Used 200-Series or Tundra or 4Runner or....?

[p nut]

I agree with the 5.7L comment. My old 4.7L was adequate for towing, but the 5.7L is a joy. Especially going up high mountain passes.
_
In your situation, I would opt for a truck (Tundra). Seems you don't need the off-road capabilities of the LC. For me, a truck bed has been so useful, for house projects, but also for family outings. I like keeping the cargo separate, so a truck made sense for me. Had to go get some firewood one camping trip. Just chopped some up and threw it all in the bed. All sorts of spiders and creepy crawly things got thrown in back there. Wouldn't have done that in my old LC. (Although a full size roof rack would do as well). Bikes, muddy clothes, and other smelly things go in the bed.
_
I think the platform is slightly more versatile. You can put on a shell for covered security, or open for odd-sized large cargo. Or even a camper shell if so inclined in the future. It comes down to personal preference, but a truck has worked out better for us.

 

[ulyist]

Take a look at lx570, depends on the market but sometimes used they are cheaper then the lc200.

 

[cruiseroutfit]

Take a look at lx570, depends on the market but sometimes used they are cheaper then the lc200.

They are also much tougher to build if that is a concern. There are few if any bumpers and the AHC system isn't easily alike the LC100/LX470. Fantastic vehicles but know your limitations on the front end of the research.

 

[Dalko43]

The Tundra and Sequoia are pretty much the same platform and powertrains, just with different bodies on top. So chances are, if one feels good to you, the other should feel similarly good...the decision really comes down to whether or not you need that pickup bed.

I've driven the 4th gen 4runner quite a bit (the v6 more so than the v8). The V8 should give you the towing power that you need, and the platform itself is very reliable in stock form. However, if you're considering the v8 4runner I'd give the LC100 a serious look as well...you'll definitely get a little more room with the LC. The LC200 obviously gives you a bit more HP and newer, well, everything. You have to figure out if its premium price on the used market is worth it for your situation.

 

[toyotech]

Sequoia is gonna ride better with coils in rear instead of leafs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[coveboy]

My uncle has a 200 series and me and my dad both drive Tundras. My uncle often either tows a small camp trailer or a CJ-7 with his 200, and you'd never know either was back there. The ride is so plush, and off road it is an absolute monster. The family will definitely enjoy their ride in the Land Cruiser more than a Tundra.
However, a Crewmax Tundra is a super roomy and comfortable truck that makes a wonderful tow rig. Just because the Land Cruiser is more comfy doesn't mean the Tundra is uncomfortable by any means. Make sure to get one with the towing package factory, though. These trucks are huge, so trails can get somewhat tight, but off road they handle about anything you can throw at them. I've just turned 150k in my 09 and my dad 180k in his 08, and neither have required anything past standard maintenance. His Tundra he uses for construction and tows an 18ft box trailer 4-5 days a week loaded with tools and materials, which is a solid testament for the durability of these trucks even with miles of towing/hauling. I used to have a 100 series, and I'm sure it would have fit your bill just fine also, but you're going to pay 20k+ for something 10 years old with 150k+ miles when you could purchase a Tundra with half the age and mileage for the same. And the money you'd save between a Tundra and 200 would be sufficient to outfit your truck with some tasteful mods.
I'd go drive each if you can, just see which you think you'll enjoy more. Personally after having the 5.7 speed and power along with the versatility of a truck bed it would be really hard to go back to anything else.

 

[canyonrider]

Thanks again to everyone for the advice, this thread was helpful. Ended up with a 2009 Land Cruiser, 110K on the odometer and in really excellent condition. Two previous owners in TX but with complete service records showing dealer service every 5-10K since new. Water pump replaced at 65K but otherwise no other issues.

I waffled hard for a while between this and a 2013 Tundra Crewmax (base model 4WD with a cap) with 66K miles that was about $8K cheaper. Deciding factors were the much better interior feel and overall "solidity" of the LC compared to the Tundra, plus the third row seating and relatively small size compared to the Tundra/Sequoia (street parking at home, no garage). It feels very familiar inside to our 4th gen 4Runner, just way, way nicer in every way and with a bunch more power.

I have no doubt the Tundra would be a more stable tow rig, but the weight of our camper is low enough that I don't think towing with the LC will be an issue. I plan to use the same weight-distribution hitch I used with our 4Runner. LC also seemed like a slightly better choice for most of our other non-towing uses like ski days/weekends in the mountains and FS/BLM road exploring.

That said, I loved the cavernous interior size of the Crewmax and was surprised at how well it drove for such a big truck. If I won the lottery I would have both, but until then I *guess* I'll deal with the LC.

 

[MagicMtnDan]

Good luck with your 100 Series.

Speaking of the 200 Series... http://expeditionportal.com/why-the-land-cruiser-is-the-worst-selling-suv-in-america/

 

[cruiseroutfit]

Good luck with your 100 Series.

Speaking of the 200 Series... http://expeditionportal.com/why-the-land-cruiser-is-the-worst-selling-suv-in-america/

Meh. Sales in the US had far more to do with economy and fuel factors than the vehicle itself. Subsequently sales are up now that the economy has rebounded and fuel prices have remained low. Land Cruiser aficionado's have come to find the 200 every bit as good as the 100 (which ExPo also proclaimed as the best US overland vehicle) with in fact improvements in drivetrain and suspension over the 100.

A far better look with some historical perspective on US offerings:
http://expeditionportal.com/evolution-of-an-icon/

 

[Upland80]

Meh. Sales in the US had far more to do with economy and fuel factors than the vehicle itself. Subsequently sales are up now that the economy has rebounded and fuel prices have remained low. Land Cruiser aficionado's have come to find the 200 every bit as good as the 100 (which ExPo also proclaimed as the best US overland vehicle) with in fact improvements in drivetrain and suspension over the 100.

A far better look with some historical perspective on US offerings:
http://expeditionportal.com/evolution-of-an-icon/

Watched a couple of the Expo episodes you were involved in. Seems you have a good bit of knowledge with regard to the different series of Cruisers. I've always considered the 80 the pinnacle of "purpose built" offerings to the U.S. By purpose built, I'm not saying the 100/200 aren't, it's just that the 80 was the last to use proprietary engines, trannys, axles, T-cases, etc. to build the ultimate exploration vehicle. The newer Cruisers (100/200) share the Tundra platforms (not that that's a bad thing). However, how do the 100/200 genuinely compare to the 80 in more extreme offroad conditions? I've watched a few Australian videos that show 4x4 "fails" where 100s and Tacos were snapping CV joints on obstacles that 80s were walking through.

 

[mgeiger]

Just picked up a '14 200-Series: Have has it just a few days. Everything I loved about my 100... utility, quality, that "heavy" feel, plus tons of power and a great transmission. Wasn't sure about the KDSS (see below), but it works well on this vehicle.

Just sold my '00 100-Series: Best vehicle I have ever owned. Sold with 182k. Never a problem.

Wife has a '11 GX460: We are selling it soon. Great highway ride. KDSS way too soft for my taste. Back door is awkward. Never got used to the looks... 470 still looks better.

Son has a '10 4Runner: Perfect for him. have taken it on some decent trails in stock form. No problem. I considered a new TRD Pro before picking up my 200.

 

[Dalko43]

Watched a couple of the Expo episodes you were involved in. Seems you have a good bit of knowledge with regard to the different series of Cruisers. I've always considered the 80 the pinnacle of "purpose built" offerings to the U.S. By purpose built, I'm not saying the 100/200 aren't, it's just that the 80 was the last to use proprietary engines, trannys, axles, T-cases, etc. to build the ultimate exploration vehicle. The newer Cruisers (100/200) share the Tundra platforms (not that that's a bad thing). However, how do the 100/200 genuinely compare to the 80 in more extreme offroad conditions? I've watched a few Australian videos that show 4x4 "fails" where 100s and Tacos were snapping CV joints on obstacles that 80s were walking through.

