I’m not even a car guy (I take my Nissan Leaf elk hunting), but it seems to me unconscionable that they can sell a car that can’t handle the payload of passengers. Should they have to put a weight limit warning on three of the seats?
Good write up - kinda bummed to see that Toyota isn't turning things around, but there are so many good other options
I sold my '17 Tacoma that I bought new in March of last year, and bought a lightly used 3.5L F150. The Tacoma was bearable when I was living on the Front Range of Colorado, but since I now live above 8,000 ft and regularly drive at much higher elevations, that engine and transmission wasn't cutting it. Turbochargers were a massive upgrade over the naturally aspirated engine, and the cabin comfort and payload of the F150 aren't even in the same universe as the Tacoma. Basically getting the same gas mileage too, which is mind boggling given the size and performance differences between the two vehicles.
I do wish there were more practical aftermarket options for the F150. Since it's a pretty distinctly American vehicle, most of the modifications seem to be designed with appearance as the primary focus rather than performance... surprising to me just given the sheer production volume of the F150. Would be incredible if ARB / OME decided to start supporting the F150 platform, but not holding my breath. Nearly went with the Ranger instead for this reason specifically, but it was a lot less truck for not a lot less money.
So much of automotive right now is cosplay — performative over actual performance — and this is a great example. Thanks for breaking that down.
The glimmer of hope here may be what's happened with Toyota on the performance road car side of the house with Gazoo Racing and that amazing story. Perhaps the 4x4 side of the house will catch up and produce trucks/SUVs that are actually matched to their mission rather than just keeping up appearances and coasting on a reputation they are no longer earning.
With all the hype around the "inevitable" electrification of the entire automotive industry, I can't help but assume that for those of us who care about what our vehicles are actually capable of, we may have to abandon the market all together and pivot to becoming multi-generation caretakers of vintage machines that actually work. Even if that includes electrifying them, if I can't buy a chassis that does what I need anymore — like have front tow points — that may be the only choice left.
Super disappointing. Thanks for the wrap up. Was really looking forward to better news around the 2024 4Runner but looks like the trend will just continue. will have to stick with the GX and a pick up Ranger instead.
Hi Wes! Reader from Venezuela here. I’m about to buy a used truck for the city, hauling bikes and roadtrips on rough roads. New cars are expensive here, so I have a peculiar set of options. Lots of Land Cruisers. I wanted to ask you if you could share some thoughts, if that’s okay. Note: range is desirable, but gas is very cheap here.
From cheapest up:
- 2005 90 series Land Cruiser Prado (similar to your 4runner). Owned by an uncle who’s neurotic with maintenance, it has 110k miles on it. 3.4L V6, ancient 4 speed auto. 875kg payload.
- 2007 80 series Land Cruiser. 4.5L straight-6, 5 speed manual. They were made here in Venezuela until 2007. Can be found with reasonable mileage. 700kg payload.
- 2008 4Runner Limited. 570kg payload.
- 2013-2017 Hilux, with a 4L V6 (1GR engine), 5 speed auto (very basic transmission), or with a 2.7L V4 with a manual trans. 1 ton payload. Mediocre safety (ABS, 2 airbags, that’s about it). Can be found with low mileage.
- 2008 200-series Land Cruiser. These were sold here (made in Japan) with the 5.7 liter V8, but no KDSS. More expensive, but better safety-wise. 600kg payload.
- Other options include a brand new Mitsubishi L200 (similar to a Hilux), with a 2.4L V4 gasoline engine, a 5-speed manual, and a 1-ton payload, which are relatively cheap but have an awful ride.
As for mods, I’d consider an extended or auxiliary fuel tank, ARB suspension and perhaps an ARB front bumper. There are tons of ARB and TJM distributors here.
