LR5 Release Updates?

[Finlayforprez]

My feelings exactly. We looked at a new Land Cruiser as a "replacement" for our LR4. We have always like Land Cruisers and we have considered one a couple of times. But every time I drive one and spend time with one I always leave with the feeling that they are way overpriced. Even in the '15, which has more niceties and a much nicer interior than the previous models, I still feel that they are not worth the price. I mean they drive ok, the interior is ok, and I am a fan of the exterior. But overall they definitely do not drive like an $80k+ vehicle should and they are not equipped like one either. Our 2010 LR4 Lux had a better ride, and a nicer, and higher quality interior and I think it would be superior off road. The LC's third row seats are terrible and they take up a lot of cargo space even when folded.

I always feel the same way!!! I have looked at Land Cruisers off and on over the last year and there are things I love, but overall, it just feels so different to me.

 

[jwest]

... I think it would be superior off road.

Come on man! I love my lr3 too and also like the v8 lr4, but there are a number of reasons that the Land Cruiser is used for so many serious applications around the world, not the disco 3 or 4.

Don't you get bored drinking the same cool-aid too long ?

ZERO modifications are needed on a LC for 32" tires and unless the engine dies, you're basically not getting stuck in the boonies due to bizarre modules, height sensors, or other gizmos that like to put our modern NAS Land Rovers into "limp" mode or on the bump stops.

A simple steel spring and damper kit allows a LC to fit 33" tires easily, and on factory 17" wheels if you like, opening up all the tires you can think of not to mention having a higher tow rating and payload capacity because it's related to upgraded springs if heavy cargo is needed, like full expedition build or armoring.

Even the LX hydraulic height system is at least twice as reliable and won't even strand you on huge tires like an air suspension because it still has steel springs doing most of the work.

Honestly, I'd love an LR4 body onto a Land Cruiser chassis (this would still be the same unique hybrid body-frame as the lr4) and Range Rover seats inside

We've all gotten so used to the plush air ride, me included! I'd say the LX is half way between the LC coils and Land Rover air struts for the ride quality but the handling is actually pretty nice in the LX.

Another thing many of you seem to forget is that with ours, we're stuck with it basically unless you want a crappy spring conversion that just isn't like the incredible high end dampers available for the Land Cruiser.

I've ridden in a 2013 LC with aftermarket kit, not even "high end", and it was so much better than stock. The thing is, you can spend just a few $k on LC mods and totally transform it while we blow many $k's just to get a proper tire and to protect it's delicate underside.

There are trade offs but overall the LC is a "better" vehicle even if it isn't as "fun" to use.

 

[Lone Star landy]

Come on man! I love my lr3 too and also like the v8 lr4, but there are a number of reasons that the Land Cruiser is used for so many serious applications around the world, not the disco 3 or 4.

Don't you get bored drinking the same cool-aid too long ?

ZERO modifications are needed on a LC for 32" tires and unless the engine dies, you're basically not getting stuck in the boonies due to bizarre modules, height sensors, or other gizmos that like to put our modern NAS Land Rovers into "limp" mode or on the bump stops.

A simple steel spring and damper kit allows a LC to fit 33" tires easily, and on factory 17" wheels if you like, opening up all the tires you can think of not to mention having a higher tow rating and payload capacity because it's related to upgraded springs if heavy cargo is needed, like full expedition build or armoring.

Even the LX hydraulic height system is at least twice as reliable and won't even strand you on huge tires like an air suspension because it still has steel springs doing most of the work.

Honestly, I'd love an LR4 body onto a Land Cruiser chassis (this would still be the same unique hybrid body-frame as the lr4) and Range Rover seats inside

We've all gotten so used to the plush air ride, me included! I'd say the LX is half way between the LC coils and Land Rover air struts for the ride quality but the handling is actually pretty nice in the LX.

Another thing many of you seem to forget is that with ours, we're stuck with it basically unless you want a crappy spring conversion that just isn't like the incredible high end dampers available for the Land Cruiser.

I've ridden in a 2013 LC with aftermarket kit, not even "high end", and it was so much better than stock. The thing is, you can spend just a few $k on LC mods and totally transform it while we blow many $k's just to get a proper tire and to protect it's delicate underside.

There are trade offs but overall the LC is a "better" vehicle even if it isn't as "fun" to use.

I was referring to a stock LC vs a stock LR4. I believe without a doubt that the LR4 is superior off-road and superior in every other way besides reliability/dependability.

