Don't like the adverts?  Click here to remove them

Lc200 mini review.

Olazz

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2010
Messages
1,428
Country Flag
zimbabwe
Have had a 200 on extended test for a week, thought I'd put up some of my thoughts if anyone interested.

I'll start by saying that I wasn't a great fan of the shape and "bulbous-ness" of the 200, and from certain angles I thought it looked odd; wheels that were too skinny and small for the huge body... After a few days my view has only modified slightly, in that the look sort of grew on me and even SWAMBO began to soften towards its looks.

This cruiser is BIG, both the exterior and the interior. Masses of space between driver and passenger, and huge amounts of room front to rear. It not only looks big inside, it actually feels very big. Everyone that got into it made the same comment. Space everywhere.

Driving position. Found this a little disappointing in that I couldn't get the seat low enough to feel really happy. I'm only 6'3" not excessively tall, and felt that the seating was designed to let shorties see over the expanse of bonnet... I couldn't !

Lights, lights everywhere. The dials are LCD type, back lit like the 100series, and I think are pretty relaxing on the eye; I liked them. Certainly found them easy to read during the day and even better at night. The Sat nav display is also, like the rest of the car enormous, with what seems like even conceivable programmable and "personalisable" menu one could think of. A little too gimmicky for me, and adjusting every-day stuff like radio, climate, internal lighting, etc was a bit of a faff. Lots of menus with sub-menus to help, but it doesn't really work for me. The huge screen certainly helps with the reversing camera, which you need because you can't see out the back too well.

Gearbox was 5 speed auto with sport setting and tiptronic. Smooth and very car like. Didn't quite see the point of the sport or tiptronic setting... if you want or indeed are expecting sports car like performance, you'll be sorely disappointed.

Engine. D4D V8 diesel. I was expecting a lot out of this, as its a V8 and the figures look pretty impressive on paper. In reality it was a bit dull. I have driven a V6 diesel which feels much more powerful and purposeful and feels muck "pokier". Perhaps this is where the gargantuan size and no doubt weight of the 200 begins to show. Around town it is easy to drive, extremely comfortable (normal mode) and providing you can find a space large enough, park. The motor is relatively quiet and if you really want to get a move on it does gather itself up and move, but I wouldn't say its an overtakers dream. Needs a clear road and a head of steam to let one feel really confident of an easy pass.

Suspension has three main settings. Comfort, Normal and sport. Comfort is ok, but made some feel a little sea-sick, with its wallowing motion. Sport (not sure why) made the cruiser, pitch and porpoise a little too much; not a nice experience. Normal it was then for most of the time.

Fuel consumption. This was pretty impressive for what feels like and certainly is a big heavy vehicle. The computer showed average consumption over three days, town and motorway, hard driving and dawdling, stop start traffic and on cruise, at 29mpg! Better than a V6, 8 speed diesel which will only show 23 for the same sort of driving.

This is a very very big and luxurious vehicle. not in the same leagues as the RR, but close. It has more toys on board than most and would make a supreme long distance "cruiser". It seems pretty frugal and can lift its skirts when required.

Would I buy one?

If I wanted a BIG, spacious, comfortable, capable long distance vehicle - its pretty hard to beat.
If I wanted an easy to drive/park/commute, every day vehicle - its too big.
If I was looking for an alternative to a RR/Cayenne/X5.

The RR is plusher and has more cache
The Cayenne is faster and more avant-garde
The X5 is sportier and more agile

I wanted to come away, blown away; I wasn't. I wanted to feel that sense of occasion when driving; I didn't. I wanted to love this Landcruiser but couldn't quite and at £67k :shock: with looks of an over bloated Hippo... Im not quite sold.

You of course, may disagree.
 
Thanks boet - nice to get some info - I take it this was the 2012 face-lift version you drove - the Euro5 compliant one with the LED daytime lights?

Pity it's gone so Tupperware and Barbie - would love to see that motor in a more 'capable' vehicle. Oh - wait - a new Ozzie 70 GX or GXL would give me that! Or even an Ozzie 200GX (with its fugly OEM snorkel) or GXL. Why do we get one option - the top-of-the-line one - only?? Come on, Toyota GB - do something here - we don't always just want the luxury.
 
Ja, it was Gary. I think Yota should have called this a Lexus as it is trying very very hard to be a luxurious cruiser and it certainly is that. I think your totally right in that dumping the V8 into something more capable and less "Escalade like", then you may have a world beater.

A petrol 100 series is pretty much as good as this without the extra plastic padding and pretence.

Like I said, I really really wanted to love this behemoth, but it just wasn't inspiring... and for the price its hard to justify.
 
Well - I'll shelve that idea for now and probably keep looking in a year or two for a nice clean, low mileage 100 :shh:
 
yeah, me too,

might just hold back a bit more

gra.
 
The 200 we get on the farm is the v8 Middle east spec and is one the most uncomfortable vehicles i have ever been in, the ride is terrible and the seats might as well be wooden benches. The engine is so underpowered its a joke.
On a recent long trip everyone went for it, i took the 105 instead as i will every time, non turbo makes it hard to drive sometimes but still better.
Also, people let you out in a 105 but not in the 200 ;)
 
Don't like the adverts?  Click here to remove them
Hi guys I have had many Cruisers and absolutely love the 200.
I did however exhaust and chip the donk as I have fitted so many after market accessories on it . It is now 3100 Kg's not loaded ,and I thought it
Needed a little help on the soft beaches in Western Australia.
Cheers
 
Driving position. Found this a little disappointing in that I couldn't get the seat low enough to feel really happy.

Agree - I have my seat on the lowest setting - can't see the need to raise it up at all.

Gearbox was 5 speed auto with sport setting and tiptronic.

Disagree - gearbox is a 6 speed auto with 4th gear being the 1:1 ratio and 5th & 6th gears are overdrives. Also disagree on the third point; the + & - is not tiptronic. It just means that the number that you select with the + or - is the highest gear that the gearbox will shift up to. It does not keep the gear in the selected number nor does it shift up whenever the driver selects a higher gear with the +. The gearbox will only shift up whenever it is programmed to do so.


Engine. D4D V8 diesel. I was expecting a lot out of this, as its a V8 and the figures look pretty impressive on paper. In reality it was a bit dull. I have driven a V6 diesel which feels much more powerful and purposeful and feels muck "pokier".

Which diesel V6 engine is more "pokier" than this engine? I've driven the Mercedes V6 diesel and it's no patch on the LandCruiser's V8 diesel. Not surprising, given that it's 2 cylinders and 1.5 litres swept capacity less than the Toyota engine.

Fuel consumption. This was pretty impressive for what feels like and certainly is a big heavy vehicle. The computer showed average consumption over three days, town and motorway, hard driving and dawdling, stop start traffic and on cruise, at 29mpg! Better than a V6, 8 speed diesel which will only show 23 for the same sort of driving.

Agree. Amazing fuel economy for such a land barge. :)

Well written review!
 
Disagree - gearbox is a 6 speed auto with 4th gear being the 1:1 ratio and 5th & 6th gears are overdrives. Also disagree on the third point; the + & - is not tiptronic. It just means that the number that you select with the + or - is the highest gear that the gearbox will shift up to. It does not keep the gear in the selected number nor does it shift up whenever the driver selects a higher gear with the +. The gearbox will only shift up whenever it is programmed to do so.

I obviously didn't twig this when I had the car for a week. Interesting to know.

Which diesel V6 engine is more "pokier" than this engine? I've driven the Mercedes V6 diesel and it's no patch on the LandCruiser's V8 diesel. Not surprising, given that it's 2 cylinders and 1.5 litres swept capacity less than the Toyota engine.

BMW's new 4.0 diesel in the X5!

Now is there an automated way of multi quoting from ONE post without manually having to type all the [/quote] stuff?
 
