held for journalists last week, I asked if I could drive the vehicle on-road for a bit, and after I got permission I hit some quiet streets near the California-Mexico border.
I can’t say I gathered any sort of earth-shattering insights on-road; the Land Cruiser drove smoothly, with a ride that seemed a bit on the softer end. There was some body roll and brake dive, and a bit of wind noise seemingly coming from the mirrors, but overall it was quiet and smooth enough.
At 326 horsepower, the 2.4-liter adequately moved the 5,000-pound machine around, but I’d hesitate to call anything about the Land Cruiser “quick.” With 465 lb-ft, the vehicle gradually and confidently accelerated when I stomped the throttle, downshifting when necessary and revving loudly enough to be heard. Was the engine as refined as the V8 in my old 100 Series Land Cruiser? No. But no engine is that refined. Is the cabin in the new vehicle as bank vault-like as my old Land Cruiser? I’d have to test them back to back, but I’d guess probably not. But again, overall, it was reasonably quiet and smooth, and I had no complaints. Not even about its acceleration.
That’s because, if we’re honest, Land Cruisers haven’t exactly been barn-burners historically, and if this new vehicle can — thanks partly to the hybrid system — manage the 22 MPG city, 25 MPG highway, and 23 MPG combined on the EPA label, that’d be a huge deal.
The last Land Cruiser — equipped with a big 381 horsepower, 401 lb-ft 5.7-liter V8 — scored 13 MPG city, 18 MPG highway, 15 MPG combined. So this is an absolutely monumental fuel economy jump.
Conclusion: I’m A Fan Of The New Land Cruiser Even If It’s Not As Special As Before
The new Land Cruiser does feel quite a lot like the new Toyota Tacoma, and by extension, it’s going to feel like the new 4Runner, too. They share an engine, transmission, general frame design, and suspension architecture.
The outgoing 200 Series Toyota Land Cruiser, though, was its own beast — a fortress on wheels unlike anything else in the Toyota line. That distinction is now gone, and what’s left is a less expensive machine that offers similar off-road capability and luxury, along with much, much better fuel economy.
It’s not perfect, with a battery in the cargo area that makes loading tough and adds a hump to the cargo floor. The underbody protection could be stronger, the ground clearance could be better (I get that it’s a fuel economy play, but air suspension would have solved that), the departure angle (especially thanks to that silly hitch cover) isn’t amazing, the low-range and lockers could both be quicker to activate, and the base 1958 model seems like a tough sell, but still, it’s a compelling overall package.
It’s not clear how it’ll be a better deal than an upcoming 4Runner, but if I were looking for a family off-road SUV that was genuinely nice inside, that looked great, and that had a high likelihood of lasting a while, this would be at the top of my list (the GX, too, but I haven’t driven that). I enjoyed piloting this spacious, nimble vehicle through the off-road trails, letting its suspension flex and its lockers do their thing, all while looking good. It’s not fast on the road, it’s not a Jeep Wrangler Rubicon off of it, but the chunky, high-quality, voluminous cabin is a great place to spend time, and that’s a big deal.
Top image: Jonathan Harper
Preface: I’m a former FJ-40 owner who thinks of the Land Cruiser as a tool; a tractor for the road. I didn’t care for the handbaggification of the model, but at least you still got build quality for a 25 year service life. The premium you paid was for that extreme reliability, and that’s where Toyota got it’s reputation. With the average “age on the road” of 11 years (last I looked) and climbing, you were getting a bargain to run the wheels off, because you were buying 2 and a little cars. Three with good maintenance. Nothing about this suggests that’s what you’re getting any more. The “luxury” is a liability, as the soft materials and beepy boopy doodads are the first to go. That nickel battery is genuinely surprising, as I thought about the only EV that still had such ancient tech was the Leaf, assuming it’s even still got it. Largest displacement, shortest service life. Is the cost savings really that significant? (Aftermarket idea: battery replacements with a modern chemistry that gives you your trunk back, or more power, or whatever sells.) But that’s kind of Toyota these days, isn’t it? All stickers, no substance. If this is just a 4Runner that looks a little different, but with a hefty price tag bump, it’s just another fake hood scoop.
Article suggestion that’s probably already in the works: What are the actual non-cosmetic differences between the Land Cruiser and the 4Runner?