The LC is a well built and well engineered vehicle for sure. I am a fan of Toyota trucks/SUVs, I own a '13 4Runner, '11 Tacoma and a '07 Tacoma. All of them are in great shape and have not had any real problems, the '07 has 120k miles, has had zero issues and runs/drives like new.

The point I was making is that you can get a fully loaded LR4 for $10k-$15k less than an LC and in my opinion with the LR4 you get a far nicer/better vehicle in almost every regard. Comparatively speaking the LC clearly loses.

You mention how often the LC is used in rough places around the world, and it definitely is. But I don't buy my primary SUV for overlanding across Africa, or any ********* off-roading. I just want a well built, luxurious, good looking and capable vehicle that will comfortably carry 5 people over long distances. For my purposes the LC just doesn't deliver.

And about me being a Land Rover fanboy who drinks the cool-aid lol; I don't even own an LR any more. I currently have 3 Toyota's, a Lexus, a Mercedes, and a Ford Super Duty. We really liked our LR4, but as you can see we didn't get another one. So I don't think that I've drank too much cool-aid

 

[jwest]

I was referring to a stock LC vs a stock LR4. I believe without a doubt that the LR4 is superior off-road and superior in every other way besides reliability/dependability.

Stock vs Stock, they're really about the same. Not sure why you think otherwise. Center locker and crawl on the LC work great like the terrain system on LR. The sway bars loosen up off road on the LC for articulation.

The point I was making is that you can get a fully loaded LR4 for $10k-$15k less than an LC and in my opinion with the LR4 you get a far nicer/better vehicle in almost every regard. Comparatively speaking the LC clearly loses.

That is incorrect. New loaded LR4 is easily $74k but there is no "standard" expected discount. Even 5% puts it still at $70k.

Land Cruiser has no options to confuse the price comparison but they sell all the time for roughly $72k +/- $1k. That equalizes the up front cost.

Next, the LC actually costs less over time and returns more in resale. This is based off several people I know with newer LC and my own research over 2 years now.

For 100k+ ownership, the LC really shines because you wouldn't bother with an expensive extended warranty like every Land Rover should have out to 100k unless you really want to gamble.

The fuel cost over 100k is $3500 less in favor of the LC due to using regular vs premium. For me, that's over just 3-4 years time frame unless split with another vehicle so I got 7.5 years over 100,000 miles.

 

[elrocko]

I find it amusing that on Toyota's Land Cruiser home page they include a table comparing the LC to exactly one other vehicle - the LX570. The LC wins!

 

[jwest]

I find it amusing that on Toyota's Land Cruiser home page they include a table comparing the LC to exactly one other vehicle - the LX570. The LC wins!

that is funny

What we need is an end of production LR4 Autobiography edition

 

[Lone Star landy]

Stock vs Stock, they're really about the same. Not sure why you think otherwise. Center locker and crawl on the LC work great like the terrain system on LR. The sway bars loosen up off road on the LC for articulation.

That is incorrect. New loaded LR4 is easily $74k but there is no "standard" expected discount. Even 5% puts it still at $70k.

Land Cruiser has no options to confuse the price comparison but they sell all the time for roughly $72k +/- $1k. That equalizes the up front cost.

Here is why I think otherwise: Greater ground clearance, fully independent suspension, four corner air suspension, locking center diff, locking rear diff, better approach angle, better break over angle and better departure angle.

Secondly, I don't thinks it's realistic to use a "blanket" discount for the LC to compare price and then say that the discount makes the LC cost the same amount as the LR4. Discount depends so much on dealer and area and is quite variable.

I also highly doubt that $84k Land Cruisers are selling for $72k "all the time" as you say, and I guarantee you they don't give that kind of discount in my area. Besides, even if they did sell for $72k they would still be $10k overpriced.

I compare vehicle prices using rough MSRP. Thus a $70k-$74k loaded LR4 is roughly $10k less than an LC. IMHO the Land Cruiser should MSRP in the low to mid $60's.

Lastly, why in the hell don't you own a Land Cruiser?

 

[jwest]

Secondly, I don't thinks it's realistic to use a "blanket" discount for the LC to compare price and then say that the discount makes the LC cost the same amount as the LR4. Discount depends so much on dealer and area and is quite variable.

I also highly doubt that $84k Land Cruisers are selling for $72k "all the time" as you say, and I guarantee you they don't give that kind of discount in my area. Besides, even if they did sell for $72k they would still be $10k overpriced.

I compare vehicle prices using rough MSRP. Thus a $70k-$74k loaded LR4 is roughly $10k less than an LC. IMHO the Land Cruiser should MSRP in the low to mid $60's.

Lastly, why in the hell don't you own a Land Cruiser?

