After 2+ weeks of ownership, I finally had the opportunity on 9/20/24 to get my LCP offroad and generally compare the ride and offroad systems to the outgoing 4Runner, which I drove for 9 years. If I were a hyperbolic YouTuber I’d title this thread “First LandCruiser up Santa Fe Peak!”, give myself a little trophy, and include a ridiculous picture of me jumping in the air next to my ‘rig’… but alas, I digress. Only ‘mods’ are 285/70r18 “E” Toyo Open Country on ’24 Tacoma 18” TRD rims (+45 offset, 28.75lbs); added FE skidplates and FE rock rails. Was a gorgeous day, so I’ll include a couple pics of both the LC and the trail. Haven’t seen many in-depth on-trail performance/feature reports, so will go into some detail here.
The route up Santa Fe Peak starts right in the town of Montezuma, and pretty immediately starts switchbacking up 2700’ in 5 miles (23 or so switchbacks, if I counted right); took about an hour to get up. Santa Fe Peak isn’t particularly rigorous or technical (no big ledges, etc.), but you do need some decent ground clearance, like in a slightly lifted 4Runner, for example. Which I no longer have. The trail is a bit shelfy and off-camber, and a few of the switchbacks felt pretty sporty on the downhill run; only had to do three 3-point turns. It really feels like the LC has a tighter turning radius than the 4R, but it’s honestly probably related to the full-time 4WD system in the LC not binding in 4 Low. I did not mind the light steering feel. This is my first full-time 4WD vehicle, and so far, I am a fan.
On the way up, I was watching the turbo and hybrid gauges, just to see how this new drive system would handle the high-altitude climb (more variables than a simple IC engine). I was quite surprised to note that below ~12,200’, the turbo and hybrid system rarely kicked in, only when needing to get up a short, very steep portion of the trail, and only very briefly. Considering the considerable elevation and temps (60-55°F), this surprised me. Also, about halfway up the hybrid battery was nearly at max SOC, ~7 bars; (started at 4 bars). At around 12,500’ the turbo started kicking in, and from then on did so pretty regularly, as needed. This seems odd to me, as there wasn’t a big change in terrain that should have warranted it. The hybrid only really kicked on for a second or two max, never for any extended period. This also surprised me. Fuel economy on the way up? 5 mpg.
As far as the offroad systems go, I stayed in 4 High until around 11,000’, at which point the road surface loosened and I engaged the center locker (in no way did I ‘need’ to, yet). Further on as the surface got more irregular around treeline, I engaged MTS Auto, simply to prevent tire spin from chewing up the trail unnecessarily. [I did not air down (38psi), I did not use DAC/CC, I did not use the rear locker, nor did I disconnect the swaybar.] This LandCruiser simply climbs like a goat, there’s just no other way to put it. I assume it is due to having more articulation than the 4Runner, and the ride is much more comfortable because of it. No sharp jolts, the stock suspension really dampens the ride without making it feel ‘boaty’, and at least for crawling, it seems much better than the 6112/5160 TRD Pro suspension on my 2016 4Runner (perhaps I’m getting soft in my old age). The ride at 38 psi was at least as comfortable as the 4Runner aired down to 20 psi! I can’t wait to get to the desert to find out the other side of this coin, e.g. high-speed/washboard. What Toyota got 100% right with this new offroad platform that was previously lacking was designing a fenderwell that can accommodate 34” tires at full articulation. That was long overdue considering the competition.
The high point of the route is 13,124’ MSL, with gorgeous views down into Peru Creek on one side (with Grays and Torreys towering 1000’ above), and Webster Pass on the other, 1000’ below. Quick aside about the Trail Dust color, which was not my first choice, asI initially thought it looked quite yellow in pictures. The color is seriously growing on me and looks more gold to me, and in my brain the color is now ‘Fall Tundra’, after this trip.
