Honest LC250 review that goes into more technical details & why Toyota missed the mark on LC250

COSmurf · 2025-07-27T16:48:00-0500

I wish it had 2 more gallons… but my current tank range is around 350-375 miles which seems totally reasonable to me. I have rock sliders, roof rack, E load rated 285 width tires, skid plates. Would I prefer it consistently had 400 mile tank range? Yes, I would but Toyota also can’t account for and contemplate that people will modify their cars heavily and then have driving habits making the car get 15-17 MPGs putting the range in the toilet. I chose some MPGs reducing mods. You sort of can’t have it all ways… the same people saying “this isn’t a car you get for gas mileage, go drive a Prius” or “these MPG threads are stupid, it’s all about smiles per gallon” are usually the ones with driving habits getting them abysmal gas mileage and then they gripe about the limited range. If you’re saying “who cares, I have 35” mud terrains and a 3” lift and laugh at people who care about MPGs” then you probably shouldn’t complain about limited tank range since it’s a literal direct function of gas mileage. I’m not even saying all people should care about gas mileage… it’s your prerogative to drive your nice car as hard as you want. I get it, the LC scoots when you prod it hard. It’s fun. Please don’t change up your driving habits for me if that’s how you want to enjoy it. All I’m saying is then please don’t then complain about 200 mile tank range when there are many people getting 350-400 mile range in the same car because they actually do care about MPGs and the car is clearly capable of delivering.

Gasherbrum · 2025-07-27T17:31:05-0500

Exactly. I just got back from a trip, all highway and averaged 26 mpg … so about 470 miles per tank full. Pretty darn good from my perspective.

Granted, serious off roading is going to result in a lot less fuel efficiency. But what type of user do you think is in the fat part of the bell curve that Toyota is really marketing this vehicle to?