2024 Landcruiser Engine Performance

Well… here we go:

https://www.edmunds.com/toyota/land-cruiser/

How does the Land Cruiser drive?Acceleration is decidedly lackluster. At our test track, the Land Cruiser accelerated from zero to 60 mph in 8.2 seconds. That's about a second and a half slower than a Land Rover Defender 110 we tested. You'll probably wish there was a little more power for highway passing. But for more normal driving, the hybrid powertrain is pleasingly smooth and responsive.

 

Another good read: https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/toyota-land-cruiser-lexus-gx-off-road-comparison-video.html

What we all knew already, essentially.

Interestingly, thr LC250 is even slower than the current 4Runner, which I was not expecting. I wonder if the 4R will weigh any less.

 

Update - actually driving the new Landcruiser was quite clarifying for me. First I’ll start with the good… for me it was more handsome in person and less toy-car looking and the proportions and overall size were nice. But I am one who doesn’t care for the physical growth with each generation’s release so loved how it seems totally trail manageable and maneuverable. It also has a really good and tight turning radius. Loved the old school Toyota logo on the steering wheel and overall styling is really nice.

What I was most shocked about is the engine. On paper the specs are really impressive. The crazy thing to me is that it doesn’t translate to seat of the pants and now I understand the Edmunds test and the 8.2 second 0-60 number. In no way am I expecting a race car in a BOF SUV, but it really didn’t feel more sprightly than my former 5th Gen 4Runner in most circumstances…. Crazy. If you never showed me published figures for HP and torque and had me drive one and guess at it, I’d never ever come close to saying 300+ HP and 400+ lbs/ft. I’d probably say, “That’s great they managed the same power numbers and performance but with much better fuel economy”. The powertrain also has a sort of CVT/elastic personality akin to driving a Prius. You mash the gas and sort of wait for the elastic reaction once turbo builds boost. Strange considering the MAX hybrid setup and supposed power and performance skew vs fuel economy. I would have thought the hybrid motor would immediately provide full torque from a stop to fill in any lagging sensation but that’s not the case. Given this drivetrain setup is the one going into top trim 4Runners too, I gotta say I am feeling less jealous of the setup than I imagined I would.

 

That’s disappointing. Do you think you will still buy one?

 

For real… just freakin build something in the shape of the 70 series… god damn.. that new 250 is ugly as sin

 

No.

 

Haha. I mean beauty is in the eye of the beholder. We both agree your 5th Gen 4Runner is handsome, but I disagree with your take on the styling of the 250. Pictures made me worry it looks like a kid’s toy car but in person it sort of just looks simple and rugged. The closest we will get to a 70 series like stripped down styling…. Albeit with more rounded edges. To me better in person.

 

Buddy of mine just got a new F250 with the 6.7 HO engine, aint gone lie that thing pins you in the seat like a drag car 0-80
BUT, its 1/4 mile time and MPH is not overly impressive. Its weird how something with gobs of torque can and will pin you in the seat and make you feel like a 3.5sec 0-60 but turn into a 15.5 @ 90mph 1/4 mile.

 

That's interesting to hear your first hand experience. The Taco guys seem to like the new engine in that, but the truck weighs a bit less, I guess.

This is why 0-60 times (and 60-80) and complete power / torque curves are more useful than peak numbers. It sounds like the torque is pretty peaky vs. spread out in the rev range.

 

I’m baffled as it looks again on paper like torque peak is extremely low and like any turbo tuned for a truck application, should be sort of broad and only further enhanced by the electric motor. Yet it didn’t feel like off idle or a dead stop it had a lot of push… I sort of had to wait and when it hit, didn’t seem like I was experiencing 465 ft/lbs. I wonder if the GX550 feel significantly better?

 

I might have shared it earlier in this thread, but Edmunds did a side by side comparison of the two. They commented on how different they felt, especially in contrast to how close the numbers are on paper. It sounds like the v6 has a much broader power band (unsurprisingly).

It's probably like comparing the current 4Runner and GX460; they don't seem terribly different (about 10-15% power on the heavier GX), but the usable power is very different.

Forgot to add earlier: we all know the solution to the 2.4: more boost.

 

Why? Are they not fast enough for some people?

