Sold 5th Gen for new Land Cruiser 250

All you need to do here is calculate your MPG and know how many gallons fit in its tank. That will give you the range per tank.

The only useful metric here is size of the tank as compared to other SUVs of the same class.

Looks like a 2024 LC has a 17.9 gallon capacity tank. Which is very small. A 4Runner has a 23 gallon tank.

you’ll still save money with the better MPG, but your trips to the gas station are equal or more frequent than a 4Runner because of the smaller tank.

 

lol the tank size is fixed.

just go by MPG.

why go by miles per tank? Useless metric that introduces variability.

 

lol “consistently “!

how often you hit E precisely as you pull up to a gas station?

 

I am not sure what's so difficult to believe here. Yes, historically when the gauge is reading empty I usually get about 19-20 gallons to full. Which maths out to about 4 gallons remaining. I don't do that often. But over the past 4 years of driving it, it has happened more than a handful of times.

 

Data scientist right here!

 

congrats!

 

Out of curiosity, how long are you waiting after the light comes on? Usually, mine takes around 17.5 or 18 gallons if I fill up when the light comes on. And, usually 18.5-19 when the range is at 0 miles.

But, I read another post about an earlier 5th get that wasn't consistent with that. I wonder if there were changes to the way the fuel level is detected? It could explain why the fuel pump recall only affected one or two model years.

 

I don’t even know what your argument is here. Do you?

 

Mine goes about a gallon lower than yours: about 19 gal to fill up at the light, and 20 gal to fill up at "0" distance to empty.

 

My light seems to come on a couple gallons before the needle hits empty. Maybe the fuel pump issue is the reason there is such a large buffer.

His posts tend to support the notion that he may be retarded. I doubt he knows what his argument is.

 

Bummer, this definitely will make it not an option. I have 3 kiddos that all sit in the backseat and at least one is going to be supermodel height.

 

Thank you! This is what I thought I had read earlier. I would have expected it to be the same year to year, but it doesn't seem that's the case. Or, maybe mine is just goofy. I guess need to compare with other 2019's.

Yes, the light comes on well before the needle hits E. So, at least that part seems consistent.

 

Congrats on the new ride!! it looks really good. I traded in my 2020 jeep grand cherokee overland with only 27k on it. Traded it for my 2018 4runner trd pro. I also looked at a Land cruisers too but there was a waiting list 3-6 months out from what the salesman said. I will miss my luxury in the jeep buttttt the reliability and simplicity of the 4runner has forever sold me lol. I also had several problems with my jeep, ( air ride went out..) AC problems etc. Keep us posted on mods and reliability if ya can!!

 

I’m in the same boat with two kids and a dog and need decent back seat space. I wonder if the hybrid battery forced the rear seats to move forward? I’m assuming the 6th gen 4Runner will be similar. What’s the next option, get a GX 550 and pray Toyota gets these V6 engine failures straightened out?

 

Currently 550 is out of my price range but maybe by the time I'm ready for one they'll have the engine issues sorted. But they look absolutely beautiful in real life. I saw two not long ago.

 

Agreed. I think they did the best job looks wise with the 550. I know it is quite subjective but I prefer 550.

 

I agree. It’s too much money for what it is but it does look great and the size seems pretty nice for a family hauler.

 

OP, just out of curiosity. When you were on the dirt road to your destination, did the dust stack up on the rear window like it does with our 5th Gens?

 

Sat in a Land Cruiser (1958) for the first time yesterday.

Initial thoughts......I liked it a lot. It was comfortable, sizing is perfect (IMO), and it seemed nicely built.

I'm 5'9 and wanted to see how much room there was in the back seat. I adjusted the front seat to where I would be comfortable driving, then went and sat in the back seat to see how much room there was. Plenty of room for average sized adult humans. My knees had a few inches to spare before touching the front seat. I didn't think the backseat area was too small at all.

Things I didn't like.....the manual cloth seats were fine but it feels like a cheap move. Just make them power Softex seats at that price. Also, I don't know if this was stock or an add-on, but the dash cam was in a really annoying line-of-sight spot on the windshield to the left of the rear view mirror (when in the drivers seat). Would have seemed more out of the way on the right side of the rear view mirror.

I'd definitely consider one of these (assuming I like the way it drives), but only after a few more years in the 4Runner.

 

Toyota folks historically by definition are more pragmatic types, or else you'd go get whatever shiny car has more bells and whistles and tech (practically all of them) instead of placing as much emphasis on a well built, reliable, and simple ride that just does what it's supposed to do. Congrats on the new LC250, I think it's a pretty cool looking car (subjective). I was very excited about being nearly the first on the waitlist for a Trail Dust colored Land Cruiser First Edition and or TRD Pro or Trailhunter 6th Gen 4Runner. Despite the big price increase, I was more than happy, really enthusiastic even about forking over $78k if it meant I got the typical made in Japan build quality, but with an immense increase in HP/torque while also gaining a lot of MPGs. I was not super skeptical of the turbo 4 cylinder hybrid format because Toyota has been a leader in hybrid tech for ages, and is also not new to making turbo. After driving a 1958 trim Landcruiser, I cancelled my order for the Trail Dust 1st Edition and grabbed the one of the final year TRD Pro 5th Gen 4Runners. Strictly speaking about data and the non-subjective elements of a 5th Gen 4Runner vs the new LC 250, it really does not do a lot of what it initially seemed to promise. OP - in CO, the premium gas uncharge vs regular is 21-30% so if it doesn't get at least that much better gas mileage, it's not saving you any at the pump. It definitely is a taller car with a higher greenhouse so has more headroom in the first, second row etc. But it does not in fact have larger cargo capacity despite being dimensionally larger on the exterior and therefore harder to park in the city or place in tight spaces on a trail. This is because of all the hybrid drive train packaging. It also is slower accelerating than a 4Runner despite how it "feels" to you or anybody else who drives it knowing it possesses so much HP and torque on paper. I would not go out of my way to post this on a dedicated Landcruiser 250 forum, but since this is a 4Runner forum and in the area talking about other Toyota cars, figured I'd give a counterpoint in the event somebody else is deliberating the change. Finally - 2024 model year TRD Pro and 2024 LC 250 1958 edition are the closest in price and at those trim levels, unless one really wants animated graphics and a fully digital dashboard (less expensive to produce than actual needled instrumentation), the 24 Pro has so much of the good tech (bright LED headlights, keyless and remote start, heated seats and steering wheel) and none of the gimmicks and a far better suspension, dual power front seats, A/T tires, JBL stereo out of the gate.

