In the movie “Out of Africa,” Denys Finch-Hatton’s 1923 International Harvester stalls on an open savannah amidst a herd of seriously cranky water buffalo. After a few nervous minutes tinkering with the engine, Denys tells Karen Blixen (Meryl Streep) to manually crank the engine. It explodes to life, and they continue their illicit journey into cinematic history. Substitute a Canon DSLR for Blixen’s .416 Rigby, and in my mind, I’m there. As for the Harvester… what about an all-new 2008 Toyota Land Cruiser?
Sticking with the cinematic theme, the new Land Cruiser’s sheetmetal is still as tight and creaseless as a Hollywood actress’ Botox-pickled brow. Subtle fender bulges give way to doors as expansive and flat as the Serengeti itself. The big rig’s headlights and turn signals are integrated into massive light clusters, flanking a supersized grille, sporting the now familiar Schick shtick. The sidelights’ silhouette now tapers sportingly; a single failed attempt to ameliorate the off-roader’s overall blockishness.
In sum, the new Land Cruiser looks thoroughly modern and endlessly generic: a Rav4 writ large. Once again, the casual observer could be forgiven for confusing the pride of Aichi for any one of America’s current crop of increasingly milquetoast motorized Mastodons. Given the ongoing antipathy towards genuine body-on-frame SUVs in some quarters, it may be a welcome case of hiding in plain site.
Inside, plain is the word. While the Land Cruiser’s helm offers a suitably majestic view of the landscape, the dashboard geography is a Toyota parts’ bin job; a throw it against the wall and see what sticks farrago of cowled gauges, glove aversive buttons, shiny knobs, LCD displays and ugly vents. Buttons under and behind the steering wheel? A single knob stuck on the side of the center stack? The Land Cruiser’s cabin is more rock fall than rock garden.
Strange to say, there is comfort to be found in the stiff though not brittle plastic adorning nearly every surface. It serves notice that the obviously not a fashion icon Land Cruiser was designed for long-haul duty in harsh climes, where cleanliness is nowhere near godliness. Even minor features such as the second row seat flip-out cup holders feel ready for half a million miles of hardscrabble living. Still, a starter button in an SUV?
The new, slightly larger Land Cruiser has enough cargo capacity for a month in the veld. For supermarket safaris, the second row offers the go-along gang plenty of leg room– more than the Cruiser’s [in name only] 4Runner. As is the way of such things, the Cruiser’s third-row fold down jump seats are best reserved for “time outs” or rewarded as “time served.”
The Land Cruiser is powered by the same luscious 5.7-liter V8 introduced in the new Tundra full-size pickup. Mated to a quick-witted six-speed transmission, stumping-up 381hp and 401 ft. lbs. worth of “I’m an SUV, get me out of here” torque, it’s Cruiser by name, cruiser by nature. Thirteen mpg city fuel economy may leave the environmentally conscious gasping for breath, but the Cruiser’s mighty mill is never caught short of puff. Entering, exiting or overtaking on the highway is epically effortless.
Through the corners… forget it. Keeping the 74” tall 5690 lbs. SUV plumb is more than the stabilizer bar-equipped coil springs suspension configuration can manage. At least the motions are predictable and relatively free of bounce and rebound.
The Land Cruiser is newly bestowed with Lexus’ trick Kinetic Dynamic Suspension System (KDSS). Interconnecting hydraulic cylinders attached to the front and rear stabilizer bars respond to unequal wheel loading to facilitate greater articulation, keeping the wheels in contact with an uneven surface. The 200 Series also gets Crawl Control; it applies throttle and brakes to maintain uniform low speed suitable for the roughest roads. Innovative, but isn’t that what a driver’s for?
The new Land Cruiser’s off-road electronic arsenal is awesome, but truly adventurous souls won’t be impressed. Toyota’s reliability rep aside, fixing software glitches in the kind of places where you would really need the off-road gizmos is an impossibility. (That Harvester was ratty, but mechanically malleable.) And if you’re not using the Land Cruiser off-road, why not opt for the cheaper, more luxurious Toyota Sequoia? All of which leaves the technologically triumphant Land Cruiser in the middle of nowhere.
And very expensive real estate it is too. My gas-guzzling test model rang-in at a whopping $79,143, including a $5K “market adjustment.” Demand outstripping supply? Not for long, Mr. Bond. There are only so many people willing to fork-out that kind of cash for capability they don’t need, from a brand (and an interior) with a decidedly downmarket demeanor. Economic conditions forced Karen Blixen to sell her coffee farm in British East Africa. Economics will take the wind out of the sales of Toyota’s bigger, better prairie schooner.
91 Comments on “2008 Toyota Land Cruiser Review...”
Back to TopLeave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You can also login using Facebook Connect.