Fair cop - the BMW X5 4.0d (a triple turbo version of their 3.0 litre six cylinder) is indeed a savagely fast machine. No heavy chassis/body setup but a much lighter monocoque body, no heavy duty driveline components, no transfer case, and much less room. I've only driven the X5 3.0d (single turbo) and not even the X5 3.0sd (dual turbo) much less the 4.0d. The 3.0d is already faster than the Landcruiser, that's for sure!

I'd like to see just how long the BMW will remain reliable though! :p I did own a BMW e39 530i and it had 220,000 kms when I sold it - it was relatively heavy maintenance but a lovely fast machine.

No way of multi quoting in one reply without manually editing those quote markers, unfortunately.
 
200 Vs 100

Last Saturday I did the 'reflection in the shop window" test in a 200 and the picture which came back wasn't a pretty one. On the looks department, it's the rear half of the 200 which really lets this top of the range Cruiser down. Frankly speaking, it's straight up butt ugly and when a car can cost 65K being ugly can be one hell of a problem. For me, the last of the five speed auto 100 Amazons are a much better bet than a 200. And they look better too......

John
 
Last edited:
For me, the last of the five speed auto 100 Amazons are a much better bet than a 200. And they look better too......

No disagreements here - styling is very subjective and personal.

When the 100 Series was first released, everyone thought that it looked too rounded and soft, and that the tail lights looked "cartoonish".

I personally think that the 100 Series front end looks bland, but the rear end is possibly nicer looking than the 200 Series, especially with the LED lights.

I actually prefer barn doors in the rear.

URL]
 
I might be able to give you my thoughts over the coming weeks! ;-)
 
I 'might' have been interested if you got, say, a GXL variant. Or even the 79 wagon. But to only offer the Chelsea Tractor model puts it way out of my league ...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
 
Hi Guys,
I bought the 200 when it first came out - I spent a fortune modifying it with ARB kit - front and rear bumpers, long ranger fuel tank, OME suspension, diff locks all around etc etc. We took it it on some long-ish trips, too (As far as Sudan).
We have now sold it and reverted back to a 100 series - and now need to kit that out from fresh. What did we think of the 200? Very disappointed. We had a new engine after some nasty aggro with Toyota as it started burning oil at 80,000miles. Our fuel consumption was truly awful - despite the computer claiming 20+ mpg - when we measured the consumption we found it was middle teens. Frightening - and we tried driving at 70mph on cruise (unladen) and found no difference. Personally, we also found that it was a nightmare to work on when in remote area's, whereas every bush/desert mechanic knows the 'simple' 4.2td. We lost a small fortune selling the 200 but have no regrets reverting to a 100 again - a lot lighter to drive off-road, especially in sand. We have also just sold our 70 series (swb, V6, 4000cc) - again, a dream vehicle (special import) which disillusioned me - no one mentions the bizarre narrower rear axle track or super recessed spark plugs etc. It seems as tho' our beloved Toyota's are getting too electronic / complicated. I searched for ages and eventually found a 100 series that fitted my requirements - paid too much but it fitted my requirements.
 
Hi Guys,
What did we think of the 200? Very disappointed.

Hope you will be happy with the 100 - seems you had no luck with your 200er.

We are very happy with our 200 - did too an extended trip:

TransAfrica-Flyer.jpg


He is our travel diary on a daily base with a lot of pictures: http://transafrica2012.blogspot.com

We did severall trips inside of Europe this summer too - we are pretty shure that there is no car arround who is that good - off and onroad..

The amount of noise cancelling, driving comfort together with the beast you can ride offroad :dance:

Surfy
 
Last edited:
Well well it looks as though there are a couple of "when we's" in here, howzit you okes. I just popped into the 200 forum for a look see and as someone has already commented, a well written review Rollance good and informative.

I must admit that I am an 80 owner and fan, as far as I am concerned its the best looking and most robust of the lot. Mine is a 4.5 petrol VX with a good LPG kit, also have a straight through (from the downpipe) stainless exhaust. I find it pretty pokey for a metal brick and the V6 sounds like that dirty woman you fantasize about :dance:.

Merry Christmas
 
Howzit Carrot... lets see pics of your truck china.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top