Josh’s Cars of Japan - Land Cruiser Review

[rjmh]

We bought a 1958. Have had it two weeks and put on a little over a 1000 miles. First Toyota. The LC fitted our requirements perfectly. A capable rugged reliable vehicle that is as at home on a highway as it is on a forestry road.

The video that convinced me was “The car care nut” review on you tube.

To me the cloth seats and hard plastic were a feature -I have an active dog.

I am really impressed with the drive train and we are getting better that the advertised fuel economy. It is a different drive train and there is a lot going on. It sounds and behaves completely differently from any drive train I have experienced. I think that really unsettles many reviewers. It does its job very well- lots of torque on demand, reasonable power without turbo lag, and impressive city economy if you drive it like a hybrid.

There are times where it gets a little lost between the two motors and its gear selection. I have found that changing the driving mode or simply putting your foot in it corrects that. While the vehicle is a smooth cruise, the drive train is a time busy which is not is smooth.

This is one soft ride much more Ford than Porsche. The biggest compromise is the soft suspension which means it handles like a body on frame truck. It is not a vehicle that wants to be hustled.

However it is a vehicle that is very comfortable, very capable both on and off road which to me fits the Land Cruiser reputation, and reasonably economical to operate. Our build quality is excellent and I have no doubt it’s is rugged enough, and durable for our use.

We did take a bit of a leap of faith in buying a year one model, and with the supposed added complexity of a hybrid powertrain, but hey real risk is owning a German car out of warranty.

 

[Watufaka]

Geez C'mon man, he even complained about not seeing a cone in front of the car. This guy doesn't even look like he off roads. Complained also about the steering feel! Really? I love the steering feel. Next he will complain about how high he has to step up to get in.

 

[FirstLC]

Last December I got sick of the many small nuisances of my GLS 450, I went to the local Lexus dealership to check out a GX 460. I test drove it, and yes it was lovely and well-built.. it's a tank, but I wasn't sold despite having driven it and the Toyota badged LC Prado for long stretches in Dubai.

I test drove the LX 600 F-Sport for a giggle. The difference was night and day. Despite being a heavier, larger vehicle the LX had better power delivery and handled better.

The LC 250 doesn't feel like the LX, but the drivetrain is far more nimble than Josh makes it out to be in this review. I've driven the GX and the LC 150, and I have to objectively say, the 250 is better. It's not perfect, but it's fit for purpose. It's an offroad vehicle you can use as a daily driver. It's good looking and functional without pretensions, and I suspect that's what we were all looking for from Toyota.

Cars have evolved, they're lighter, and they user smaller engines, that doesn't mean they're not built well. I think that's where his review falls short.

BTW, his watch reviews are pretty good. I'm a watch guy, and I have a lot of the same pieces, but I suspect for different reasons.

 

[Esquire]

First of all, he was driving a rental car, likely been abused. Secondly, Ive read and watched reviews and some had some criticism, but mostly good stuff, but this guy complained about everything, which makes me wonder.

Bottom line, I love my LC FE. I don't care what he says since I bought my car just in case I need to head to the hills

Last December I got sick of the many small nuisances of my GLS 450, I went to the local Lexus dealership to check out a GX 460. I test drove it, and yes it was lovely and well-built.. it's a tank, but I wasn't sold despite having driven it and the Toyota badged LC Prado for long stretches in Dubai.

I test drove the LX 600 F-Sport for a giggle. The difference was night and day. Despite being a heavier, larger vehicle the LX had better power delivery and handled better.

The LC 250 doesn't feel like the LX, but the drivetrain is far more nimble than Josh makes it out to be in this review. I've driven the GX and the LC 150, and I have to objectively say, the 250 is better. It's not perfect, but it's fit for purpose. It's an offroad vehicle you can use as a daily driver. It's good looking and functional without pretensions, and I suspect that's what we were all looking for from Toyota.

Cars have evolved, they're lighter, and they user smaller engines, that doesn't mean they're not built well. I think that's where his review falls short.

BTW, his watch reviews are pretty good. I'm a watch guy, and I have a lot of the same pieces, but I suspect for different reasons.

Agreed and well-written.

Engineering is evolving on vehicles and that is a positive in my opinion.

The new Land Cruiser is a complete package. It is sharp, quick, nice size, smooth, reliable, holds its value, and is somewhat exclusive.
The prior model Land Cruiser was great. However, let's face it, it was very old technology, very outdated and ho-hum looks inside and out, and horrible efficiency. The 5th gen 4Runner as well.

This Josh character of Japan has no credibility with me since he is knocking new models based only on the fact he has the prior model.
He doesn't own the new model and has only driven one for a few miles.

That's like me saying I hate the brand new Porsche 911 997.2 GT3's because the arm rest is not as nice as my arm rest in my 2016 911 997.1.
And the fact all new 911's are turbo charged (since 2017) and my 2016 is not turbocharged....so the new ones are horrible and mine is superior. Engineering change is good.

I'm a watch guy as well. I like all brands. I'm a Sub guy, a Tudor guy, a Tag guy, and a Breitling guy. I don't hate AP and Patek because I don't own one. AP's and Pateks are arguably better watches than what I have. I'm rambling.....