4Runner v Land Cruiser Fuel Grade

LC250 owners may get away with 87, but if Toyota requires premium, you may not want to own one after they’re done with it.

FJ sales died in part b/c it had crazy suicide doors and blind spots that could hide an 18 wheeler. But later we saw that by keeping the powertrain & chassis, adding real doors, and toning down the cartoon styling, Toyota magically sold 100k+ annually, badged 4Runner.

 

2004 Toyota 4runner
SR5 V6 4x4
245 Hp, 282 Lb-Ft., 4290 Weight
7.2 sec, 15.2 @ 89mph

2010 Toyota 4runner
SR5 V6 4x4
270 Hp, 278 Lb-Ft., 4780 Weight
7.8 sec, 16.1 @ 88mph

>https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a16579630/2010-toyota-4runner-v6-instrumented-test/
The 4.0-liter V-6 with its five-speed automatic (as before, no manual is offered) keeps pace with traffic easily enough, although at 7.8 seconds to 60 mph, it proved slower by 0.6 second than the last 4Runner we tested in April 2005.

I dunno duck.... Might wanna freshen up on your data.... Hp to weight ratio, the older one has it, and the older one wins the drag race. All they did was add a fresher heavier body, more electronics, and sure ok dual VVTi but its not faster. My main point was the physical running gear, the frame, the suspension, the axles, the driveline, the engine and trans, are all practically untouched.

 

Good data. So the new LC250 is a second slower to 60 than a 2004 4Runner. LOL.

 

Watch this, timestamped for you. All it takes is about 25 seconds to see it. The acceleration test, watch this thing start the shifting gears initiation at 59mph where it pulls timing, rolls out of power, shifts gears, rolls back into power and take a second and a half to get everything done before it starts accelerating again. This thing is going to be 19sec 0-60
EDIT: Looks like its 1.95 seconds of "nothing" before it starts pulling again..... Thats a LONG delay.

https://youtu.be/zlhSgUh_6VY?t=1063

 

But again, what defines as a failure? Sale numbers? Because if this is the metric that defines failure then a lot of vehicles for car enthusiasts are failures, even more when daily drivers are not the main objective (i.e. off roaders that are loud, poor mpg, etc…)

The Accord, Camry, Corolla, and now even a lot of Hyundai vehicles are some of the best sellers because they are excellent daily drivers and check all the boxes for most Americans (affordable, good mpg, cheap to fix, etc…).
Most people care about daily drivers. This is not the case for car enthusiasts.

Would you consider an Hyundai Elantra a better car than a 200 series Land Cruiser? Probably not unless you look at sale numbers.
Only manufacturers look at sale numbers as a source of failure, if we do the same as consumers, it’s going to be the end of what we truly want (NA V8, sturdy, etc…)
There’s a reason the LC 70 series is not sold in the US, and that reason is partly people wanting cars like the new LC over the 200 series (the other reason is EPA, CAFE, and other regulations forced on manufacturers)

 

I suspect there is chicanery going on integrating the hybrid system and the power is being held back to preserve the transmission. Historically when companies try to add power AND gears on the cheap, gears/teeth/bearings/clutchpacks get smaller to fit a size package, they have to find places and times where power is nerfed to not tear up the driveline. This has happened with a lot of manufacturers when they try to avoid buying the ZF gearboxes and do 8-10 speeds on their own. Ford, GM and others comes to mind.

What will be interesting will be to see how the gas only 4R performs. I have a feeling it will be faster and crisper shifts.

 

2025 Toyota Land Cruiser
Powertrain: a turbocharged 2.4-liter four-cylinder engine 326 horsepower and 465 pound-feet of torque
Drivetrain: four-wheel drive
Transmission: eight-speed automatic
0-60mph 8.2
Curb weight 5445

Dang the LC is pretty beefy aint it....

 

I wouldn't say that a lack of sales numbers makes something a failure, if it is meant to be a niche vehicle.

My main issue with the FJ Cruiser is that it really doesn't live up to the FJ in its name. When I think FJ, I think solid front axle 4x4 powered by an inline 6. But, what we got was a goofy looking shortened 4Runner.

 

A major miss was that it was not much shorter than the 4Runner, the wheelbase was only 3.9 inches shorter than a 4th or 5th gen 4R. Very little benefit as trade off for the "2 and 2 half" doors. From where I sit the only thing going for it was the availability of a manual, but Toyota shipped so few of those to the US, it was pathetic.

 

Agreed. For the 2025 models with the I-Max setup, sure the numbers look great however, and this is the only torque curve I've been able to find so far, warrants another look at the overall performance (fuel type notwithstanding) of the new hybrid. I'm very much skeptical about how long the hybrid system can maintain 'boost'. On-board battery capacity can only provide a finite amount of energy and with the published curb weights and basic info on certain battery chemistry mass I'm finding it unlikely that the new power trains can support that level of performance say over a short 15-30 minute hill climb. Now if I did my math correctly a 48HP electric motor and 1.87 kW/hr battery (only a 6Ahr battery? are you kidding me?), 48HP roughly equivalent to 35 kW so that makes the 1.87 kW/hr battery last only like 3 mins...not accounting for system inefficiencies. Yeah, once that battery gets depleted you're back to non-boosted numbers...