For the ride down I immediately engaged 4Low, and as on the way up, the LandCruiser also descended like a goat. Tires stayed planted, and it never felt like a tire was quickly slipping down a rock and bashing into a low spot, which was not uncommon with the 4Runner. Clearance seemed to be more of an issue on the descent, I assume because the terrain is harder to see than going uphill. Tire placement became more important, and despite not dinging the FE skid plates on the way up, I definitely heard three contacts on the way down (only felt one). The LC could certainly have a bit more ground clearance out of the box, especially in the vicinity of the front crossmember. The trail cameras were a refreshing benefit of a modern vehicle, thus never had to worry much about tire placement in relation to the drop-off. Visibility out of the LandCruiser is excellent; the sloped hood makes a huge difference (my prehistoric 4Runner shows more hood out the front than terrain!), and the view out the side window/A pillar is also much better. I think it's a big deal that MTS can be used in 4 High, as the 4Runner's ATRAC system is limited to use in 4 Low; MTS makes virtually no noise compared to the incessant chattering of the 4Runner’s ATRAC system. The inclinometer is fun to scan, albeit occasionally alarming. One question: Why no altimeter, Toyota?
Now, the elephant in my room, anyway, and probably my primary beef with the new platform: Engine Braking. Or lack thereof. Nearly a complete lack thereof, compared to the 4Runner’s V6. I haven’t heard anyone talking about this! Even for on-road driving, manually downshifting provides little braking effect. We tow a mid-sized teardrop trailer, and I’m having a hard time envisioning how this will work (read: I’ll have to use much more brake pad). This is probably the most unfortunate part of this purchase for me, as we wanted to move to a vehicle that tows better (I’m sure the LC does so in regard to power/torque, despite TFL’s inane missteps with the tow/haul software). I can only hope that the lack of engine braking might have something to do with a designed break-in period which anecdotally might end at 1000 miles. Can the hybrid motor be used for engine braking? Total trip fuel economy at the bottom? 7.9 mpg, so maybe got 11 on the way down.
So, between the previous articulation/tire rub test I recently did and this first outing (no tire rub here, either), I am incredibly impressed by how much better the LC is compared to the outgoing generation of the 4Runner. I honestly did not expect this, I just assumed it would be a more modern take on an established platform. It is certainly that, and more. Yes, I know they are historically two different vehicles/markets, but now that four Toyota/Lexus vehicles are built on the TNGA-F platform, they’re all coming together with little more than design and creature features to set them apart. Yes, the new 4Runner should perform identically (albeit with predominantly part-time 4WD), so if nothing else, this sample of one should at least give those waiting for the 6th Gen 4Runner some info on what they are still waiting for. It will be a great vehicle, just no longer for me.
Cheers, Jeff
[EDIT: Not sure why that last image also shows up as thumbnail, doesn't show up in 'Edit' pane]
The route up Santa Fe Peak starts right in the town of Montezuma, and pretty immediately starts switchbacking up 2700’ in 5 miles (23 or so switchbacks, if I counted right); took about an hour to get up. Santa Fe Peak isn’t particularly rigorous or technical (no big ledges, etc.), but you do need some decent ground clearance, like in a slightly lifted 4Runner, for example. Which I no longer have. The trail is a bit shelfy and off-camber, and a few of the switchbacks felt pretty sporty on the downhill run; only had to do three 3-point turns. It really feels like the LC has a tighter turning radius than the 4R, but it’s honestly probably related to the full-time 4WD system in the LC not binding in 4 Low. I did not mind the light steering feel. This is my first full-time 4WD vehicle, and so far, I am a fan.
On the way up, I was watching the turbo and hybrid gauges, just to see how this new drive system would handle the high-altitude climb (more variables than a simple IC engine). I was quite surprised to note that below ~12,200’, the turbo and hybrid system rarely kicked in, only when needing to get up a short, very steep portion of the trail, and only very briefly. Considering the considerable elevation and temps (60-55°F), this surprised me. Also, about halfway up the hybrid battery was nearly at max SOC, ~7 bars; (started at 4 bars). At around 12,500’ the turbo started kicking in, and from then on did so pretty regularly, as needed. This seems odd to me, as there wasn’t a big change in terrain that should have warranted it. The hybrid only really kicked on for a second or two max, never for any extended period. This also surprised me. Fuel economy on the way up? 5 mpg.
