100 series LC/Lx470 vs Land Rover LR3 vs 1st generation Sequoia

[ShottsCruisers]

Considering this guy's demands...any of these rigs would do. So once we know any of them are "capable enough" what's the next most important thing to consider?

For me it's reliablity. That's an easy one to answer. The LC 100-series was the most reliable SUV every year of it's life. Disco's and LR's are on the total opposite end as being one of the worst. That's a deal killer for me and most Americans. That's why late model used Rovers are worth so little.

So I'd look at Toyota for YOUR needs. If you think you might want to head somewhere "rough" one day then eliminate the Sequioa. Too big...too wide...no articulation...etc, etc. If you stick to easier roads and pathways you'll likeit's extra space...though it's no Land Cruiser.

 

[Flagster]

I would be interested to see a comparison of the sequoia and the LC100...maybe since both would be easier to find in near stock config...
How much wider is the sequoia...longer?...I found quickly 112" vs 118" wheelbase...76" vs 78" width...LC/Sequoia
Wasn't ATRAC an option on the sequoia? Seems to me the Sequoia could be pretty capable with just some AT tires...

 

[ShottsCruisers]

Seems to me the Sequoia could be pretty capable with just some AT tires...

For basic forest roads and the like...sure. That's where it ends. And the VSC programming will get you stuck in a hurry in sandy conditions. It's design and intended use is not off-pavement.

 

[khronus79]

I would be interested to see a comparison of the sequoia and the LC100...maybe since both would be easier to find in near stock config...
How much wider is the sequoia...longer?...I found quickly 112" vs 118" wheelbase...76" vs 78" width...LC/Sequoia
Wasn't ATRAC an option on the sequoia? Seems to me the Sequoia could be pretty capable with just some AT tires...

The specs are on the 3rd post.
Here are some comparisons on Ih8mud on the LC and the Sequoia:
http://forum.ih8mud.com/********-chat-section/100082-land-cruiser-vs-sequoia.html
http://forum.ih8mud.com/********-chat-section/10359-sequoia-landcruiser.html
http://forum.ih8mud.com/100-series-cruisers/30651-100s-vs-v8-sequoia-tundra-4runner.html
http://forum.ih8mud.com/100-series-cruisers/75504-honest-thoughts-100-series-sequoia-me.html
http://forum.ih8mud.com/100-series-cruisers/92123-sequoia-vs-100-series-lc.html
http://forum.ih8mud.com/100-series-cruisers/65682-sequoia-lc.html

Here you can see a rock crawling Sequoia with SAS conversion:
http://forum.ih8mud.com/95-gen-toyota-trucks/312885-bored-building-02-sequoia-mild-build.html

More Sequoia off roading, read posts #26 and #29, interesting comparison:
http://forum.ih8mud.com/95-gen-toyota-trucks/190333-can-sequoia-off-roader.html

And here is a Sequoia hanging with a bunch of 80 series LCs through the San Juan Mountains, it seems to have done just fine with its "inferior" capabilities, I guess is all about the driver:
http://forum.ih8mud.com/nm-high-desert-cruisers/482393-camping-trip-ouray-aug-4-5-6-7-a.html

 

[Flagster]

interesting reads...:ylsmoke:

 

[haven]

In my opinion, if you plan on taking 7 people plus camping gear on a road trip, you'll need a vehicle that is larger than the models you're discussing. The Ford Excursion and Chevy Suburban provide enough room for people and gear.

The Excursion of 2000-2002 was made with the International 7.3L diesel. The diesel will return better fuel economy than the the gas powered 4x4s you're considering, particularly when loaded.

Here's an example of an Excursion Limited 4x4 diesel with 116K miles, $14,000.
http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.jsp?ct=u&car_id=306542357

 

[khronus79]

In my opinion, if you plan on taking 7 people plus camping gear on a road trip, you'll need a vehicle that is larger than the models you're discussing. The Ford Excursion and Chevy Suburban provide enough room for people and gear.

The Excursion of 2000-2002 was made with the International 7.3L diesel. The diesel will return better fuel economy than the the gas powered 4x4s you're considering, particularly when loaded.

