2025 Toyota 4Runner Review // Decisions, Decisions

[PDPete]

The 2025 Toyota 4Runner Trailhunter ($40,770 starting in the US, $54,200 starting in Canada )

Trailhunter model doesn't start at $40k, it starts at $68k.

Yeah, that's definitely misleading.

I've read/watched a number of reviews that compare the LC 250 to the 6th gen 4Runner, and it's often pointed out how similar they are but the 4Runner is a "better value" because it starts at a lower price.

While true in an over-simplified way, I think the more accurate way to look at it is that 4runner is available with considerably more trim level options, some of which are certainly less expensive than the base 1958 LC, but once you get into comparably equipped trim levels with the hybrid power train, the prices start to match up as expected.

Toyota can afford to offer the minimally equipped/optioned ~$40K SR5 version because the 4Runner brand doesn't demand the same minimal level of quality that "Land Cruiser" does (even a Prado), and because I'm sure they plan to sell a LOT more 4Runners in the US than Land Cruisers, so it makes more sense to offer a lot more trim level options across a broader range of prices.

I don't think you can go wrong with either one, but I also don't think that one necessarily represents a "better value" over the other either, it just comes down to what you, the buyer, wants.

 

[katekebo]

I went for the LC 1958 for the following reasons:

• I wanted full-time 4WD/AWD for safe handling on snow / ice covered highway.
• I don't care about leather seats, moonroofs, giant screens, etc. I prefer simple, basic interiors.

You can only get part-time 4WD in 4Runner unless you go for the top trims. RWD sucks on slippery roads.

 

[KSea]

I went for the LC 1958 for the following reasons:

• I wanted full-time 4WD/AWD for safe handling on snow / ice covered highway.
• I don't care about leather seats, moonroofs, giant screens, etc. I prefer simple, basic interiors.

You can only get part-time 4WD in 4Runner unless you go for the top trims. RWD sucks on slippery roads.

I have been so impressed with how the LC handles in the snow. It feels like a tank!! I thought my 4R was great but so happy with the LC so far.

 

[katekebo]

I have been so impressed with how the LC handles in the snow. It feels like a tank!! I thought my 4R was great but so happy with the LC so far.

Yes, full-time 4WD/AWD is game changer. I had several AWD vehicles, and a couple RWD ones. My BMW 5-series handled beautifully on dry roads, but a little bit of snow or even heavy rain was enough to make if a PITA to drive.

 

[KSea]

Yes, full-time 4WD/AWD is game changer. I had several AWD vehicles, and a couple RWD ones. My BMW 5-series handled beautifully on dry roads, but a little bit of snow or even heavy rain was enough to make if a PITA to drive.

I had an X5 before my 4R and hated it lol!

 

[No15]

You clearly know nothing about 911's when you refer to, and I quote you, "The IMS bearing grenades on every single 911" now this is being a true parakeet

We all know that the 981 is a better driving car anyway

 

[Dragoon]

Trailhunter model doesn't start at $40k, it starts at $68k.

You're right! I think they meant to say that the base 4Runner starts at $40k. I've removed it from the first post.

 

[skc406]

I went for the LC 1958 for the following reasons:

• I wanted full-time 4WD/AWD for safe handling on snow / ice covered highway.
• I don't care about leather seats, moonroofs, giant screens, etc. I prefer simple, basic interiors.

You can only get part-time 4WD in 4Runner unless you go for the top trims. RWD sucks on slippery roads.

There is even a difference between the full-time 4WD variants of the 4Runner vs the LC (and GX/LX) that doesn't seem to be mentioned very often.

With the LC you can switch to 4L without locking the center differential, which may be beneficial in certain use cases.

With the Limited/Platinum 4Runner the options are:

H4F - equivalent to the LC’s H4.
H4L - center differential locked.
L4L - low range with the center differential locked.

This may be of value to some who are cross-shopping.

 

[MJE]

Well I finally had a chance to check out the 4R & LC side by side at the auto show today. I’d really be torn on which way to go. While I expected both cars to feel much the same, just sitting in them, there’s 2 distinct differences:

1. The high tunnel in the LC seems to limit knee room compared to what the 4R offers. I was actually surprised how roomy the 4R felt in width. As good as most of the unibody crossovers (most of which all feel very similar to me) I checked out. Yes it’s obviously my legs are more spread out in the LC in these pics.
2. What I didn’t take a pic of, it’s clearly noticeable how much more headroom is in the LC. I purposefully wore my fav hat to test this in cars. The 4R seems to lack, though it’s not bad. The extra height of the LC is quite remarkable leading to a nice airy cabin with taller windows. Moreso than really any other car at the show.

Still leaning LC, particularly for the awesome tall greenhouse, but I was surprised I didn’t immediately gravitate to it over the 4R (or the other way around). Clearly very different cars & I suspect most people wouldn’t have gone back & forth between them a dozen times like I did.

 

[Dragoon]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts between the two!

Interestingly, Toyota put TRD wheels and aftermarket tires on the show LC instead of running the standard wheel and tire package.

 

[katekebo]

Any observations about the quality and solidness of the interior? Which one feels more "plasticky" and flimsy, and which one feels more solid? I'm not referring to "technology", fancy "features" and "bells and whistles", only to the overall feel of the materials and build quality.

 

[AlexGates]

I'm a 4R guy, I went with the LC because I like the interior better, and it is a fantastic around town vehicle with a serious lack of blind spots. I waited until we got some real photos of the 4R, I think the interior is hideous. I specifically bought my LC for around town, no way I was driving a Highlander/RAV4/Explorer.

