Test drove the LC - wanting a bit more performance - future performance upgrades coming?
- Thread starter starfly
- Start date
Coming from a Rav4? and worry the LC is not fast enough? Head scratching emoji right here.
Why not try the Urus or DBX707 or Bentayga? They are probably all upgradable later.
Why not try the Urus or DBX707 or Bentayga? They are probably all upgradable later.
I quite like the Land Cruiser powertrain, but I could see how one might find it underwhelming. Right now, it only provides marginal gas mileage advantages over V6 turbo and V8 counterparts while delivering comparable or slightly less power. Especially for the Land Cruisers vehicle price.
Sure the rated hp & tq numbers look good, but pushing the powertrain into delivering it results in basically the same gas mileage numbers as a those bigger engines. I’ve also found sometimes the electric doesn’t kick on every time? And the 2.4 is barely adequate for highway cruising. The electric seems to be used less often than the turbo for maintaining highways speeds of 70-75 mph further reducing your highway mpgs. The electric motor also seems to be used inconsistently accelerating from a stop. And the power is definitely mediocre when under gas only.
To me, it feels like a stronger electric motor that was more active would solve a lot of the issues, but who knows how that would’ve balanced out. E.g. it would probably need a bigger battery etc. Alternatively, if the 2.4 was maybe upsized (maybe to something power wise comparable to the Chevy 2.7) it wouldn’t suffer on the highway mpgs as much?
There are obvious cost/feasability constraints as to why they didn’t do either of these things. Clearly Toyota also thought they’d be able to squeeze more out of the powertrain seeing as they originally claimed it’d have 27 combined?
Edit: to clarify, I think the 2.4 is perfectly adequate for the highway power wise, for all the pure gas Tacoma and 4Runner owners out there. I just think it struggles to return good mpg numbers having to dip into boost a lot to maintain 70-75mph.
Sure the rated hp & tq numbers look good, but pushing the powertrain into delivering it results in basically the same gas mileage numbers as a those bigger engines. I’ve also found sometimes the electric doesn’t kick on every time? And the 2.4 is barely adequate for highway cruising. The electric seems to be used less often than the turbo for maintaining highways speeds of 70-75 mph further reducing your highway mpgs. The electric motor also seems to be used inconsistently accelerating from a stop. And the power is definitely mediocre when under gas only.
To me, it feels like a stronger electric motor that was more active would solve a lot of the issues, but who knows how that would’ve balanced out. E.g. it would probably need a bigger battery etc. Alternatively, if the 2.4 was maybe upsized (maybe to something power wise comparable to the Chevy 2.7) it wouldn’t suffer on the highway mpgs as much?
There are obvious cost/feasability constraints as to why they didn’t do either of these things. Clearly Toyota also thought they’d be able to squeeze more out of the powertrain seeing as they originally claimed it’d have 27 combined?
Edit: to clarify, I think the 2.4 is perfectly adequate for the highway power wise, for all the pure gas Tacoma and 4Runner owners out there. I just think it struggles to return good mpg numbers having to dip into boost a lot to maintain 70-75mph.