As far as the offroad systems go, I stayed in 4 High until around 11,000’, at which point the road surface loosened and I engaged the center locker (in no way did I ‘need’ to, yet). Further on as the surface got more irregular around treeline, I engaged MTS Auto, simply to prevent tire spin from chewing up the trail unnecessarily. [I did not air down (38psi), I did not use DAC/CC, I did not use the rear locker, nor did I disconnect the swaybar.] This LandCruiser simply climbs like a goat, there’s just no other way to put it. I assume it is due to having more articulation than the 4Runner, and the ride is much more comfortable because of it. No sharp jolts, the stock suspension really dampens the ride without making it feel ‘boaty’, and at least for crawling, it seems much better than the 6112/5160 TRD Pro suspension on my 2016 4Runner (perhaps I’m getting soft in my old age). The ride at 38 psi was at least as comfortable as the 4Runner aired down to 20 psi! I can’t wait to get to the desert to find out the other side of this coin, e.g. high-speed/washboard. What Toyota got 100% right with this new offroad platform that was previously lacking was designing a fenderwell that can accommodate 34” tires at full articulation. That was long overdue considering the competition.
The high point of the route is 13,124’ MSL, with gorgeous views down into Peru Creek on one side (with Grays and Torreys towering 1000’ above), and Webster Pass on the other, 1000’ below. Quick aside about the Trail Dust color, which was not my first choice, asI initially thought it looked quite yellow in pictures. The color is seriously growing on me and looks more gold to me, and in my brain the color is now ‘Fall Tundra’, after this trip.
For the ride down I immediately engaged 4Low, and as on the way up, the LandCruiser also descended like a goat. Tires stayed planted, and it never felt like a tire was quickly slipping down a rock and bashing into a low spot, which was not uncommon with the 4Runner. Clearance seemed to be more of an issue on the descent, I assume because the terrain is harder to see than going uphill. Tire placement became more important, and despite not dinging the FE skid plates on the way up, I definitely heard three contacts on the way down (only felt one). The LC could certainly have a bit more ground clearance out of the box, especially in the vicinity of the front crossmember. The trail cameras were a refreshing benefit of a modern vehicle, thus never had to worry much about tire placement in relation to the drop-off. Visibility out of the LandCruiser is excellent; the sloped hood makes a huge difference (my prehistoric 4Runner shows more hood out the front than terrain!), and the view out the side window/A pillar is also much better. I think it's a big deal that MTS can be used in 4 High, as the 4Runner's ATRAC system is limited to use in 4 Low; MTS makes virtually no noise compared to the incessant chattering of the 4Runner’s ATRAC system. The inclinometer is fun to scan, albeit occasionally alarming. One question: Why no altimeter, Toyota?
Now, the elephant in my room, anyway, and probably my primary beef with the new platform: Engine Braking. Or lack thereof. Nearly a complete lack thereof, compared to the 4Runner’s V6. I haven’t heard anyone talking about this! Even for on-road driving, manually downshifting provides little braking effect. We tow a mid-sized teardrop trailer, and I’m having a hard time envisioning how this will work (read: I’ll have to use much more brake pad). This is probably the most unfortunate part of this purchase for me, as we wanted to move to a vehicle that tows better (I’m sure the LC does so in regard to power/torque, despite TFL’s inane missteps with the tow/haul software). I can only hope that the lack of engine braking might have something to do with a designed break-in period which anecdotally might end at 1000 miles. Can the hybrid motor be used for engine braking? Total trip fuel economy at the bottom? 7.9 mpg, so maybe got 11 on the way down.
So, between the previous articulation/tire rub test I recently did and this first outing (no tire rub here, either), I am incredibly impressed by how much better the LC is compared to the outgoing generation of the 4Runner. I honestly did not expect this, I just assumed it would be a more modern take on an established platform. It is certainly that, and more. Yes, I know they are historically two different vehicles/markets, but now that four Toyota/Lexus vehicles are built on the TNGA-F platform, they’re all coming together with little more than design and creature features to set them apart. Yes, the new 4Runner should perform identically (albeit with predominantly part-time 4WD), so if nothing else, this sample of one should at least give those waiting for the 6th Gen 4Runner some info on what they are still waiting for. It will be a great vehicle, just no longer for me.
Cheers, Jeff
[EDIT: Not sure why that last image also shows up as thumbnail, doesn't show up in 'Edit' pane]
Attachments
Last edited:
