Both are bad. I drive mostly SF city and hilly Marin highways so my mileage is usually worse than city numbers. 16mpg is still a 23% improvement on 13mpg.

Sure, you lose 23% in gas, but you gain 100% in smiles.....

Thats like saying a grade of 55% is better than a 50%... whats the difference, they're both F's.
I don't see appreciable MPG #'s until you get over that 30mpg mark. That's why I commute in a 1991 Geo Metro... solid 48 mpg's of bleh...lol

Never much understood b!tch!ng about MPGs on a forum such as this. Please someone, raise your hand if you bought any generation of 4Runner with fuel economy as one of your top ten must-have criteria. I bought all of mine with absolutely no consideration for that.

And as for the LC - you need a big re-think there if MPG means anything to you.

That's what LC owners like me did and now Toyota is discontinuing them in the US. If LC resale values held up as well as 4Runners, owners would have put up with the highly reliable but very inefficient engine. Three years later 2016 LC's are worth $20-25k less and the 2019 models are almost identical except for a power tailgate. I'm enjoying the thought that I won't lose too much on my used 2015 4Runner along with the ability to buy a Geo Metro every year with gas money I save.

Toyota is still a Toyota. Avalon sells much less than Camry. And Avalon is every bit as reliable as Camry. And we all know how reliable and durable LC is...exceeding pretty much everything Toyota makes. People simply don’t go to a Toyota dealer to buy an expensive car, much less an $85k car.

I think that people look at LC and think...i might as well buy Lexus LX 570...and they do because LX outsells LC by a significant margin.

LC just does not have the luxury panache as other vehicles costing the same. For the love of all cars, LC still has fake wood!

I just don't see people spending $85k will have MPG at the top of their priorities.

So, in the end, LC appeal is only to small group of enthusiasts that know the real worth of the LC platform.

Only because Toyota choose to go mega-lux and deny us the off-road versions.

People say this kind of stuff, but I don't think there's any manufacturer who says to themselves, "Let's go mega-lux, or do this or that other thing, and ruin our flagship vehicle, and alienate our buyers. Let's deny them the versions they want, that would also result in more sales for us." Manufacturers do things for reasons, even if they seem stupid to some people. And sometimes, the market simply moves away from some vehicles. Ford is an example - they discontinued all their passenger cars except the Mustang and Fusion. In their view, there's no longer a market for cars.

As someone else suggested, maybe it's just a hiatus for a couple of years while Toyota re-tools a plant to make "simpler" Land Cruisers.

LC was never the "off-road" version of anything...for a long time! Maybe when FJ40 was around, it was a Jeep alternative. Since then, LC was never meant to be a Jeep Rubicon (or Bronco).

LC is all about durability, reliability, and strength as quoted by LC engineer above. It is about capability and comfort rolled in one. It is not meant to transverse Rubicon trail, even tho owners have done it. It is about getting to a destination and back in comfort safely.

IF you want all-out capability, then you look at TRD Pros and whatever Toyota answer is to the Bronco/Rubicon.

But if you want capability, long-lasting durability, and comfort, then you go LC. Everything in LC is over-engineered for decades of service without fail...the same can't be said about its competition. (And remember, i owned a 2004 G500...and i am not gonna own another Mercedes...i agree with Jetboy in that.)

And as the article i posted above pointed out, next-gen LC300 is still a semi-luxury cruiser like the generations before it. It is not a "back to basics" LC. It is not a Jeep Rubicon fighter. Never was, never is, never will be.

Everything's going mega-lux. Even today's Corollas are fit for the kings of the 80s. It's annoying. I don't like how lux my 2020 SR5 is. I wish it was less lux and costed less, and this is a vehicle that reviewers complain about not being lux enough.

LIke I said over here in this thread it seems like there is a lot of confusion at the top of Toyota's SUV offerings.

Land Cruiser 2022

4Runner
-$42k
-V6 5 spd
-BOF
-Ind. front, Solid rear

Sequoia
- $65k (Limited 4wd JBL)
- BOF
-Independent front and rear
-v8 6spd

Land Cruiser
-$85k
-Unitized body on ladder frame (BOF)
-Solid axle rear, ind. front
-v8 8 spd

Who would pay $85k for a LC when you could get a Sequoia for $65k? Maybe someone who is well off and knows vehicles but most likely at those price levels the market for the LC I see is wealthy “Country Club Bob” or “LPGA Mary” types and not off road enthusiasts. If you want luxury and “status” then I see people buying the GX. You can get them for a lot less than the LC. I dont really consider Lexus a “status” vehicle anyhow. MB G wagon, here seem to be driven buy Russian “gangster” wanna-be’s or immigrant nouveau riche. That’s not the kind of status I’m interested in. They are definitely not off road types.
.
.
.

If you test drive a Sequoia and a LC, then you will notice a huge difference in how they feel. As an owner of LC and formerly GX460, i can also tell you that there is a difference as well, but less than Sequoia vs. LC. I had to sell my GX due to unbalanced ride motion and seat discomfort.

Actually, one of the main reason i picked LC over LX570 is that LC is invisible...most think that it is a Highlander. I also don't like electronic and/or hydraulic suspensions of any kind.

Probably largely due to the newer crop of buyers who chase the latest tech all the time. Transportation is often the second or third reason some folks buy a vehicle these days.

No one disputes the quality of the LandCruiser. I won't even dispute that its not worth the $85K. I think the bigger issue is that you are driving something with a 25 year life expectancy that gets 13-16 mpg on the best day.

Lets say I buy a used 2015 Landcruiser with 100k miles for a killer deal of $45k. I'm sure I can easily hold onto it for another 20 years...200K miles and it would still be beating along like the tank it is.

But in 20 years am I going to want to be driving something that gets 13-16 mpg on gasoline? Even in 5 years am I going to want to do that? The hybrid/ev technology is improving so quickly that it will be even more of a dinosaur than it already is. An awesome, ultra-reliable tank of a dinosaur but a dinosaur nonetheless. Who knows even how difficult it will be to get gasoline or what the prices will be by then (this is not a political statement, it is a technological evolutionary statement)? I know we don't buy these vehicles for the mpg...but I also paid under $40k for my 4runner in 2015, so the hit at the pump is a little less of a sting (although my conscience is not as fond of the environmental impact).

The 200 series will be collectors items just because of the sheer lack of supply. They are vehicles of the highest quality...I wish I had the disposable income to own one as my 2nd or 3rd vehicle. Alas I don't...so I will remain on the 4runner forum in the 5th gen section until they release some form of hybrid-electric v6 in the next generation of Toyota________, body on frame vehicle that will hopefully be in the price range of only one kidney instead of 2.

I have a minivan that I beat on.

Either way, I won’t lose sleep on what may or may not happen in the future. I am just enjoying the ride now.