I'll let Kurt address the feedback on how the LC200 handles itself offroad. But just to clear up some misconceptions, the LC200 is not based off of the same platform as the Tundra. The Sequoia and Tundra share the same platform/frame, though with slightly different suspension setup's (as discussed in previous posts) and different bodies. Both of them, as well as the Tacoma, are built in North America

The LC 200 has its own platform and frame and is built in Japan (I don't know if they're built elsewhere as well).

 

[cruiseroutfit]

Watched a couple of the Expo episodes you were involved in. Seems you have a good bit of knowledge with regard to the different series of Cruisers. I've always considered the 80 the pinnacle of "purpose built" offerings to the U.S. By purpose built, I'm not saying the 100/200 aren't, it's just that the 80 was the last to use proprietary engines, trannys, axles, T-cases, etc. to build the ultimate exploration vehicle. The newer Cruisers (100/200) share the Tundra platforms (not that that's a bad thing). However, how do the 100/200 genuinely compare to the 80 in more extreme offroad conditions? I've watched a few Australian videos that show 4x4 "fails" where 100s and Tacos were snapping CV joints on obstacles that 80s were walking through.

I'd be curious to see this videos. There are a variety of ways to use a Land Cruiser but for "overlanding" in the broadest sense, the 100 and furthermore the 200 are superior to the 80. Now if Fordyce, the Rubicon or Moab 4+ trails mix into your needs, the 80 will trump the 100/200's IFS but I've seen faaaaaaar more broken birfs on 80's than CV's on 100's. Sure they can break but it's hardly common.

While the 100/200 have similarities to the Tundra/Sequoia, they are in fact different. Different vendor sources for parts, different suspension, Japan vs. U.S. Made including the engine, different axles, etc. The engine similarities are welcome as it makes parts availability that much better here in NA.

When I started I the Land Cruiser realm, the 80 was a "soft-core" mall crawler that would never trump the 60 Series. I heard the same about the 100 and of course we are hearing the same about the 200. Evolution never comes easy but the Land Cruiser engineering mantra to "make it better than the last" holds completely true.

 

[toylandcruiser]

I'd be curious to see this videos. There are a variety of ways to use a Land Cruiser but for "overlanding" in the broadest sense, the 100 and furthermore the 200 are superior to the 80. Now if Fordyce, the Rubicon or Moab 4+ trails mix into your needs, the 80 will trump the 100/200's IFS but I've seen faaaaaaar more broken birfs on 80's than CV's on 100's. Sure they can break but it's hardly common.

While the 100/200 have similarities to the Tundra/Sequoia, they are in fact different. Different vendor sources for parts, different suspension, Japan vs. U.S. Made including the engine, different axles, etc. The engine similarities are welcome as it makes parts availability that much better here in NA.

When I started I the Land Cruiser realm, the 80 was a "soft-core" mall crawler that would never trump the 60 Series. I heard the same about the 100 and of course we are hearing the same about the 200. Evolution never comes easy but the Land Cruiser engineering mantra to "make it better than the last" holds completely true.

x2 its the same way with every vehicle. The previous generation is the last of the real whatever it is.

 

[toylandcruiser]

I'll let Kurt address the feedback on how the LC200 handles itself offroad. But just to clear up some misconceptions, the LC200 is not based off of the same platform as the Tundra. The Sequoia and Tundra share the same platform/frame, though with slightly different suspension setup's (as discussed in previous posts) and different bodies. Both of them, as well as the Tacoma, are built in North America

The LC 200 has its own platform and frame and is built in Japan (I don't know if they're built elsewhere as well).

the sequoia and land cruiser do not share the same chassis.