Yep. This pretty much sums it up right here. In virtually every way, the LC is better; and of course it is. The price differentiation reflects this. The only advantages the 4runner has is the roll down rear window, and in the case of non-hybrid versions, a little more storage space in the trunk. Of course the storage space you gain comes at the expense of SIGNIFICANT hp and torque.
4Runner vs LC250
- Thread starter jbe2289
- Start date
I will admit that I miss the roll down window of my '97 only 2 times since owning my LC at this point. It would have been neat if that was an LC alternative option, but seeing the videos of the sillyness with the window and the automatic lift gate I actually really appreciate the simple window flip on the LC much more than the roll down for quick access.
Who needs storage space when you can get more HP and torque equaling to more smiles per ride, storage is overrated any who, just tie it to the roof and give the strap a slap and say that will hold haha
. Gotta go fast in our LC down our dirt roads.
I had three vehicles so far with automatic liftgate. The reality is that the struts in automatic liftgate WILL fail, it's not "if" but "when". Some are better made than other, but they are "wear parts" - good ones will last 10+ years, many fail around the 5-7 year mark or even earlier. Simple gas struts also fail after several years, but are much cheaper and easier to replace. No need to pull door trim or roof headliner.
BTW, same with sun- and moonroofs. They also have finite life and are a real PITA to repair. A broken motor, corroded cable or rail require pulling down the headliner, and this is a very costly repair. Needless to say that they love to fail while open at the precise moment when it starts to rain (like it did my BMW lol).
Fully agree, everything has a wear and tear that will require replacement. My '97s lift door struts surpingly lasted and I was the 3rd owner of the vehicle haha. However, colder weather the lift door would sometime close a little even when lifted all the way up which as you said nothing lasts forever. I was EXTREMELY lucky the moon roof never had an issue and I was able to use that full function. I truly feared it breaking and it getting stuck open or something, but ~28 years no issues just made sure to always double check the drain holes.
I think overall some of the more minor parts like the back glass struts don't look too hard to replace. Not sure about the the automatic power lift ones, but I hope they last for a good long while, but I am sure at some point everything needs maintenance, repair or replacement. I'm curious to see the longevity of the LC, especially mine I really hope to own and use it for a long time with minimal to no issues is my goal.
I still gave good headroom with the LC LC with moonroof. It's downright spacious.
We did the same thing. I had money down on the TRD Pro, I owned a 5th gen trail edition for many years and also drove a 6th gen ORP. For me the Land Cruiser is the best fit and I am very happy with my purchase.
I was going to say that, comparing a base model LC 1958 to an off-road PREMIUM
I think it is safe to say, the reason there is and was always a 4runner and Land Cruiser, because most people do not cross shop the two. You either want a 4runner or a Land Cruiser and Toyota knows that. I would not mind having both the 4runner and the Land Cruiser at the same time for a while to see which one I enjoy more
OP
OP
- Thread starter
- #49
But that was when they were different vehicles. The 4R was always the world market LC Prado adjusted for the North American market. The LC250 is the world market Prado and the 4R is the North American market specific Prado. So now it is two versions of the same vehicle, one world market and one North American market specific. It is nice to have a choice, but it is a strange one for Toyota. In interviews with the Japenese engineers, it is said that Toyota had no intention of making a 4R for a 6th gen, they actually wanted to kill off the 5th gen a couple years ago. The plan was to only sell the world market LC250, but the North American dealer network pushback was really strong so they kept the 4R alive too. I assume that Toyota needs to sell way more 6th gen 4R in the US to make up for needing to design it. If it would have been only the LC250 Toyota probably would have marketed the LC differently and likely would have made more options available too.I think it is safe to say, the reason there is and was always a 4runner and Land Cruiser, because most people do not cross shop the two. You either want a 4runner or a Land Cruiser and Toyota knows that. I would not mind having both the 4runner and the Land Cruiser at the same time for a while to see which one I enjoy more
Last edited:
OP
OP
- Thread starter
- #50
What's the problem?? The 1958 in many respects is better equipped than the 4R OR Premium. Every model of the LC250 is mechanically the same, with the same insulation and glass. The only difference in models is seating material, a couple soft touch points, screen sizes and speakers. Sure there's an available stabilizer bar disconnect, but that's meaningless in any on-road and all but the most extreme off-road comparisons.I was going to say that, comparing a base model LC 1958 to an off-road PREMIUM
Stabilizer disconnect greatly improves ride quality on uneven roads as well. I was driving through a forest service road that was in pretty bad shape (not washboard, but close). Having sway at disconnected significantly reduces road vibrations.
The limitation of course is that it automatically connects if you go above 20 MPH.
All of a sudden, the 4Runners have started appearing in my area. They are nice looking, and I could see Toyota going on a similar long-term production run as with the 5th Gen. I still prefer the LC, and I'll be interested to see the sales numbers and demographics for the LC vs 4R sales. I'm guessing the 4R skews younger but that's just a guess.
Which is a somewhat unrelated peeve of mine when it comes to Toyota... I don't theoretically object to having a lot of trim levels and a multitude of optional features, that should be a good thing...but since Toyota doesn't have any kind of system for ordering the exact vehicle you want and rely only on an allotment system, it can be quite frustrating trying to shop for something specific...and most of the time you wind up paying for options you didn't necessary want or settling for something that's not quite what you were looking for...or a different color, etc.