I’ve now read several articles really trying to figure out what the primary differences are between the 4Runner and Land Cruiser, or at least who Toyota is targeting them to, and I still can’t really tell. Seems to me like they’re slicing the pie pretty thin, and that’s coming from someone who lives in Southern California where 4Runners are very popular and can be spotted everywhere.
They literally said it’s brand loyalty and styling.
I don’t feel like that’s enough, and that’s even before I start talking about Lexus variants. Is there really that much demand out there for body-on-frame 4WD SUVs?
And I say that as a person who works in the light truck/off road industry and is surrounded by Toyota diehards, but I realize my world doesn’t represent normal people.
I’m with you, though expected LC volumes are kinda low (I can’t remember if they said 20K a year?).
That doesn’t surprise me and it makes sense in a non-sensical way. The Land Cruiser has been Toyota’s halo vehicle for quite some time. There’s a subtle prestige in owning one and people like me that have always wanted one can now have one within reach at $60k vs. almost $100k.
I also wonder how much the GX played into us getting this Land Cruiser. As you’re aware the GX is a popular vehicle with it’s own following so a little badge engineering from a mainstay Lexus vehicle nets us a Land Cruiser at a cost that can justify selling it for Toyota.
Knowing what you know about this model vs the 100 or 200, is the badge still desirable in itself?
“Yo dog I heard you like Land Cruisers so here’s a 4Runner with a Land Cruiser badge on it”
I understand the business case for what Toyota is doing, which is fine, but I also feel like there’s too much homogeneity for efficiency’s sake these days. The days when a certain flagship model was unique and special are passed, I believe. With that, the legend of the 25 year service life the Land Cruiser goes with it, until or unless I’m proven wrong in two and a half decades. Yes, there were flagship models with shared underpinnings with other platforms under a manufacturer in years past, but it feels like we’ve reached a point where all the “specialness” is being bred out of vehicles.
A few other thoughts, if you take the rear seats out it makes for a great sleeping area, but fold flat would be ideal. Tricky to do with a frame though. I take my middle row out when I sleep in it and its not that bad. 8 bolts, lift out. Bring a lightweight impact and a socket set and it takes 10 minutes.
As for the rear cover, being a press vehicle its more likely than not that someone else broke it, and stuck it back on there for it to fall off for you on a little lip.
My Xterra had the bottoms fold up separately from the seat backs for a truly flat floor on a BoF SUV. Further, the seat bottoms came out with two clips for even more space. And the front passenger seat folded completely flat for a nice table, albeit raised from the rear seats. *sigh* I miss it…
I don’t know where the 4runner starts in price, but they are slicing this pie way too thin if you ask me. I realize that Land Cruiser people aren’t 4Runner people and vice versa, but seriously. Why buy the cheapest Land Cruiser when you can get a mid range 4runner? It’s the same car in all meaningful ways. Seems to me that Toyota is differentiating the triplets in strange ways.
GX – The only one with the V6, also a 3rd row option, highest towing options
Land Cruiser – Standard full time 4WD and hybrid powertrain
4Runner – Part time 4WD and non-hybrid standard, but can be optioned with full time and hybrid.
The GX and Land Cruiser are so close looks wise that its a coin toss to chose between them. The 4runner has a unique look, but…as is typical…functionally worse sight lines.
Toyota is counting on model name loyalty to do a lot of the heavy lifting here.
Is it a “real” land Cruiser? Yeah, it says “Land Cruiser” on it, it has a “J” chassis code (J250) and hardware wise its every bit a Land Cruiser. The axles are more or less shared with the J300 and while some stuff is sized down (tie rod ends in particular) its going to be plenty strong. When I drove the GX550 overtrail it felt a lot more 80 series than GX470 to me. Great suspension performance and ride quality off-road.
The front needs a 50 mm lift to help with the rake and solve the ground clearance issues, but once you do that, you are basically done. Put better tires and wheels (33’s should fit, and PLEASE better wheels) and a small lift and boom. Land Cruisering time.
What really irks me is that you can’t get all the good stuff in one place. How I would want mine:
Land Cruiser 1958 body and cloth seats, but standard trim interior (bigger screen, soft touch), full time 4wd, standard turbo 4 (No hybrid) so that I can also have the 3rd row. I would want the rear locker (so far as I can tell, there isn’t a way to get a 3rd row AND a locker on any of these yet) and the eKDSS from the GX with the 33 inch tires and adaptive suspension (it’s genuinely transformative how well this works off-road).