Here's an example of an Excursion Limited 4x4 diesel with 116K miles, $14,000.
http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.jsp?ct=u&car_id=306542357

I used to drool over those, almost got one instead of the dodge durango, wife didn't like the enormity of that truck.
I do not plan on taking 7 people on a road trip, is just 4 of us(2 adults+2 kids) plus a pet, however having had the dodge durango since new in 2004 I don't think we can settle for anythings less than a 7 seater. Our truck quickly fills up when we have family or friends over, even when is just me, my son and his friends, that 3rd row seat is a godsend and keep the kids away from each other.
So, for daily use 3 rows of seats is a must for us. However, for family trips the 3rd row seat comes out and the rear section gets filled up with gear.
As far as mpgs, I don't recall ever owning a car that gave me good mpgs, I've always owned rotaries and suvs, I think I have a lifetime average of 15MPGs give or take a few gallons:Wow1:.

 

[ShottsCruisers]

And here is a Sequoia hanging with a bunch of 80 series LCs through the San Juan Mountains, it seems to have done just fine with its "inferior" capabilities, I guess is all about the driver:
http://forum.ih8mud.com/nm-high-desert-cruisers/482393-camping-trip-ouray-aug-4-5-6-7-a.html

*If you think a Sequoia is not inferior to a 100-series off road then you either need to do more research and/or be honest with yourself.

*San Juan Mountains? Do you know how easy those trails they ran are? All kinds of STOCK SUV's can run those and they do all the time.

 

[khronus79]

*If you think a Sequoia is not inferior to a 100-series off road then you either need to do more research and/or be honest with yourself.

Those are not my thoughts, just the thoughts of someone that owns both a LC100 and a Sequoia, with real world first hand experience. That's why I even considered a Sequoia in the first place, before that it hadn't even crossed my mind. Here's a quote from that particular thread:

Great opinion, so here goes mine. I personally own a 100 series (03 lx470) and the SAS Sequoia.. The LExus Basically the loaded up version of the LC WITH factory rear locker. Compared to a Sequoia bones for bones, the 100 series is a toughter truck. both have solid fully boxed frames, Both have the 2UZFE engine and transmission, both are factory 4:10 gears. they have different transfercases. The rear axles are the same (R and P sizes), and the front IFS is different (the Lexus has a bigger R and P, but the CV shafts of of the same thickness. Both have the linked rear suspension, and the Lexus has bigger A arms on the front IFS. the LC100 is a heavier truck than compared to a Sequoia. Comparing my Sequoia with my 100 series, the Sequoia BAR NONE, is a bigger, lighter truck that averages 18.9mpg HAULING *** the down the highway loaded with kids, gear, and dogs.... TE 100 series SUCKS *** in Fuel... I average, loaded with gear and hauling *** down the highway, about 14 mog on a good day. I personaly feel that the Sequoia is a more comforatable vehicle for the long hauls. BUT you cant beat the hydrolic suspension on the Lexus for its ability to raise and lower the suspension and dial in its settings from sprt mode to "cadillac" mode...

Now her egoes the interesting part... I (after wheeling both trucks) feel that the ATRAC system on the Sequoia is FAR SUPERIOR to just having a rear locker on the 100 series... I took that Sequoia in places that it had NO BUSINESS BEING. as a stock truck, the ATRAC was a beast, and VERY reliable... just the rear locker on the Lexus is great, but not a beast off road beause once you loose the front traction, you basically lost the rear. My Lexus, would not go as far in the woods as my ATRAC'ed Sequoia would.

If I had a choice between the 2 rigs for a total package. I would choose the Sequoia over the 100 series. I love both my trucks, but for the total package, I would get a Sequoia ....

http://forum.ih8mud.com/95-gen-toyota-trucks/190333-can-sequoia-off-roader.html

*San Juan Mountains? Do you know how easy those trails they ran are? All kinds of STOCK SUV's can run those and they do all the time.

I honestly don't know how easy or hard any trail in the San Juan Mountains is, since I've never been there, all I can do is go by the word of experienced people such as yourself and also by the trail ratings found on the web, for example:
Colorado4x4.org says that there is at least 1 trail in the San Juan's with a rating of 7

Rating: 7
Rocks frequent and large, 12" and may exceed hub height. Holes frequent or deep (12"). Shelves to 9". Mud 8" deep and may be present on uphill sections. Grades to 25 degrees and sidehill to 30 degrees. Water crossings to 18" and may have strong currents. 1-1/2 vehicles wide. 4WD required. Driver experience helpful.

Another Jeep website rates the same trails from Easy all the way to Challenging:

Challenging: Not recommended for the novice. Even experienced 4-wheelers may find the obstacles and ledges intimidating, and damage to vehicle is possible, unless extreme caution, careful throttle control and precise wheel placement is exercised.

