Differences between 1958 and LC Grade

Q

qberg

Well-known member
đź“› Founding Member
Dec 20, 2023
179
Media
9
309
USA
I was looking at two of them side by side at the dealership today. I find the 1958 charming, but I've noticed quite a lot of differences that would maybe push me to a non premium LC Grade.

I think we all know about the interior differences, but the exterior differences are bigger than I first thought. We knew the unpainted front bumper panels, but I didn't notice the flares until now. In this photo you can see that the fender flares are wider on the LC grade, the air deflector at the trailing edge of the fender flare is different, and the mud guars are wider. It is very subtle, but maybe an easy upgrade for 1958 owners that upgrade to less offset wheels without getting excessive poke.

The stock wheel offset difference is less pronounced on the 1958 due to the smaller flare, IMO.

Looks like this was sorta covered in this thread: OEM fender flares 1958 VS 1st E/LCLC
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5915.jpeg
    IMG_5915.jpeg
    398 KB · Views: 250
It makes one wonder where else corners may have been cut? Sound deadening? Amazingly, the 1958 has tri-zone HVAC, which also amazingly, was omitted in the GX Overtrail variants.
 
Nuke said:
It makes one wonder where else corners may have been cut? Sound deadening? Amazingly, the 1958 has tri-zone HVAC, which also amazingly, was omitted in the GX Overtrail variants.
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t call it cutting corners. It costs a shitload more to spec a completely redundant set of flares than to just put the same flares on all. My guess is that it helps fuel economy just like the 245 section tires on the 1958. If those things are worth 1 mpg on the official testing, they can report the entire line as 23mpg or whatever it is rated rather than 22mpg. That matters when it comes to CAFE.
 
qberg said:
I wouldn’t call it cutting corners. It costs a shitload more to spec a completely redundant set of flares than to just put the same flares on all. My guess is that it helps fuel economy just like the 245 section tires on the 1958. If those things are worth 1 mpg on the official testing, they can report the entire line as 23mpg or whatever it is rated rather than 22mpg. That matters when it comes to CAFE.
Click to expand...
This alludes to my suspicion of why they recommend, but do not demand, premium fuel, to have an increased 1 MPG per the feds.
 
Nuke said:
This alludes to my suspicion of why they recommend, but do not demand, premium fuel, to have an increased 1 MPG per the feds.
Click to expand...
I thought that 87 octane and 91 octane fuel both have the same potential energy (ability to do work such as move a vehicle). One just has additional refinement that “guarantees” the combustion will act in a more predictable way.
 
TLC said:
I thought that 87 octane and 91 octane fuel both have the same potential energy (ability to do work such as move a vehicle). One just has additional refinement that “guarantees” the combustion will act in a more predictable way.
Click to expand...
Hopefully someone can chime in, and explain. It was my rudimentary understanding that the higher the octane, the slower the burning of the fuel, hence no "detonation" (knocking). Detonation will destroy pistons, and probably damage other components. Modern engines employ knock sensors, retarding the timing, so will using 87 octane actually result in damage, or just decreased economy?
 
Nuke said:
Hopefully someone can chime in, and explain. It was my rudimentary understanding that the higher the octane, the slower the burning of the fuel, hence no "detonation" (knocking). Detonation will destroy pistons, and probably damage other components. Modern engines employ knock sensors, retarding the timing, so will using 87 octane actually result in damage, or just decreased economy?
Click to expand...
I will say that the tire size and fender flare width make sense as to why they would improve gas mileage.
A smaller section width on the tire and smaller diameter means smaller contact patch on the road, less friction.
The flares would cause more wind resistance (prob nominal tho)
 
TLC said:
I thought that 87 octane and 91 octane fuel both have the same potential energy (ability to do work such as move a vehicle). One just has additional refinement that “guarantees” the combustion will act in a more predictable way.
Click to expand...
Potential energy is the same, but there is loss of efficiency turning the energy in the fuel into actual motion. That's all impacted by valve timing and spark timing, both of which are variable based on environmental and fuel conditions. If the knock resistance is better, the ECU can be more aggressive with various parameters which leads to making the same power with less fuel.

The auto industry is actually lobbying to go away from regular and midgrade as a whole because higher octane fuel gives them more latitude for meeting fuel economy regulations. It would probably not cost anything more, either, because instead of fuel manufacturers having multiple grades, they can consolidate.

 
qberg said:
Potential energy is the same, but there is loss of efficiency turning the energy in the fuel into actual motion. That's all impacted by valve timing and spark timing, both of which are variable based on environmental and fuel conditions. If the knock resistance is better, the ECU can be more aggressive with various parameters which leads to making the same power with less fuel.

The auto industry is actually lobbying to go away from regular and midgrade as a whole because higher octane fuel gives them more latitude for meeting fuel economy regulations. It would probably not cost anything more, either, because instead of fuel manufacturers having multiple grades, they can consolidate.

Click to expand...
This is interesting. I thought the yield of premium octane fuel per barrel of crude is lower than that of regular.
If this law goes through, wouldn’t it have the effect of using more crude oil and therefore driving up prices?
 