THAT is the Land Cruiser I want. Maybe even the 3.4TT and 10 speed for the higher tow capacity. For all their model overlap, they don’t actually make the one I want.
I would settle for the GX550 Overtrail with a 3rd row.
I think it has evolved that way because of the offerings for the past 30 years. But they really shook up the etch-a-sketch. Now that they are so similar, it will be interesting to see who buys which variation. Dark-horse prediction: The J300 will return.
I would have a hard time buying a 4runner, but I would happily buy a GX. Not sure why that is. I think the 4runner has a bit of a rep out west as being the official offroader of people who still think Zombie outbreak vehicle motifs are hella rad. You know, the common clay of the American west…
YES YES YES. Why can’t I have a base model LC, Cloth seats, good color (heritage blue, please), soft touch points, 3rd row, non hybrid, with the rear locker and KDSS? Heck, they were even able to give the Tacoma a manual transmission with that drivetrain, so that would be the ultimate new Toyota in my book.
None of the people buying this thing are actually doing any of offroading that they are built to do or David is testing. Those things will be done by the second owners of the vehicle 5-10 years from now.
Where toyota seems excel is that they have figured out that if you can keep depreciation down or the “toyota tax” up then the mall crawlers will buy the rigs if the ride experience is decent enough because they can pay the astronomical amounts and not get killed on the resale.
The question I really have is – at these price points, with this many vehicles – is there still room for lexus?
How many “adventure SUVs” skus can one company maintain in the 60-90k price segment?
Reading all these articles about toyota certainly raises my blood pressure when I think about all the brand equity Jeep has squandered over the years. To have completely ceded the “adventure” trim to the Wrangler in their lineup will go down as one of the most significant blunders in modern automotive history.
This is mostly how it plays out, but I can tell you that Cruiser Outfitters will have their hands full moding J250/J252 platforms the instant they become available and people will be out using them here in Utah.
I heard that folks that run J150GX or 200 Series LC in Utah and Nevada sometimes install aux fuel tanks, and I know that was a factory option in some markets. Given overall range is still not great, I wonder if the new platforms will be amenable to relocating the spare (especially if it has tire size restrictions) and install an aux tank. We can’t in CA but I know people do it anyway.
Im sure people like Long Ranger will develop extended range tanks. I’m interested to see what the Australian market does with their 2.8 liter diesel version, if they will offer an extended range tank like they used to.
If previous market conditions remain true in the future the Lexus will hit higher depreciation quicker, and thus be cheaper 2nd hand. Look at 4runners & Sequoia prices vs. GX460. GX460s are all mostly cheaper than comparable 4runners, and come with far more features. The Lexus will always be around new for people who need a luxury badge, but should also be a better deal on the used market.
That last point is a good one. Toyota has room for 3 separate off-road/luxury(ish) focused SUVs and Jeep has just the Wrangler? Does anyone cross shop these new?
The Grand Cherokee should be in this segment, but it compares itself to the Highlander instead.
https://www.jeep.com/2024/competitive-compare/grand-cherokee.html
Its just abysmal that there isn’t a clad Grand cherokee with all the fox shox adventure garbo. a small t-top capable CUV ala a geo tracker and a hybrid modern XJ in the jeep lineup.. Just complete mismanagement of the brand.
I’ve finally figured out what the LC is for, in the Toyota lineup: modifying. The lack of KDSS and a simple front stabilizer means that the LC is going to be a lot easier to lift and modify than either the 4Runner or- especially- the GX. That’s what the Land Cruiser is for, and once I realized that, the lack of ground clearance and bash plates suddenly comes into sharp focus. If you plan to keep it stock, the LC makes not a lick of sense, but if you do, the LC is your platform.
Personally, I would take either the 4Runner for the price (and keep it simple, the SR5 model with 4WD) or the GX Overtrail for the luxury, lower rear storage space, and higher towing capacity. But I also wouldn’t be planning to modify my ride significantly.
Modders, go to town. I can’t wait to see what you build with this.
You might be on to something given how fugly those stock wheels are…wonder if you can fit 35 inch tires in the spare area though….
“I hopped into my girlfriend’s Lexus RX350 and drove to Catalina Island”
Wait just a darn minute here sir! You converted her Lexus into an amphibious vehicle!?! Talk about burying the lede!
Looks like Jason and Bishop performed some undocumented upgrades to that RX.
I approve!