Now, for someone with your level of experience those trails might be cake, but for common folk such as myself its a whole different story regardless of vehicle.

But all that is besides the point, this thread was originally meant to be only about LC100s, if you go back to my first post:

Mi idea is not necessarily to do a head to head comparison, what I would like to do is gather as much data as possible from actual owners of all 3 trucks, and then post all that in one place to make it easier for others that are looking for the same answers.

So, since this is the Land Cruiser section of the forum
-What year 100 series is best and why????
-What are the strengths and weaknesses of your 100 series LC????
-What major problems have you had with your 100 series LC????(Major failures, enough to leave you stranded)
-Other minor problems with your LC100????(annoyances such as electrical stuff)
-What modifications are a must have????
-Which modifications have you done that you wish you hadn't????

Perhaps you can post your honest thoughts on the LC100, I know everything, the good and the bad is on your thread:
http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...-series-(Roklimo)-Step-by-Step-5-year-buildup
but it would be nice to have your input in here as well.


p.s. sorry for the extra long post.

 

[Sawyer]

Those are not my thoughts, just the thoughts of someone that owns both a LC100 and a Sequoia

Not trying to stir anything her, but there is a lot of miss information in the thread you linked. I realize you are just re-posting what some one else wrote. So, just to clarify:

The 100 series only came with factory rear lockers in '98 & '99 starting in 2000 traction control was introduced (ATRAC). So an 03 LX470 would not have had a rear locker from the factory and it would have ATRAC. Source:100 series guide

Maybe he just never understood what he had or how to use it. Be that as it may. Another thing to point out is he was comparing a SAS heavily modified Sequoia to a non heavily modified LX470. I dont think that is a very good comparison.

They are both amazing vehicles. They are a Toyota. The 100/470 is the flagship of the line. The Sequoia was an economy version of a full sized SUV. There will be some differences. Depending on needs, either could fit the bill based on what is written here. If modifications are a driver.... well the choices are limited. Best of luck with the decision.

 

[ShottsCruisers]

Not trying to stir anything her, but there is a lot of miss information in the thread you linked. I realize you are just re-posting what some one else wrote. So, just to clarify:

The 100 series only came with factory rear lockers in '98 & '99 starting in 2000 traction control was introduced (ATRAC). So an 03 LX470 would not have had a rear locker from the factory and it would have ATRAC. Source:100 series guide

Maybe he just never understood what he had or how to use it. Be that as it may. Another thing to point out is he was comparing a SAS heavily modified Sequoia to a non heavily modified LX470. I dont think that is a very good comparison.

They are both amazing vehicles. They are a Toyota. The 100/470 is the flagship of the line. The Sequoia was an economy version of a full sized SUV. There will be some differences. Depending on needs, either could fit the bill based on what is written here. If modifications are a driver.... well the choices are limited. Best of luck with the decision.

EXACTLY! SAS Sequoia...give me a break.

And they didn't run the "7-rated" trail in that thread...Poughkeepsie Gulch. And PG isn't tough either except for The Wall. The ones they ran can be done in a RAV4!

 

[khronus79]

Not trying to stir anything her, but there is a lot of miss information in the thread you linked. I realize you are just re-posting what some one else wrote. So, just to clarify:

The 100 series only came with factory rear lockers in '98 & '99 starting in 2000 traction control was introduced (ATRAC). So an 03 LX470 would not have had a rear locker from the factory and it would have ATRAC. Source:100 series guide

Maybe he just never understood what he had or how to use it. Be that as it may. Another thing to point out is he was comparing a SAS heavily modified Sequoia to a non heavily modified LX470. I dont think that is a very good comparison.

They are both amazing vehicles. They are a Toyota. The 100/470 is the flagship of the line. The Sequoia was an economy version of a full sized SUV. There will be some differences. Depending on needs, either could fit the bill based on what is written here. If modifications are a driver.... well the choices are limited. Best of luck with the decision.

Sawyer, on that particular post the person clearly compares the trucks on their stock form, or at least what he believes to be stock trucks(perhaps his LX has aftermarket rear lockers???):

Now her egoes the interesting part... I (after wheeling both trucks) feel that the ATRAC system on the Sequoia is FAR SUPERIOR to just having a rear locker on the 100 series... I took that Sequoia in places that it had NO BUSINESS BEING. as a stock truck, the ATRAC was a beast, and VERY reliable... just the rear locker on the Lexus is great, but not a beast off road beause once you loose the front traction, you basically lost the rear. My Lexus, would not go as far in the woods as my ATRAC'ed Sequoia would.