How does the recently announced land cruiser prado in the US and the Tacoma redesign fit in this discussion? Seems like both bucked this trend. I only ask bc it's sad to see toyota not hold up their past quality and am wondering if there's any hope
I own a 2001 Sequoia with 330,000 and runs like new. Have an LC200 as well. In the interim I had a 2009 Sequoia that I was super excited to buy but got rid of. The 2001 not up to LC standard but very solid. Wife wiped the side off a sedan at school pick up and the bumper buffed out on the Sequoia while the sedan needed $6000 of repairs. The 2008 sucked. Foil thin sheet metal (assuming to save weight), Junk plastic interior with giant control knobs and other poor design. The Sequoia is built for its customer who does not really off road. Modern station wagon. I think the new LC300 shared frame and drivetrain with Sequoia now? Too compromised in my opinion
Probably. They are taking the Land Rover route of reducing mechanical capability, while improving electronic traction capabilities, and favoring on-road performance over off-road. The positive is that they are still more capable as touring vehicles than most of their 'competitors' in the SUV segment. (at least in the U.S.) Bronco has virtually 0 load capacity once you add the Sasquatch package, passengers and fuel. Tahoe/Yukon have the load capacity but poor articulation, and little aftermarket support. And while the Defender is probably the best in terms of capability and capacity, it unfortunately ends up having to spend way too long in the shop.
Thanks for the article. Soon to dropping the boots and shedding the 9 to 5. I have been looking at vehicles for more adventurous travels ie boondocking/ BLM etc. and have been following your LC and Ranger mods. Looks like most of the new vehicles are just cramped with techno wizardry compromising reliability and capability.
Definitely don’t like the way Toyota is headed. The new gen Tundra and Sequoia are very evident of that. Still can’t wrap my head around how they don’t have front recovery points, especially on the “off road focused” models. Grabbed a ‘22 GX for my wife and a ‘22 Ranger for myself last year. She originally wanted a 4Runner, and I was set on a Tacoma. I think we’ll be very happy with our decisions long term.
I know. I like what you do and would like to support you for a year but the $80 minimum doesn’t represent good value to me - at least not yet. How can I send you a little less support?
How about something less, Wes? I’ve enjoyed your writings for a while and might be willing to pledge my support but not for $80/year. You need to have a $25-50 option.
I’m not even a car guy (I take my Nissan Leaf elk hunting), but it seems to me unconscionable that they can sell a car that can’t handle the payload of passengers. Should they have to put a weight limit warning on three of the seats?
And on top of everything you mention - they reduced reduced cargo space in new gen Sequoia from 120 cu ft to 87.
Good write up - kinda bummed to see that Toyota isn't turning things around, but there are so many good other options
I sold my '17 Tacoma that I bought new in March of last year, and bought a lightly used 3.5L F150. The Tacoma was bearable when I was living on the Front Range of Colorado, but since I now live above 8,000 ft and regularly drive at much higher elevations, that engine and transmission wasn't cutting it. Turbochargers were a massive upgrade over the naturally aspirated engine, and the cabin comfort and payload of the F150 aren't even in the same universe as the Tacoma. Basically getting the same gas mileage too, which is mind boggling given the size and performance differences between the two vehicles.
I do wish there were more practical aftermarket options for the F150. Since it's a pretty distinctly American vehicle, most of the modifications seem to be designed with appearance as the primary focus rather than performance... surprising to me just given the sheer production volume of the F150. Would be incredible if ARB / OME decided to start supporting the F150 platform, but not holding my breath. Nearly went with the Ranger instead for this reason specifically, but it was a lot less truck for not a lot less money.
So much of automotive right now is cosplay — performative over actual performance — and this is a great example. Thanks for breaking that down.
The glimmer of hope here may be what's happened with Toyota on the performance road car side of the house with Gazoo Racing and that amazing story. Perhaps the 4x4 side of the house will catch up and produce trucks/SUVs that are actually matched to their mission rather than just keeping up appearances and coasting on a reputation they are no longer earning.
With all the hype around the "inevitable" electrification of the entire automotive industry, I can't help but assume that for those of us who care about what our vehicles are actually capable of, we may have to abandon the market all together and pivot to becoming multi-generation caretakers of vintage machines that actually work. Even if that includes electrifying them, if I can't buy a chassis that does what I need anymore — like have front tow points — that may be the only choice left.
Super disappointing. Thanks for the wrap up. Was really looking forward to better news around the 2024 4Runner but looks like the trend will just continue. will have to stick with the GX and a pick up Ranger instead.