80K for this? After your done with taxes and registration your looking at 85 easily.
Perhaps a stout ride for the nanny to do errands on wintry days. But a Lexus badge would have a lot more impact at the middle school pickup lane.
That’s a lot of money for a Tahoe.
OK. I give up. Why? What earthly need does this thing possibly serve? Is Toyota just taunting us? Who really won the Second World War?
WCM, does the steering wheel telescope? Does it adjust height? It looks a little low in those glam shots.
That price is incredible, even without the “market adjustment” it has to be the most expensive Toyota ever-by far. I wonder how much the Lexus version is going to cost. Why buy this over a Range Rover?
Samir, yes and yes.
Oops! The Lexus LX470 completely loaded goes for $69,865.00. I know, thats the ‘07 but still.
I can think of a lot of fun, equally capable cars I could buy for $80k — hell, for 50-60% of that price you get an equally capable SUV plus a fun car to make up for the lack of driving excitement. An LR3 plus a GTI? A Range Rover (which will have 57 times more luxury)? A used Defender plus a Mini Cooper S?
The farthest off road 99.9% of these will ever get is hopping over the speed bumps in the Neiman Marcus parking lot.
And the Phaeton failed?
This is far more a stretch for the brand, IMHO. If not for the off-road/touring legacy of the name, I don’t see how it would even be feasible. I guess Lexus will have to tart it up quite a bit to command whatever premium they’re hoping to eke from their version.
Personally I'd love to own one.
If you lived in Alaska and have the money you might begin to understand the appeal of this vehicle. In its class the Land Cruiser is basically KING! Yes in theory a Range Rover should be just as good or better but the reality is a RR is a extremely unreliable over-priced POS that is better left in the city close to tow trucks and service stations.
Yes it is expensive but if I needed this type of vehicle and could afford a LC or LX570 buying one would be a no-brainer. Toyota is not going to have a problem selling these things and they will continue to command a premium in the future. Unlike GM I doubt Toyota is planning to build 500,000 of these things and will only offer up a limited amount for sale in the USA. This is specialtiy vehicle with limited appeal but there are enough LC die-hards out there to make this a profitable product in the Toyota portfolio.
Somebody forgot to tell Toyota that the home equity piggy bank days are over. For my 80k I’ll put a new Pilot and a slightly used Cayman S in my garage.
To me, these things (and the RR Sport, and the Lexus) scream subtle class, not “Look at me”. A new take on classic design lines. Sadly, most never see anything but pavement, and 13 mpg is ridiculous.
Wow. I could fill my driveway with 5 copies of my daily driver for that price. And afford to rent a truck to do the amount of off-road driving the average Lot Coaster driver does, when I need to (i.e., never).
There was not a thing in the world wrong with the last Land Cruiser, was there? I hope the last generation lives on in the second/third world, and this ugly shopping cart is U.S. only.
Toyota told me that the upcoming LX570 will cost about $12K more than the ‘08 Land Cruiser.
I don’t think people here actually understand or except the demographics for the Land Cruiser. This IS a high-end vehicle that is generally purchsed by folk with high incomes. In the USA it really does not appeal to the Tahoe crowd. Most people that come from other parts of the world truly understand the mystic and appeal of this vehicle. It is considered to be legendary for it unstoppable off-road performance and rock-solid reliability. Go to places like Iceland, Norway, Africa, the real “Outback”, or any place you where the roads suck but people still wish to get around and you will find Land Cruisers. And yes they do have cache value on par or better than anything else in that class that you can buy.
Urban folks that think they are “Kool” buy Range Rovers. People that really live in remote and hard to get to locations drive LCs.
If I needed an off-road vehicle, I’d go for the LC. Can’t think of a more capable and authentic tool for the job. In character, it’s the exact opposite of a suburban SUV, yet it has none of the backwardness of a Defender.
Sounds like some UN Peacekeepers will be riding around in an even more comfortable vehicle soon..
I would take a Chevy Tahoe/Yukon over this generic beast 8 days a week, 25 hours a day. Plus you have the option of a hybrid.
I would take a Chevy Tahoe/Yukon over this generic beast 8 days a week, 25 hours a day. Plus you have the option of a hybrid.
Ok, Please explain to me how the Land Cruiser is generic but the even boxier Tahoe is not? In all fariness the Land Cruiser and LX570 are everything an Escalade is pretending to be.
Everything peaple are saying about the greatness of LCs is true – or was until maybe the 80 series. This thing is a fat overpriced POS, and an insult to the LC legacy. Anyone living in AK who buys one of these and thinks it will be repairable or can even be maintained without shipping it to the lower 48 is on crack. Even a hummer makes a better case for itself than this wanna be luxury car with a corolla interior. The Escalade is not really a fair comparable as its a far BETTER car in the suburban mall enviroment that both those vehicles are really designed for, and nearly bargin priced in the deal. Far better a MB G-class than this for the money.