The SAS was added later down the road after his ATRAC blew out. There's a whole thread on that truck in Ih8mud and he clearly wheels the cr@p out of that truck in stock form.

Now please understand that I am NOT trying to make a case for the Sequoia, in fact I didn't even wanted to talk about the Sequoia in this thread, all I want is non bias, honest opinions on YOUR actual truck, the LC100.

My goal was to gather your opinions with the opinions of actual LR3 owners and those of actual Sequoia owners and post it all in one place, to help others in their decision making process.

By the way my decision was made before I started this thread and I can honestly tell you that I spent, literally, months reading all that I could on the vehicles in question. You can find my SN in about 15 different sites where I signed up just to be able to read all the info.
All I'm trying to do is save someone all that time by having as much info as possible in one place.












And no, I didn't get the Sequoia.:smiley_drive:

 

[Sawyer]

Debate is always good.

Sawyer, on that particular post the person clearly compares the trucks on their stock form, or at least what he believes to be stock trucks(perhaps his LX has aftermarket rear lockers???): and perhaps when they installed that aftermarket Locker they removed the factory installed ATRAC system???? I don"t thing so.

The SAS was added later down the road after his ATRAC blew out. There's a whole thread on that truck in Ih8mud and he clearly wheels the cr@p out of that truck in stock form. Not debating that.....

Now please understand that I am NOT trying to make a case for the Sequoia, in fact I didn't even wanted to talk about the Sequoia in this thread, all I want is non bias, honest opinions on YOUR actual truck, the LC100. I have Given that and also corrected the bad misinformation you re-posted....

My goal was to gather your opinions with the opinions of actual LR3 owners and those of actual Sequoia owners and post it all in one place, to help others in their decision making process.That is why I posted the correct information but just to be clear:

The problem I have is you are quoting bad information. An '03 LX470 did NOT come from the factory with rear lockers and an '03LX 470 DOES have ATRAC.

To repeat what I said earlier:

They are both amazing vehicles. They are a Toyota. The 100/470 is the flagship of the line. The Sequoia was an economy version of a full sized SUV. There will be some differences. Depending on needs, either could fit the bill based on what is written here. If modifications are a driver.... well the choices are limited. Best of luck with the decision.

Like I said, I am not trying to stir the pot here... just trying to make sure the correct information is posted.

 

[ShottsCruisers]

By the way my decision was made before I started this thread and I can honestly tell you that I spent, literally, months reading all that I could on the vehicles in question. You can find my SN in about 15 different sites where I signed up just to be able to read all the info.
All I'm trying to do is save someone all that time by having as much info as possible in one place:

Not trying to be mean, but if you've spent MONTHS reading and researching, why is a huge tuna boat like a Sequoia even being compared to a LC and/or LR3?

Have you not already concluded that:

*There are no "Sequoia off road clubs" because the trucks are not designed for that use.
*There is no aftermarket support for the Sequoia
*There are Land Cruiser clubs for dedicated off-road travel
*Aftermarket parts and mods abound
*Ever seen Sequoia Expedition vehicles other than ones witha roof rack?
*Seen and read about Dakar Cruisers

I could go on and on. Using ONE person's Sequoia as an example is plain crap. They are designed to haul people and gear on-road and in comfort. That's it and they're better than a Cruiser for that. If you want both on and off-road then you look at a Cruiser.

 

[Jwestpro]

I have an 07 lr3 since new in spring 07. My few main gripes are:
low ground clearance, even in the most modified set up, mostly due to tire size limitations. Where the air suspension is magical for combining nice highway cruising for 3000 miles to a 4x4 destination, it still really only provides a small total ground clearance in it's most extreme setting. People try to fight this with extended rods, but even then, I've only seen a 32.5" max tire. Combined with the lr3 design underneath, you just don't get much for super deep ruts or super deep snow. It's awesome for some things, but very limited in other ways.

The LC100 can apparently ? fit larger tires and it doesn't even have an air suspension. Much of the lr3 bad design is in it's wheel travel/tire size clearance inside the wheel well area. Too many frame and component points too close to the tires.

Does a stock Sequoia or Tundra (same chassis right) really have 10.6" under the lowest point? - which would be the rear differential. I sort of doubt that but wow if so. For your basic forest road travel when covered with really deep snow, that is where a Tundra/Sequoia could do better than the smaller suvs.