Since it's maybe not obvious, I thought I'd drop a quick list of common problems you'll encounter if you load a vehicle beyond its payload capacity:
- Increased braking distance
- Increased body roll
- Reduced fuel economy
- Reduced performance
- Overheated suspension
- Increased wear to drivetrain
- Reduced service life for consumables like wheel bearings, brake pads, etc
- Mechanical failure (CVs, axles, bushings, bearings, joints, etc)
- Overheating
- Rollover
Hi Wes! Reader from Venezuela here. I’m about to buy a used truck for the city, hauling bikes and roadtrips on rough roads. New cars are expensive here, so I have a peculiar set of options. Lots of Land Cruisers. I wanted to ask you if you could share some thoughts, if that’s okay. Note: range is desirable, but gas is very cheap here.
From cheapest up:
- 2005 90 series Land Cruiser Prado (similar to your 4runner). Owned by an uncle who’s neurotic with maintenance, it has 110k miles on it. 3.4L V6, ancient 4 speed auto. 875kg payload.
- 2007 80 series Land Cruiser. 4.5L straight-6, 5 speed manual. They were made here in Venezuela until 2007. Can be found with reasonable mileage. 700kg payload.
- 2008 4Runner Limited. 570kg payload.
- 2013-2017 Hilux, with a 4L V6 (1GR engine), 5 speed auto (very basic transmission), or with a 2.7L V4 with a manual trans. 1 ton payload. Mediocre safety (ABS, 2 airbags, that’s about it). Can be found with low mileage.
- 2008 200-series Land Cruiser. These were sold here (made in Japan) with the 5.7 liter V8, but no KDSS. More expensive, but better safety-wise. 600kg payload.
- Other options include a brand new Mitsubishi L200 (similar to a Hilux), with a 2.4L V4 gasoline engine, a 5-speed manual, and a 1-ton payload, which are relatively cheap but have an awful ride.
As for mods, I’d consider an extended or auxiliary fuel tank, ARB suspension and perhaps an ARB front bumper. There are tons of ARB and TJM distributors here.
Any input would be great. Thanks!
How does the recently announced land cruiser prado in the US and the Tacoma redesign fit in this discussion? Seems like both bucked this trend. I only ask bc it's sad to see toyota not hold up their past quality and am wondering if there's any hope
I own a 2001 Sequoia with 330,000 and runs like new. Have an LC200 as well. In the interim I had a 2009 Sequoia that I was super excited to buy but got rid of. The 2001 not up to LC standard but very solid. Wife wiped the side off a sedan at school pick up and the bumper buffed out on the Sequoia while the sedan needed $6000 of repairs. The 2008 sucked. Foil thin sheet metal (assuming to save weight), Junk plastic interior with giant control knobs and other poor design. The Sequoia is built for its customer who does not really off road. Modern station wagon. I think the new LC300 shared frame and drivetrain with Sequoia now? Too compromised in my opinion
Probably. They are taking the Land Rover route of reducing mechanical capability, while improving electronic traction capabilities, and favoring on-road performance over off-road. The positive is that they are still more capable as touring vehicles than most of their 'competitors' in the SUV segment. (at least in the U.S.) Bronco has virtually 0 load capacity once you add the Sasquatch package, passengers and fuel. Tahoe/Yukon have the load capacity but poor articulation, and little aftermarket support. And while the Defender is probably the best in terms of capability and capacity, it unfortunately ends up having to spend way too long in the shop.
Thanks for the article. Soon to dropping the boots and shedding the 9 to 5. I have been looking at vehicles for more adventurous travels ie boondocking/ BLM etc. and have been following your LC and Ranger mods. Looks like most of the new vehicles are just cramped with techno wizardry compromising reliability and capability.
Definitely don’t like the way Toyota is headed. The new gen Tundra and Sequoia are very evident of that. Still can’t wrap my head around how they don’t have front recovery points, especially on the “off road focused” models. Grabbed a ‘22 GX for my wife and a ‘22 Ranger for myself last year. She originally wanted a 4Runner, and I was set on a Tacoma. I think we’ll be very happy with our decisions long term.
I know. I like what you do and would like to support you for a year but the $80 minimum doesn’t represent good value to me - at least not yet. How can I send you a little less support?
How about something less, Wes? I’ve enjoyed your writings for a while and might be willing to pledge my support but not for $80/year. You need to have a $25-50 option.