+for the 4R probably wins in wind-noise and probably a slight edge on hwy mpg.

 

[Nuke]

Any observations about the quality and solidness of the interior? Which one feels more "plasticky" and flimsy, and which one feels more solid? I'm not referring to "technology", fancy "features" and "bells and whistles", only to the overall feel of the materials and build quality.

Would be interested if the doors feel more solid in the 4Runner, as several report a tinny feel to the LC doors. However, this could be relatively easily remedied. Would sure like to see a tutorial re removing the LC door panels.

 

[Jack_]

Because very few of these "reviewers" have actually owned any Land Cruiser...old or new. All they do is parakeet what the others have said. Namely, that every LC should have a V8. The V8 in the L200 was actually a dog that couldn't get out of its own way and roared like an old farm harvester.
People like the 4Runner because it is more affordable and people don't relate to Land Cruises as they are more expensive to buy and operate.

Think how many 911's get rave reviews when the have an improved model....none of them. They're no longer air cooled; they are getting bigger and bigger and don't handle well anymore; The IMS bearing grenades on every single 911 costing millions of dollars to repair. The list goes on and on.

People typically don't learn anything because they start yacking without education on the product they are trying to make a couple of bucks from another worn out YouTube video.

Yep...there is that. The ever condemning traditionalists.

 

[MJE]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts between the two!

Interestingly, Toyota put TRD wheels and aftermarket tires on the show LC instead of running the standard wheel and tire package.

I found that interesting too. I assume it was to get prospective buyers to like the look then pony up for additional accessories. I actually liked the TRD wheels, they might make a nice set to run winter tires on.

 

[MJE]

Any observations about the quality and solidness of the interior? Which one feels more "plasticky" and flimsy, and which one feels more solid? I'm not referring to "technology", fancy "features" and "bells and whistles", only to the overall feel of the materials and build quality.

Honestly they both felt Toyota quality to me. The guy working their booth (Toyota not a dealer) did tell me to expect nicer materials in the LC, but I didn’t find the 4R lacking in this regard. I know from my current car experience though it can be hard to take a car designed for a low price point, throw the option book at it, & hope that it somehow will feel like a more expensive car. It doesn’t.

The LandCruiser seems well designed for the LC standard. You can take a few thousand away & get a 1958 or add a few thousand & get a premium. But all feel designed for a price point that needs to be shared with a Lexus.

The 4R might have some more Taco shared parts & come in at a lower overall average price & design point. That might be seen mostly in the dash which has all those different trim plastics everywhere which isn’t for everyone but I liked it. Still, if the Limited 4R had a few more hard plastics here & there it was well hidden & still felt solid.

 

[MJE]

I'm a 4R guy, I went with the LC because I like the interior better, and it is a fantastic around town vehicle with a serious lack of blind spots. I waited until we got some real photos of the 4R, I think the interior is hideous. I specifically bought my LC for around town, no way I was driving a Highlander/RAV4/Explorer.

+for the 4R probably wins in wind-noise and probably a slight edge on hwy mpg.

That’s just it, I think the vast difference in look would be enough for a decisive win of one over the other for most buyers. I might be the small minority that sees the beauty in both.

I do love what you saw about the Land Cruiser though. Around town with fantastic visibility! The tall roofline really makes for a great seating position & all that glass does mean fewer blind spots.

I hear ya on the crossovers. I tried out everybody’s midsize today including the Highlander & Explorer. I had an Explorer & it probably drives the best of any of them, but as someone who doesn’t need 3 rows the LC should be a better fit. A friend has a Camry & his wife a Highlander, thinks that’s the way I need to go. I suppose it’s more efficient & should be a good quality package, but I kinda want a little more image in my vehicle & willing to pay for it with an LC or 4R.

 

[MJE]

Would be interested if the doors feel more solid in the 4Runner, as several report a tinny feel to the LC doors. However, this could be relatively easily remedied. Would sure like to see a tutorial re removing the LC door panels.

They might have? Maybe? I actually didn’t notice any issues with either as different as the doors are between the two. & so didn’t think about watching for any differences in doors while comparing them.

 

[LunarCruiser]

It's a tough one for sure, but the LC overall looks like a more appealing vehicle to me. I've had a Tacoma and 4runner in the past and was going to buy the Tacoma 4g, but I drove the LC and felt more gravitated towards the LC. I do love 4runners as well, but I thought that the price point of 1958 with a hybrid powertrain versus trying to get a Tacoma with a hybrid or a 4runner would be pretty tough as the 1958 is a good solid truck. My only complaint now is that cabin space overall is shrinking in the mid-size as I run out of cup space fast!

 

[Meteor1]

2. What I didn’t take a pic of, it’s clearly noticeable how much more headroom is in the LC. I purposefully wore my fav hat to test this in cars. The 4R seems to lack, though it’s not bad. The extra height of the LC is quite remarkable leading to a nice airy cabin with taller windows. Moreso than really any other car at the show.

This was one of the reasons I chose the LC over the Tacoma, which I had waited 2 years for. I little bit of the Goldie Lock's syndrome. We test drove the Hybrid Tundra, Tacoma and LC. Although we both loved the Tundra it was too big for an everyday driver. The Tacoma is a great truck but seriously lacks interior space. It felt confined in both front and back seats. The LC has great interior space, even sitting high/forward in the front seat (I've got short legs) I didn't feel like I was going to hit my head on the ceiling when I hit a bump. Plus, the back seats recline slightly. We both love the look, that's what drew my wife's attention to it in the first place.