Back to the thread's topic and before I get flamed (or put in time out corner) for taking it waay off track, it was brought up earlier in this thread about a possible different tune exists for the LC vs the 4Runner despite similar power plants. It's my understanding that the factory ECU makes adjustments depending upon what octane fuel is being run through the engine. So why the difference in published octane ratings in the owners manuals? Most likely to explain the published HP/Torque numbers?, fuel economy? I know for a plain fact that whether I run 91 octane or 87 my 4Runner doesn't care, it makes the necessary adjustments and keeps on running. Now give me a tank of pure gasoline without any of the ethanol blending crap and I can honestly say that my MPG does go up by a measurable amount...that's all I really care about as fuel prices out west are once again going stratospheric.

(Speaking of Jeeps, I once rented a Grand Cherokee Limited back in 2016 while on a work trip and first hand experienced what the 8-speed did for that SUV. 100 lbs heavier than my Pro and only 3.6L that Jeep felt like quite a rocket on the freeway.)

 

it's especially note worthy the strange set up considering how much room in the back cargo area the NiMH battery pack takes up.

I encourage everyone to stand in front of an LC250 and see for themselves. Photos I saw don't do it justice just how big that battery compartment is and high much higher it makes the load floor.

 

Not the same order of magnitude. The LC200 was selling ~3000 per year, basically irrelevant as a commercial product. Early on the 5th gen was selling 46000-49000 per year. Even in those days, the 5th gen was selling more in a month, than the LC200 in a year, and Toyota still planned to kill the 5th gen. According to Carmaker1, Toyota only reversed its decision when the dealers begged/demanded Toyota keep the 4R in production. Back then people were also bitching about Toyota dropping the V8, even though it was the correct decision as V8 4th gens rotted on dealer lots amid high gas prices. If Toyota tried the same LC200 formula now and brought LC300 stateside, it would've bombed. Can't blame the company for offering something that would actually sell.

And yes the LFA was a sales failure, with Toyota losing around $800 million on the program. That's why Toyota didn't bring a successor model to production. You will notice that was also the last time Toyota developed a sports car on its own.

 

So you’re just proving my point. When did I ever talk about failure in terms of sales/profits? You said that, and I was explaining you that a better vehicle is not measured in terms of sale numbers as as consumer standpoint.

all I said was that the 200 series is far superior than this new LC (read a better vehicle)

not once did I say that Toyota made more money with the 200 series than they will with the new LC

 

100% agree with you here!

True, the FJ would have been nice with a solid axle. But the fact that it was only supposed to be a concept vehicle initially and that they turned it to consumers due to popular demand by the fans was pretty cool from Toyota.

 

No. You said "how much of a joke this new LC really is". I'm saying the 200 sold in such few numbers, it might as well have not existed. At least the new LC is selling in sufficient numbers to remain relevant.

 

They are completely different vehicles. The 200 was never intended to be mass produced. It was a super expensive elite suv in the class of the Range Rover and G Wagon. The 250 is just a basic overpriced midsize SUV comparable to an Audi to BMW.

 

^Nope. The 80-100-200 Land Cruisers were "station wagon" series i.e. basically Suburbans and Expeditions for third world countries.

 

Once more. I was never talking about sale numbers so it’s irrelevant.
Just because the fiat 500 has sold more units than a LaFerrari doesn’t make a fiat 500 the superior vehicle

 

Not in this country buddy.

 

You give the brand "Land Cruiser" too much credit. Price-wise the 80-series was competing with the likes of Grand Cherokee and Isuzu Trooper in the early 1990s. Toyota's attempt to bring the nameplate upmarket was a mistake.

Putting the LC200 on a pedestal in the same vein as LaFerrari? The delusion here is incredible.

 

Wrong analogy. First of all, the Fiat 500 isn't a reboot of the LaFerrari. Second of all, the LaFerrari sold 700+ at over $1 million each. Unlike the LFA, for example, the LaFerrari actually sold enough to have a positive business case and spawn a successor in the form of the SF90. Nobody calls the SF90 a joke, despite it being a V8 hybrid instead of a V12 hybrid, and it has sold a lot more than the LaFerrari.

 

How many today's 100k dollar equivalent vehicles should be sold to be considered a "relevant" in the US? Lexus sells less LS than that a year in the US, is the LS irrelevant?

 

We aren’t taking about the 80 series. We’re talking about the 200 and 250.

 

Yes. It remains to be seen if Toyota will kill the LS after the current 5th gen (joining other flagship luxury sedans like the Acura RL, Infiniti Q-everything, Lincoln Continental, Cadillac STS, Jaguar XJ...) or do a fundamental reboot like full EV.

 

the fact that you put the LS along the likes of FWD based rebadged rental cars like the POS continental, and RL that's been gone for 12 years makes it clear you understanding of the automotive market is rudimentary at best.

Don't quit your day job.

 

You're just clueless aren't you? You think 2000 units a year is going to pay for the $6 billion or so it takes to redesign a model? The 5th gen LS has been a sale failure since it's introduction in 2018.

 

LOL. "clueless" says someone who equated the LS to a rebadged Taurus and doesn't understand how flagship cars work.

Again, don't quit your day job, automotive analysis is not your strong suit.

 

Equate? No. But the Continental was Lincoln's flagship luxury sedan. Lincoln has no sedans anymore. Perhaps Lexus should've clued in to this market trend a generation ago...

 

LOL. Flagship straight to Hertz and Avis.

You are a funny guy.