TLC said:
This is interesting. I thought the yield of premium octane fuel per barrel of crude is lower than that of regular.
If this law goes through, wouldn’t it have the effect of using more crude oil and therefore driving up prices?
Click to expand...
Depends on the percentages. If they can improve fuel efficiency by 10% by tuning everything for 93 or 94 and the yield difference is only 1%, it's a win. If yield drops by 5% and the efficiency improvement is only 3%, then it wouldn't be worth it. I don't work in that industry, so I can't hazard a guess at the percentages.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TLC
Call me crazy, but i dont see a difference in fender flares. I only see a difference in mud flap size which is probably due to the 1958 getting smaller tires??? Can anyone post an official link from Toyota which states the body structures are different? That seems really stupid to tool up for diff bodies in a factory for a platform like this.
 
trek805 said:
Call me crazy, but i dont see a difference in fender flares. I only see a difference in mud flap size which is probably due to the 1958 getting smaller tires??? Can anyone post an official link from Toyota which states the body structures are different? That seems really stupid to tool up for diff bodies in a factory for a platform like this.
Click to expand...

I was surprised too, but I have a 1958 and indeed the black plastic trim on the fenders is flush, where the other trims it sticks out a bit (1/2in ?). I parked next to an LC trim in town and compared. Plus someone on the IH8MUD posted the upper trim part numbers, but you’d have to search that. I’d take any more fender I could get because my tires poke a bit, and fling mud, but of course the parts are ridiculously expensive.
 
Here’s the link to the models/features comparison on the Toyota website:

www.toyota.com

2024 Toyota Land Cruiser Specifications | Toyota.com

Browse the 2024 ToyotaLand Cruiser specifications on the official Toyota website and discover the dynamic energy it brings to any adventure.
www.toyota.com www.toyota.com

Pretty useful in this case. A few of the differences between 1958 and LC that jumped out at me about the 1958, other than what’s already been mentioned:

No running boards
Manual lift on the rear hatch
No roof rails
Smaller digital display
No wireless phone charging
No seat memory settings
No stabilizer disconnect

The 1958 is just a more basic version of the vehicle, as they positioned it to be. Aside from the stabilizer, there’s actually not much absent related to performance, and unlike in the past the powertrain is the same on the base model as on the others.
 
Ok, I see now. Duh. My bad. The plastic flares are bigger due to tire size. I was thinking the sheet metal was different. Got it!!
 
qberg said:
Potential energy is the same, but there is loss of efficiency turning the energy in the fuel into actual motion. That's all impacted by valve timing and spark timing, both of which are variable based on environmental and fuel conditions. If the knock resistance is better, the ECU can be more aggressive with various parameters which leads to making the same power with less fuel.

The auto industry is actually lobbying to go away from regular and midgrade as a whole because higher octane fuel gives them more latitude for meeting fuel economy regulations. It would probably not cost anything more, either, because instead of fuel manufacturers having multiple grades, they can consolidate.

Click to expand...
To add a bit more detail. It is not the higher octane fuel that is more efficient, but the fact that a higher compression engine is more efficient. Both types of fuels will have equal efficiency if the engine is designed to be low compression, or if the timing is retarded by ECU to reduce compression.

To be able to effectively run high compression, the engine needs higher octane fuel, and by doing so it achieves higher thermal efficiency (ability to convert heat from the burning fuel to kinetic energy). So the engine generates more kinetic energy from the same amount of fuel, or in real world, uses less fuel for same amount of kinetic energy. This is where the belief that higher octane fuel generate less least comes from. It does not generate less heat, it is that one would need less fuel to generate same amount of kinetic energy so less fuel is burned and less heat forms. This is, for example, why some manufacturers recommend using higher octane fuel in their turbo trucks (like ford) during towing, since makes a significant difference in heat generation under heavy load.
 
TumaloCruzer said:
I was surprised too, but I have a 1958 and indeed the black plastic trim on the fenders is flush, where the other trims it sticks out a bit (1/2in ?). I parked next to an LC trim in town and compared. Plus someone on the IH8MUD posted the upper trim part numbers, but you’d have to search that. I’d take any more fender I could get because my tires poke a bit, and fling mud, but of course the parts are ridiculously expensive.
Click to expand...
Hi,

Do you remember which thread the part#'s are posted in? I've been searching that forum for it to no avail. Thanks!

JT
 
TumaloCruzer said:
I was surprised too, but I have a 1958 and indeed the black plastic trim on the fenders is flush, where the other trims it sticks out a bit (1/2in ?). I parked next to an LC trim in town and compared. Plus someone on the IH8MUD posted the upper trim part numbers, but you’d have to search that. I’d take any more fender I could get because my tires poke a bit, and fling mud, but of course the parts are ridiculously expensive.
Click to expand...
This is really not a new thing. My old 100 series had some flare built into the metal fender but did not have the tacked-on additional flare of other 100’s that was a port-installed option. In a sense, we have the same thing continued now. Both the 1958 and LC have the same flare within the metal fender but the LC grade has the added flare in black plastic. If you need or want that, pick that grade. Personally, I like the cleaner look of the 1958
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

yoadriantrd
OEM fender flares 1958 VS 1st E/LCLC
Replies
1
Views
1K
Nuke
Nuke
S
Land Cruiser - On-road driving experience
Replies
10
Views
2K
EOD Guy
EOD Guy
yoadriantrd
35s do in fact "FIT" on stock height suspension
Replies
18
Views
4K
Stage7
Stage7
A
1958 folks.. regrets?
2 3
Replies
49
Views
3K
Newbee1958
N
thehardway
17" SCS F5 wheels installed
2
Replies
23
Views
5K
mkg
mkg

Latest Discussions

Back
Top