Firstly, because a Land Rover is more fun, which is what I said in the first place.

So if you think the LR4 is such a great value, why doesn't it have ventilated seats or better suspension components ? There's a reason why so many threads exist on "bushings" "control arms" "air compressors" in addition to low grade driveline parts. These issues simply do not exist on LC like LR.

Why is a "blanket" discount not fair when it's pretty much the norm. Paying full price for a LC is about as silly as expecting common $10k off a LR. Does it happen, sure, but the truth is the truth. Not my concern if someone is silly enough to just pay the msrp when a quick search will show many dealers advertising right up front a $71-75k price. For example, even autotrader right now shows 58 of 244 new 2015 LC for sale at $75 or lower. Only a few are demos. That is what I'd call a "blanket discount".

It is simply not the case with an LR4. There will be the random negotiation from $72 down to mid 60's, not $62k.

Aside from that, the LC is the long term winner for $ and more than makes up for any up front higher price. You seem to keep bumping up your pricing, LC is not $84k There are no factory options for the US market.

As far as I'm concerned, the LR4 is at least $10k overpriced for what it provides the buyer when you compare the updates in other similarly priced 4x4 suvs.

....In Texas.... 11 shown under $75k only 200 miles from Dallas.

Here is why I think otherwise: Greater ground clearance, fully independent suspension, four corner air suspension, locking center diff, locking rear diff, better approach angle, better break over angle and better departure angle.

Oh come on. That statement is for another thread entirely and has definitely been debated endlessly.

So you want to simply say that on factory delivered street tires, the LR4 is SO much more capable off road? Really? For how long...1 hour, 1 day for 24 hours using the hell out of the air compressor, 1 year every day, exactly how do you mean? I ask because if it's 100% factory stock, then you can't bring along an IIDtool.

Want to only allow equal mods? Sure, the LC will have it's choice of many 18"x33" serious tires and the LR4 will have a 20" tire...

Want to allow a "lift" for the lr4? Sure, the LC will then be running 35" tires on 17 or 18" wheels....

Want to allow a front locker on the lr4, then the LC will get both front and rear as well.

You still don't get to bring along the IIDtool though.... LC doesn't need such things.

I don't make this argument because I need to have a LC as you suggest. I make it because LR almost got it right with the LR4 but is going to head down the road of pure sales and away from what a Land Rover was meant to be in the first place. I'm just ******.

 

[Lone Star landy]

You seem to keep bumping up your pricing, LC is not $84k

It's not?? http://http://donmcgilltoyota.com/vehicle-details/houston-texas/2015-toyota-land-cruiser-base-77079-jtmhy7aj7f4032327

As far as I'm concerned, the LR4 is at least $10k overpriced for what it provides the buyer when you compare the updates in other similarly priced 4x4 suvs.

Agree to disagree.

....In Texas.... 11 shown under $75k only 200 miles from Dallas

That's odd. None under $81k within 100 miles of Houston.

Oh come on. That statement is for another thread entirely and has definitely been debated endlessly.

So you want to simply say that on factory delivered street tires, the LR4 is SO much more capable off road? Really? For how long...1 hour, 1 day for 24 hours using the hell out of the air compressor, 1 year every day, exactly how do you mean? I ask because if it's 100% factory stock, then you can't bring along an IIDtool.

Want to only allow equal mods? Sure, the LC will have it's choice of many 18"x33" serious tires and the LR4 will have a 20" tire...

Want to allow a "lift" for the lr4? Sure, the LC will then be running 35" tires on 17 or 18" wheels....

Want to allow a front locker on the lr4, then the LC will get both front and rear as well.

You still don't get to bring along the IIDtool though.... LC doesn't need such things.

I was just stating the facts and specs, IMO they are superior. You only mention duration of off-roading because that is the only advantage the LC has over the LR, dependability/reliability. Besides, I had already noted that. If I had to choose one vehicle to solely off road in for a year as you say (which is outrageously unrealistic) I would choose the LC. But that does not mean it is a better off roader and it is definitely not a better all-rounder.

Once again, I compare stock to stock. No mods.

The LR does not need the IIDtool to be superior.

I make it because LR almost got it right with the LR4 but is going to head down the road of pure sales and away from what a Land Rover was meant to be in the first place. I'm just ******.

Now this...I agree with. It is unfortunate.

 

[danrhiggins]

LOL. I must admit that I find these debates entertaining. ;-). The reality for me is that I'll worry about all this when my '14 LR4 dies. If I don't die first we'll see what's on the menu. But I do get a kick out of the "passionate" debates.