It was actually quite refreshing when I was shopping for the Land Cruiser... 2 trim levels, one possible "premium package", and a fairly limited array of color options. Once I researched online exactly what I wanted, it was easy to find it....no games, no waitlists, no sales pitches for vehicles that were "pretty close" to what I wanted. Granted, what I wanted was a black 1958, so yeah, that should have been pretty easy...but even when trying to get what should be the most common configurations of other Toyotas I've owned in the past, that wasn't necessarily the case. (Having said that, I don't think I've seen a trail dust LC in person yet...so that may have been a bit of challenge in my area, but still)
The new 4R was next to me at the light, she was all black. I have to say, she was dead sexy. Much prettier in person. The LC for me because of the extra head room and the lower number of units on the road.
The reason for the 4Runner is cultural differences between US consumers and most of the world. The majority of world consumer buy cars based on a rational evaluation of what they need, what the vehicle offers and how much they can afford. Consequently, the "global" LC is well-rounded vehicle that can do many things well, without necessarily excelling in one specific area:
- It can be a reasonably comfortable and practical family SUV
- It is strong off-road for those who need this capability due to their work or location/geography or just enjoy going off-the-beaten-path
- It can tow a trailer
- It has a nice design and is visually attractive
- It is expected to be reliable and durable, with good resale value and low maintenance and repair costs, so the actual cost-to-own per year is quite reasonable even if initial purchase price is quite steep.
The 4Runner is a much more "focused" vehicle that has a strong off-road appeal, but falls short (compared to the LC) on the other criteria. Kind of like Jeep Wrangler or Ford Bronco. They are very much off-road oriented, but few would consider them to be a practical "family haulers".
US consumers are unique in the sense that they usually have more than one vehicle, and they are very emotional (buy based on what they want vs. what they actually need). 70-80% of people who buy a large pickup truck don't actually need one. They buy one because they want the "macho" look (and compensation for you-already-know-what). This unique US culture has led to a number of vehicles that make absolutely no sense, but people bought them purely because of the image - Plymouth Prowler, Chevrolet SSR, ... This also leads to crazy proliferation of trims and options that characterizes US-market vehicles - US consumers are willing to pay for things they will probably never use, but can brag about to their friend ("my d*ck is bigger than your d*ck" mentality).
So it's easy to understand why the logical Japanese engineers had initially hard time envisioning why Toyota would need a 4Runner if they already had the LC.
I saw a really nicely built our 4Runner today at CaTuned in NorCal, gorgeous blue, top rate suspension, some goodies here and there, nicely done.
A toy, not anything classy like the Cruisers.
So it depends what you want. Get what you want.
You want it, you got it, Toyota.
A toy, not anything classy like the Cruisers.
So it depends what you want. Get what you want.
You want it, you got it, Toyota.
The 4Runner was an answer to low US Land Cruiser sales in the 1980s and has been very successful ever since at a lower price point with fewer features that most US buyers don’t want to pay for. The 5th generation 4Runner also easily outsold the FJ Cruiser, which continued to be sold in other markets after it was discontinued in the US.
I was chatting with a neighbor who has a Gen 4 or 5 4Runner. I am a little surprised both models still exist with so much overlap. I looked at potentially trading for a (cheaper) 4Runner but for a non-hybrid with the trailer brake controller: I think I was looking at the Limited and was near $60k. My argument to help him decide was:
At the lower end trims, the 4Runner is stronger as a more utilitarian option. As you start to head up the 4Runner trims, the gap for a comparable Land Cruiser gets smaller. At the Platinum level A Land Cruiser with the Premium Package is only a couple thousand more and if you can justify a 4Runner Platinum that amount should not be a deal breaker.
Hybrid - IF it is a MUST have or MUST NOT have ; that really drives the decision. I say this because a 4Runner with the Hybrid starts to compete with a Land Cruiser. Lower trims with the turbo non-hybrid have enough price separation to make a case from the Land Cruiser.
IMO I really like the hybrid. I would like a bigger electric motor / battery / potential partial plug in EV ; but that is another discussion. What I REALLY like with the hybrid is that in the morning while the oil warms up; the Land Cruiser prioritizes the electric motor for the first minute or so when under load.
The next key factor I argued was the interior; specifically the seats and infotainment. For me personally; I do not want vinyl seats but the larger screen was a must have. For the Land Cruiser that means Premium Package. For a 4Runner; I think it would be a Limited.
IF my Land Cruiser was to be totaled; I might consider the 4Runner being around $5k less. But there is no justified case to trade it in. And even IF was was having to shop for a car, some of the styling I prefer on the Land Cruiser. Not sure about $5k worth, but the smaller that gap between what you want in a 4Runner and Land Cruiser is; the more of a case to spend a little more for the Land Cruiser.
I saw my first 6th Gen 4Runner on my way to work today. It was an SR5 in grey. I thought it looked very nice and would own one with no problem. I think the TRD off-Road is probably the best value to they money in the line up. Even the limited showed good competency off road. I cross shopped but decided on the LC because the top trims were too close in price to the LC. Might as well spend an extra 2-3K and have everything the 4Runner has and get full time 4wd. If the TRD off-Road was like 45k, it would have been a very close one for me.
