Hyundai'ish?

[4Rescue]

Except it's not a drop in the bucket. It's huge $$$. Emissions, crash tests, air bags, etc - there is a huge cost in bringing a vehicle into US specs that wasn't in US specs before.

Haven't you wondered why Toyota, Nissan, Subaru, et al, build vehicles in the US that are different from their "world market" cars? It's because the cost of converting a "world market" car to US specs is so prohibitive that it's not worth it. That's why you don't see, for example, the Nissan Patrol or the Toyota Troopie in the US. They are (or were) small market vehicles and the cost to bring them up to US specs would not be offset by the sales price. And besides - they sell every one they make in the rest of the world, why would they risk all the costs of converting one of these vehicles to US specs only to put it for sale in a market that is already super-saturated with SUVs?

.

Boy, you missed the boat completely... Do you really think that's how it works? Ther WRX was a "world market car" that Sudaru finaly offered in N.America and look how well it did. Every year Toyota and Nissan re-work and re-tool to make NEW models to spread they're market share out and get more profit from any given segment. So you're saying that it wold cost more to spec a rig for US consumption than it would to make a whole new vehicle and in Toyota's case SEVERAL (Scion anyone)? What pray tell are these huge differences ion US regs and the rest of the owrld that make it so prohibitive to bring these trucks into the country? Euro diesel emissions regs are higher standard than the US regs (although the fuel is a little different) and I don't really think say BMW has a problem bringing in M3's and the like that are mechanicaly identical to their Euro brethren... Funny how the Fiat Panda can't get into the country... Oddly enough, there is one single market segment where US auto builders are ahead (ok two if you count so called muscle cars) and it's the HD truck market. Toyota has systematicly dominated most all segments in the US car market. WHy would they mysteriously stop just shy of making the "big 3" obsolete... And to be fair there are always going to be silly Chevy loving folks here in the US, it's just the way it is, but look: Who's throwing Billions of dollars to keep these grosly mis-managed corporate VP bloated companies afloat? You guessed it the US government. They've done alot more underhanded crap than this. But hey, since when has the US liked to play fair with the other kids... Were more like the bully that get's what we want by force and corruption.

 

[Martinjmpr]

So you're saying that it wold cost more to spec a rig for US consumption than it would to make a whole new vehicle and in Toyota's case SEVERAL (Scion anyone)?

No, I'm saying it would cost more to bring these vehicles up to US Specs than the profits their sales would generate in the US.

You have to face the facts of the US SUV market. Leather seats and DVD players are much more popular options than locking diffs. And those people who want straight axles, locking diffs, etc, have the Jeep Wrangler. So if Toyota were to try and bring vehicles like the solid-axle 100 (the 105?) over to the US, they'd be spending millions of $$ to try to appeal to a market that's just not that big.

Just take a look next time you're driving around town and check the ratio of unmodified "mall cruisers" to even mildly built-up trail rigs. What do you think that ratio is? 20:1? 40:1? 60:1? It's probably at least that high here in CO, and when you get away from the juicy 4x4 territory it goes even higher.

Look, I understand the frustration, I really do. When I was in the military I got to travel all over the world and saw all the cool vehicles they get in other countries that we don't get here. But I still can't get angry at Toyota (or any other import manufacturer) for making a sound business decision.

 

[Pskhaat]

if Toyota were to try and bring vehicles like the solid-axle 100 (the 105?) over to the US, they'd be spending millions of $$ to try to appeal to a market that's just not that big.

Martinjmpr: I am only doing this to be the devil's advocate

In the case of the HZJ105 (given example), I argue that the full safety basics have been met by the UZJ100 with the majority of the shared dimensions. You are looking at some frame and suspension differences. What is left is the diesel and airbags. For the latter, Toyota I fully expect has already recovered it's costs and may require slight re-engineering of the airbag timing. The diesel debate is...well we all know and feel about that one. You gotta worry about smog stuff, but it ain't that complicated for an auto mfg, and they already have worried about that in Japan and Europe.

Millions invested? Maybe, though doubtful even that. That US$1M number is really a drop in the bucket for a several hundred billion market cap company that can likely write that off not as expense but as development or investment. Let's say $2M invested, 500 units sold (seems really low considering nearly 300,000 of them are produced annually) annually for 10 years is linearly $400 additional cost per vehicle, which is by average quite a bit of $ but well below even the average profit value across their whole fleet.

When you talk about the ratios you can't blankedly place those who own the luxos vs the ``trail rigs'' because they are too cannabilistic, there should statistically be some gray area buyers, but there's no doubt it's a smaller market.

But I still can't get angry at Toyota (or any other import manufacturer) for making a sound business decision.

Nope, it's their own business decision, just one--save some other invisible politics--in which we do not share the same definition of a good one.

 

[haven]

Comparably priced

The Land Cruiser has comparable equipment and a comparable price to other "luxury sport utility" models from Range Rover, Porsche, Mercedes and Cadillac.

I am eternally grateful to the dentists, real estate moguls and personal injury attorneys who can afford to purchase the Land Cruiser new. They won't use the off-road capabilities of the vehicle, they will have regular maintenance performed at the dealership, and, in 10 years, they will sell the vehicle to me at a price I can afford.

Chip Haven

 

[calamaridog]

The Land Cruiser has comparable equipment and a comparable price to other "luxury sport utility" models from Range Rover, Porsche, Mercedes and Cadillac.

I am eternally grateful to the dentists, real estate moguls and personal injury attorneys who can afford to purchase the Land Cruiser new. They won't use the off-road capabilities of the vehicle, they will have regular maintenance performed at the dealership, and, in 10 years, they will sell the vehicle to me at a price I can afford.

Chip Haven

:clapsmile

Exactly!!! I can't wait to get my hands on one.

In the meantime, I'll enjoy my 100 series

 

[Martinjmpr]

Martinjmpr: I am only doing this to be the devil's advocate

You know, this happens in the motorcycle market all the time. One of the Japanese big-4 will make a bike for sale in Japan or Europe (typically it's a big naked standard) and the enthusiasts in the US will just rave about how great it is and curse the Gods that the companies won't bring them over to the us (and consider that it's much easier to modify a motorcycle to US specs than it is to modify a 4-wheeled vehicle.)

So, after much whining, cajoling, letters from die-hard fans, etc, the Japanese take the risk of brining one of these Euro or Japan-spec bikes to the US. And invariably - without exception - they fail to sell in numbers needed to justify the costs of bringing them over. The bikes end up collecting dust on the showroom floors until they're finally sold at near cost to get them off the floor, and then the model is dropped from the US lineup in favor of more crotch rockets and Harley clones. After a while, the Japanese realize that the die-hard enthusiasts know absolutely zip about marketing or sales. They just want their toys.

Hardcore 4-wheelers are a tiny niche in the SUV market, a market that is already saturated not only by the multiple foreign and domestic makes, but also by the used market.

Finally, I think front SAS is highly overrated. While it may be great for rock crawling and make for easy lifts, for almost anything else (including DD use), IFS is better. I can easily recall how the SAS in my 85 Toyota PU required me to slow down to about 15mph on washboard roads, which I can now cruise at easily double that due to the IFS.

 

[ShottsCruisers]

Finally, I think front SAS is highly overrated. While it may be great for rock crawling and make for easy lifts, for almost anything else (including DD use), IFS is better. I can easily recall how the SAS in my 85 Toyota PU required me to slow down to about 15mph on washboard roads, which I can now cruise at easily double that due to the IFS.

I agree

 

[calamaridog]

I agree

Of course you do:shakin:



But so do I