 

Which would you have chosen if the LC also came with the 4.0 engine?

 

Why do you keep saying this? Car and driver has them neck and neck.

My '03 also had torque up the wazoo, and yet it actually accelerated slower than the 5th gen. But, like the Landcruiser, it had more pull in the low to mid RPM range. There's more to having power than rapid acceleration. A better towing experience comes to mind.

 

Saying it because it’s true. I feel like you love to refer only to the Car and Driver instrumented test when it’s the only one that has them neck and neck. How come you ignore and never reference the other articles you ask me about earlier in the threads like “where do you see this?” Edmunds comparison of GX550 vs LC250, how about the Motor Trend latest instrumented test? In both of those they clock a 0-60 and quarter mile slower than a 5th Gen 4Runner. Not my opinion, facts.

Those articles also comment on the lack of actual observed fuel efficiency vs the EPA figures that you also have asked me about. I didn’t drive one long enough to comment on fuel efficiency first hand. I just know that for all the LC250 owners getting 21-22 MPGs there seem to be plenty who are getting 16-18…. Which sounds a lot like the 4Runner except it has a 17.9 gallon tank vs a 23 gallon in the 4Runner.

 

I just looked them both up on Motor Trend and it has them both at 8 seconds 0 to 60

I also got a reply from remember here who was getting 24.8 miles per gallon or something like that. That's a heck of a lot better than most people are getting with a 5th gen 4runner.

 

Tough… that would assume the hybrid plumbing goes away and you possibly recapture space for the larger fuel tank and cargo area. But even then, would it still be priced such that the 1958 LC would be the same or slightly more than a TRD Pro 4Runner? It would be much more based on just styling preference probably.

 

Motor Week has 5th Gen at 7.7 seconds… but honestly who cares? I’m not drag racing my 4Runner against anybody. It’s comically slow… which is again, hilarious/disappointing that the new, ultra sophisticated, much more powerful hybrid, turbo 4 moves the LC250 only as fast or slower according to some publications. That’s my only point. You know, the 5th Gen with 5 forward gears and a 15 year old engine.

I mean at that point it’s hard to argue against picking the simple, understressed, stubbornly proven and reliable drivetrain.

 

I can't find anything on the LC250's 0-60 time from Motorweek. But, it seems like anytime the same publication has tested both vehicles, they are pretty much identical.

As I mentioned before, power isn't just about acceleration. Go drive a Dodge Ram Cummins. They are not fast at all, but they have brutal torque.

 

These MAX hybrids are starting to sound like a flop. All this complication and cost for little gain seems silly. They should have offered a non hybrid engine option and a standard hybrid option designed to gain mpgs.

 

I have… the shove on one is far far more powerful feeling than the elastic sensation followed by the steady push from the LC250.

Hahaha. I don’t get it, you point out how people’s feelings and opinions don’t really stand up to actual respected car magazine data when it came to V8 4Runner info and then bring up anecdotal data that doesn’t get supported by any of those very car magazine reviews I’ve directed you to. They ALL unanimously say they are not getting the EPA rated gas mileage in their narrative commentary. Also, many owners of the LC250 have just accepted that is the case because they are having great difficulty achieving it. One person getting 24.8 MPGs isn’t really strong counter-evidence. I can get 48 MPGs downhill with a tailwind in my 5th Gen at times. But honest to goodness, driving like a somewhat normal human on a non-lifted (but still factory TRD Pro with A/T tires and roof rack and in my case 180 lbs of additional weight in sliders and rack) 4Runner I get 19-22 MPGs on a blended basis. All the people who talk about their 5th Gens on this forum getting 14 MPGs have stadium trucks, with quintuple ply 33” and larger tires and 2.5” of lift. That’s not exactly representative of a stock 5th Gen is it? Also, add 21-30% more to the 19-22 MPGs of the 4Runner, and that is the real bogey for the premium guzzling LC 250 and I don’t know ANYONE reporting they get that type of mileage. I’m sure if you have perfect tire pressure, a factory or mostly stock LC250 and drive a super steady 70 MPH or below on mostly flat grade, one can get 24 MPGs but that same scenario for a factory 5th Gen will also get you about 22 MPGs.

 

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. What anecdotal data are you talking about? Actual realized fuel economy from a Land Cruiser owner? I'm not saying that that isn't going to be the exception, but I'm going to wait to see what actual drivers get before I make my mind up based on a couple of short-term tests by car magazines.