 

I'm going to have to drive one of these for myself. I've read mixed reviews of the new Taco, but I thought it felt great personally. I didn't want to redline a brand new vehicle, but I mostly felt it had great power in the midrange RPM's.

I think some people are expecting these things to feel fast, which isn't going to happen.

 

I mean that's the solution if it's too slow for you. I guess 8 sec 0-60 is pretty close to the outgoing 4Runner at 7.8 sec, so it's par for the course.

Same people who get tunes for the Taco and 4R now, I suppose.

Honestly, I haven't driven one, and likely won't. By the time I expect to replace the 4R, I'll likely be interested in a different type of vehicle. (And if I have to replace it in the next few years, I'm not paying for the LC or the new one anyway).

 

Sounds like the throttle tuning is very eco-optimized again, and this thing is so boxy it’s probably quite a bit draggier even that the 5th gen. Bigger tires and more rotating mass doesn’t help either.

hmm. Still like the looks of it.

 

I mean that is the thing, when people are talking about how it’s not getting the advertised fuel economy the response is, it’s iForce MAX, tuned for power not efficiency. But then when people drive it and realize it’s not all that powerful feeling, it’s “must be tuned for efficiency”. It’s early days and break in isn’t even done for the owners but the gas mileage to date has definitely not shown an economy biased tune.

 

https://www.motortrend.com/reviews/2024-toyota-land-cruiser-first-test-review/

Finally another instrumented test.

“It should therefore be unsurprising that, with 23 fewer horsepower, 14 fewer lb-ft of torque, and an additional 100 pounds or so to carry, the Land Cruiser is slower than the GX to 60 mph. We didn’t think it’d be this much slower, however; at 8.0 seconds to 60, it’s 1.5 to 1.7 seconds behind the Lexus GX550 Premium and GX550+ Overtrail models.”

So per Edmunds it’s 0-60 mph in 8.3 seconds and per Motor Trend it does it in 8.0 seconds. Wild, since all the publications “estimated” in the 6 seconds range. But at the same time wholly consistent with my real-world experience driving one. I just don’t understand who all these people are that complain about the lack of pull in the tractor 5th Gen 4Runner V6 and have gotten 2024 Land Cruisers and talk about how much power they have. Talk about how handsome they look, sure, but are they deluding themselves in the seat of the pants feel department?

 

It seems crazy that the smaller LC is heavier. Stupid hybrid battery.

 

It's not actually smaller; they're basically the same vehicle.

 

The GX is bigger. It’s both longer and wider.

 

Oh, so it is, my mistake. It also has a bigger engine, so even more reason to weigh more.

I guess we'll see what the GX550 hybrid comes in at.

 

I mean you’re both right… the GX has bigger overhangs and is slightly longer but they are the same car minus drivetrain. All I know is, that hybrid 4 turbo in the 5600 lbs LC is resulting in lethargic acceleration and just as poor real-world gas mileage as the 5th Gen 4Runner drivetrain with its 5 speed transmission and all. So in that case, the simplicity of a naturally aspirated V6 and 5 cogs seems “better” to me, especially sipping regular unleaded.

 

Once you see the GX in person you’ll realize how big it is. The GX vs LC is kind of like the difference between a Tundra and a Tacoma.

 

Bruh.. they are literally the same car.. you can almost call it badge engineering

 

<Not mine>

 

There’s conflicting info out there on the widths with and without mirrors. I don’t know which is correct but the GX certainly looks bigger in person. Maybe it’s an optical illusion due to the massive grille.

 

lol I saw both vehicles in person, back to back.. sat in the gx.

they are the SAME.

I also asked AI lmao:

 

I’ve also seen and sat in both in person… they are what a Yukon Denali is to a Chevy Tahoe and definitely not a Tacoma vs Tundra. It’s def badge engineering and overall very similar size. GX def has longer overhangs but we are talking low single digit inches here not anything material. The grill on the GX does def look like it eats lots of plankton though.

 

I drove a new Landcruiser a few weeks ago. It didn't feel lethargic to me at all. It felt way more powerful than my 4Runner, as it should.

What kind of real world fuel economy are people getting?

 

Are you considering it or waiting for 6th gen?