Maybe it is some kind of inside joke.
Maybe?
There’s a bridge!
I think you need to check a map.
I don’t see a 30 mile long bridge on my map connecting Catalina Island to the mainland.
Catalina Island also severely limits the vehicles allowed on it.
Ummmm, me thinks either you were on some other island, or perhaps maybe drugged and kidnapped???
Must have been the Catalina Wine Mixer
That’s gotta be it!
No.. there is no bridge to Catalina.
I grew up working on the island and was thinking man things must have changed if he was able to drive there.
That would be one HECKUVA bridge!
For sure, since the sea floor depth between Palos Verdes and Catalina can be as much as 3000 feet deep.
At least the area is geologically stable though…
Just avoid the DDT and other barrels of waste on the ocean floor..
Good tip!
The fact that these don’t come with a third row is a huge loss. For that reason alone, I’d consider a 4runner over this. Not a fan of the Sequoia (the proportions seem off to me, looks like a bulldog), and the GX can’t be had in the Overtrail trim with the third row.
The 4runner and Land Cruiser being in the similar size and price categories should be interesting to watch. I also wish they’d remove the hybrid system and make it 5-7K cheaper.
Can you get a 4runner with a 3rd row? I was out Land Cruisering when it dropped.
Yes.
NO! We have dozens of other 3rd row vehicles, and very very few that don’t have that unnecessary feature.
THISSSSSSSSSS is why I come here. I love this article.
Regarding the flimsy plastic hitch cover: Toyota figures that people who tow and go offroad with the Land Cruiser will take the cover off and probably lose it somewhere in the garage. The people who buy it as a mall crawler will never take it off and might not even realize that there is a hitch under it.
Toyota Gibraltar’s where the orders and upfits for aid agencies are consolidated, so you don’t have to be an oligarch to buy a 300 (but it helps).
I’m not the target market for these, have nowhere near the money, and have almost zero off-road experience, but damn…I have to say “Land Cruiser” is just 100% Toyota’s coolest current vehicle name; might be its coolest name historically. That does a lot of work on its own.
Most of the rest of its names are adequate at best.
Toyota loves locking that brown interior on the top of the line models. If I want it in a Grand Highlander, I have to get the “Platinum”, or else you are stuck with dreary black or slightly less dreary gray.
As others have pointed out, it’ll be interesting to see how demand shakes out on the 4Runner, LC, and GX. I’m sure the 4Runner and LC will impossible to find a lot without a markup for a while, so maybe you have customers who just take whatever they can get through Toyota’s awful allocation process. Or maybe the Lexus is easier to get. Going back to the Grand Highlander example, the Lexus TX seems to be sitting around on lots, while the GH is gone in an instant.
The base GX is $65k, isn’t a hybrid which might be appealing to some, and (if they build any) can be had in Nori Green with brown interior, which is a better combo than anything Toyota offers.
Lexus uses the same “custom order” that toyota does. You get what they give you and you should thank them for it. My mom just got a new RX or whatever that suv/cuv looking thing is. She was told it would be green with her picked out features, turned out black (surprise) and half the stuff in it she didn’t want. But after waiting for months and an uncle needing her old car, she took it and decided to just enjoy it.
So the competition for this is the 4Runner, the GX, the Defender 110, Discovery and the Grand Cherokee, am I getting that right?
Depends where you draw the line, some might include the bronco and Wrangler others the explorer. But for body on frame midsize fixed roof SUVs the Toyota trio both own and dilute the segment. That said I wouldn’t be surprised to find a coworker was trying to decide between this and a rav4
Ok so it sounds like the move is to either get the new 4Runner or the Lexus GX. If you have to step up into the 60k range and above to get a good interior here, just spend a bit extra and get a GX.
It could be worse, in some markets it’s being sold alongside the “big” 300 Landcruiser, the Lexus LX, its sibling the Lexus GX, the cheaper GUN160 Fortuner, and the old GDJ76 Wagon, the latter two of which share its 1GD engine.
David: “…to LA, where I hopped into my girlfriend’s Lexus RX350 and drove to Catalina Island…”
I applaud the effort. Hope you kept the windows up!
I’m still jonesing for a good FJ40. If, that is, I can’t find an old Nissan Patrol. Old Skool off-roaders were rough, basic (and therefore repairable on the trail) and not a whole lot of fun on the road. But they got there, and almost always got back.
