I don't see much 200 series here, any particular reason?

[coledudley]

Cool, you did the Moab and then Breakenridge trip a couple weeks ago? I wanted to do that but... work and all. Those pictures above are from Barnwell Mountain Recreational Area in Texas.

Completely agree about how easy it is to wheel a 200. It somehow able to stay so much more level than a lot of other vehicles. I figure KDSS along with a little wider platform and travel than a 4Runner is what makes the difference. My 200 when stock could go further up a RTI ramp than my long traveled front and rear with no sway bars FJ Cruiser. That was a pretty big surprise to me, and a testimate to the engineers behind the land cruiser.

Yup, I participated in both legs of the trip. It was a great time for sure. I actually didn't see your photos on this page so my reference to "the photo above" was to the picture on the previous page traversing the Golden Crack in Moab.

 

[SDDiver5]

Since this thread was started I have been keeping an eye out of for sweet 200's. Saw 3 fully modified this morning on my drive/walk to work. They seemed more mall crawlerish but still awesome looking.

 

[Dalko43]

4runner rti 584
https://instagram.com/p/BWjTHMKANRY/

Land cruiser 647
https://instagram.com/p/BRwi-4SgISR/

4Runner ~10% less flexy by that measure. It's track is about 3% narrower and wheelbase is 2% smaller


More on the tale of tape comparison here: http://forum.expeditionportal.com/t...nner-v-2017-Landcruiser?p=2235440#post2235440

Additionally, the LC has about a 15% higher horsepower to weight ratio and is 17% less efficient (MPG combined)

That's impressive articulation for both vehicles, but especially so for the LC 200.

 

[ckkone]

Is there something out there that rivals the LC in terms of capability and reliability? I know there aren't tons of them in the US in general, but I would think a forum like this would have most 200's posting up.

Thoughts?

No, Landcruisers are the best and the 200 series is the best one yet. This forum is more about how much money you can spend bolting stuff onto your truck to go on camping trips (and I'm guilty of this....). Once the vendors who support this forum start making more stuff for the 200 series you will see more of them on here.

 

[MTSN]

We actually spotted a few other 200s recently on the way to the mall around 12,800 feet.

Fortunately the mall lot was pretty empty, but we couldn't find a valet anywhere nearby which was really annoying.

 

[FireGuy]

I've been quietly waiting for the right 200 to pop up to start building. I think we are about to see a lot more of them getting used offroad. I love the 4runner, but for a family of 4 it gets small, fast.

 

[rickashay]

4runner rti 584
https://instagram.com/p/BWjTHMKANRY/

Land cruiser 647
https://instagram.com/p/BRwi-4SgISR/

4Runner ~10% less flexy by that measure. It's track is about 3% narrower and wheelbase is 2% smaller


More on the tale of tape comparison here: http://forum.expeditionportal.com/t...nner-v-2017-Landcruiser?p=2235440#post2235440

Additionally, the LC has about a 15% higher horsepower to weight ratio and is 17% less efficient (MPG combined)

Cool Instagram page. I will definitely follow them...

I'm guilty of not reading all the pages in this thread but I am not sure if I care what the RTI score is stock vs. stock on any of these vehicles in regards to this particular discussion. I guess it's an interesting comparison for a starting point. How many of us here who purchase either of these vehicles will leave them on the stock suspension? Chances are the factory suspension won't last long, and those RTI scores will go out the window. I know my 4Runner would kick the crap out of both of those scores. Someday my 200 will too

 

[Riptide]

We actually spotted a few other 200s recently on the way to the mall around 12,800 feet.

That last shot is great...

I was just out in CO with my family in our Sprinter, but many times, all I could think about was returning soon in my 200. You've nudged me a little closer.

One of the things that I think makes the LC a great value is all the capability that is already built-in. Yeah, we like to hang stuff off of them, but the reality is, they're more than capable out of the box for what 98% of us do.

 

[Arktikos]

.. a 4runner trail is going to perform just as well in technical terrain, arguably better, than a stock LC 200. You're also going to get further on a tank of fuel. Build quality and comfort are what separate the two in my mind. That said, I'm not sure how quantifiable that quality difference is, as I've seen 4runners with a lifetime of abuse continue to run reliably in harsh conditions. They may not look as good or feel as comfortable as a LC of similar age, but they'll still run.

Well said.
However, I think the newest 4Runner is better looking than the 200, and 2nd generation 4Runner is a winner in the appearance category compared to the 80 series.

Also, a 1990 4runner is plenty comfortable for my aged body, so any advantage that a 21st century Land Cruiser has in this department would be negligible in my book.

Someone answered the thread title by pointing out the relative rarity of 200 series in US, and its high cost.
Plus, for me it'd be difficult to pick them out of a freeway lineup, because their styling isn't so distinctive as older generations.

 

[JLee]

Cool Instagram page. I will definitely follow them...

I'm guilty of not reading all the pages in this thread but I am not sure if I care what the RTI score is stock vs. stock on any of these vehicles in regards to this particular discussion. I guess it's an interesting comparison for a starting point. How many of us here who purchase either of these vehicles will leave them on the stock suspension? Chances are the factory suspension won't last long, and those RTI scores will go out the window. I know my 4Runner would kick the crap out of both of those scores. Someday my 200 will too

I'd be curious to see RTI scores for modded vehicles - without swaybar disconnects, it's still probably tough to beat. I read an article a while back about how the 200 had a better RTI score than even a SFA Wrangler at the time.

I should find a ramp somewhere and try my GX out.

 

[Taco2FJ]

I have an FJ Cruiser with a Total Chaos long travel front end and a metal tech long travel rear end wth no sway bars. My 200 Series when stock had a better RTI score than the FJ, and subsequently any Prado 120/150 frame vehicle. Plus the 200 stays considerably flatter when in larger boulder/off camber wheeeling.

I was just as surprised as anyone else when I found this out.

 

[tbisaacs]

I'd be curious to see RTI scores for modded vehicles - without swaybar disconnects, it's still probably tough to beat. I read an article a while back about how the 200 had a better RTI score than even a SFA Wrangler at the time.

I should find a ramp somewhere and try my GX out.

Stock GX470 w/o KDSS: 428
W/KDSS: 519

Source
https://plus.google.com/+ToshiClark/posts/4UjKS2hBWR9


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JLee]

Stock GX470 w/o KDSS: 428
W/KDSS: 519

Source
https://plus.google.com/+ToshiClark/posts/4UjKS2hBWR9


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Oh that is awesome. Thanks!

 

[Highlander]

What about the Sequoia?

Is it better than the 4R and worse then the LC200?

 

[lathamb]

For me it was value. Coming from a 1996 80 series (which was fantastic off road), I was looking for something roughly 10 years newer. That left either a 4Runner or 100 series (know this is a 200 series thread). Comparing similar 2007 4Runners vs. 2007 100 series LC, the LC was roughly double the price. Given they have virtually the same drive-train (I got the 4.7) and similar capability, I couldn't justify spending 2x the price. A 200 series was out of the question. I've been happy with my choice and had a lot of fun in it so far.