While I’m sure Toyota developed the bejeebers out of the new Land Bruiser, I’m not convinced all the gadgetry and gewgaws are either necessary or desirable. Maybe they are, and I’m just too fossilized to know, but I just can’t see the appeal of a $70K 4WD limo.
I’m guessing that if bringing one’s dog(s) is a priority, the 4Runner, with its operable back window and smoother back end floor (with the rear seats folded), would be the more compelling option. “Off-road” and “luxury” seem like two opposing goals (and mine favor simplicity and durability).
These hybrid batteries, raising the rear loading floor above the lip in these new Toyotas (and the way the seats fold) would really have me looking at the competition. Those seem like deal breakers.
Isn’t the current 4Runner like that? For no apparently reason?
Yeah, the recent 4Runner review shows a similar floor. It seems like really poor packaging. Seems like a great vehicle otherwise.
As enthusiasts, we often give far too much credit to the general car-buying populace. They will not know or care that this is on the same platform as the 4Runner. They will buy this simply because it says “Land Cruiser” on the tailgate, or because it’s more expensive, therefore it must be better.
Everything I’ve read about this vehicle leads me to believe the traditional Land Cruiser buyer is going to be pretty disappointed by it.
It’s a good thing they still make the LX.
I think the LX exists for the traditional Land Cruiser buyer. If you have the budget for the old LC, you can buy the new LX.
This is for the people who yearn for a Land Cruiser but can’t afford it until it has 100k miles on it. Or those with lesser budgets who want to join their neighbors with squeaky clean Wrangler Rubicons and Broncos in LARPing like an offroad enthusiast.
Yeah, I think the traditional new LC buyer can swing the LX, it was more of an old money or quiet luxury type choice, kind of like going a Yukon Denali vs. an Escalade.
It’s those 100k mi buyers that may be disappointed. The Prado-based GX appears to have plenty of cred in off-road/overland/etc circles, so the vehicle itself may not be so much of an issue, more the name and such.
Though if the old LC & LX were too close to one another, it does seem like Toyota just shifted that concern down to the GX vs. the new LC.
Yeah, Toyota will be perfectly ok with having those buyers go to the Lexus dealership instead.
As a current high- mileage (heavily off-roaded) 100 series owner with an inclination to add a more modern version to my fleet, this is extremely accurate. I’d rather the GX between the pair, which, is a big deal for Land Cruiser owners to say out loud.
There’s also the GX which seems even more comparable at this point. At the lower end of the price point it seems like the 4runner would be the better option and at the upper end why not just get the Lexus? It seems like Toyota really wanted to get the landcruiser name back into the market but without a clear way to distinguish it from its two siblings.
It will be interesting. It’s basically that or the GX, much like it was Land Cruiser or LX back in the day.
Yeah but now it’s something of a three way choice with the 4runner too. Not unlike the Tahoe/Yukon/Escalade. With the landcruiser playing the Yukon.
Forgive me for not being head over heels for anything with a Toyota badge, but $70k for a vehicle that doesn’t seem to excel at anything except expected reliability seems….steep.
Its okay off road, fine on road and not really anything special….
Toyota might not see this and the 4runner competing, but everyone in the real world does. I think their base model will not really sell, since a comparable 4runner is much better equipped at that price (assuming pricing doesn’t change too much). Toyota probably wants that though since they make more on the high trim.
I like it better than the 4 runner in almost every way. I think for people who don’t really want to off-road, but want to have the high up “can go anywhere” feel of a boxy suv will flock to this and ignore the 4 runner. Making them priced so closely, and making one much more classy (no pop up infotainment, no camo seats, no trendy bullshit) will show to be a huge mistake.
Most people I see driving 4runners these days are older, older people want nice things, not trendy things, which is what drove them to the old 4runner. If you can’t tell I am not impressed with the new 4runner.
4Runners are for MILFs in my area. Or, maybe mom’s who used to be hot until they hit 25. A white 5th gen in Atlanta is almost exclusively piloted by a blonde woman with her sorority’s cute initials on the back window.
We have a tiny bit of that, but honestly its mostly people 55+. Younger people, ditched this car years ago around me. It’s rapidly become a car for old people in my area. Not sure how that started, maybe nostalgia for older square vehicles? I haven’t seen a 20/younger 30’s of either sex in one that I can remember in at least 2-3 years.
You must have cooler old people than my town. Here, they all drive Hyundai crossovers.