Actually, the Land Cruiser DOES serve a huge need for third and second world countries. I was in Tibet last summer and probably 1/3 of the cars on the road were Land Cruisers.
They are a truly useful vehicle–good off-road capability, powerful, extremely reliable. I’m an anti-SUV kind of guy but I can totally see why the Land Cruiser is a crucial product.
Making comparisons to Tahoes, Land Rovers, etc. or complaining that the electronic nannies prevent you from having more fun is completely missing the point of this car. It’s not for fun, it’s actually a practical SUV for people. Just not in America.
OK William I think its time you took this beauty (or beast) off road up to its axles and let us know. Is it a Land Cruiser or a Country Club Cruiser?
Did you mention the range? At 13 MPG I don’t want to get too far into the bush.
The LCs you see in the third world are mostly 70 and 75 series, not this bloated 80K joke.
The new Toyota Sequoia will eat the Tahoe/Yukon’s lunch. The Platinum trim version is targetted at the Navigator/Escalade end of the market.
The Tahoe’s and Yukon’s of the world (and even the blinged out ‘Slade for that matter) are no competetion for the Cruiser.
As folks have already stated, this is not the Land Cruiser you see all over the world. The Land Cruiser brand is built on utility rather than luxury. If they would sell a stripped-down version of this truck in the US as they do in other parts of the world, I could see a market for it, especially to the oil patch and mines.
I did a trek through Tibet 6 years ago. Older (90’s era) LCs were THE car there. Our group of 20 had 5 of ‘em, and each day, you always hoped you’d be in the lead vehicle, because all those following ATE dust for breakfast, lunch and dinner. Most of Tibet is unpaved, rocky and rutted roads (to say nothing of the unpaved mountain passes with zero guard rails!) These Land Cruisers were far from luxo; manny trannies and no a/c. But when they broke (and they sometimes did) the Tibetan drivers could fix them with the simplest of tools (I sometimes got to help). One of the utes had a gas leak and the combo of petrol fumes and spilled yak-butter tea is an aroma I hope never to experience again. But it was a GREAT trip and my admiration for Toyota engineering was re-inforced over and over again.
A couple comments about this review:
1) This shows again that the “star system” doesn’t work. Two 5’s, two 4’s, three 3’s and a 2 doesn’t equal a 2.
2) This car’s pricing shows that Toyota’s “package system” doesn’t work. According to Toyota’s site, the base price of a Land Cruiser is $63,885 (plus destination), already a $7000+ boost from the old LC’s price. For that you get the great 5.7L engine, full-time 4WD, power moonroof, cruise control, and the whole raft of safety technologies. The problem is, if you want, say…the JBL stereo system, you have to get the navigation system, which adds at least $3400. Even worse, if you want heated seats or a rear-seat entertainment system, those are only available with the Upgrade package (which I believe the tester did), and that adds $7,245!
I’m not saying it’s a complete bust. I can’t compare the ’08’s standard features to the ‘07, since TrueDelta doesn’t have either in its database. That’s likely where some of the differential lies. I just can’t help but wonder how the price is justified over the old one.
No, Shiney, you are wrong. Go to Tibet sometime and tell me what you see. LC80’s and 100’s all over the place. Some Prado’s too. You don’t see any 70 and 75 series around, they are far too old and underpowered.
As for driving range, the LC80 I was in had dual fuel tanks for around 200L total. That’s a very substantial driving range. Plus, any good driver knows the area well enough to refuel at the right opportunities. There aren’t any more fuel-efficient alternatives.
My parents used to own a ‘78 LC 40 series diesel and it was an awesome off road machine – this new model looks like it not only needs a diet but also a shrink as it seems to have an identity crisis. Laden with fragile electronic junk and a plain interior it is neither luxurious enough to compete with the Germans nor rugged enough for serious off road adventures.
I think a beefed up FJ Cruiser would have been a better fit for the LCs traditonal role as a go anywhere vehicle.
As for the Land Rover – don’t even think about taking it either off road or even beyond its factory warranty.
Until the new Land Cruiser gets trail rated by the Taliban, its off-road/third world operation will be in question.
This is Toyota skimming the rich cream from years of developing a legendary rep and following for the LC. Well to-do folks/kids go on volunteering/trekking/safari trips and see LC’s everywhere, even though those machines are strippers compared to what we get here. But it reinforces the image, and makes T. big bucks. Toyota is scary and awesome.
So what, 3 more years and we’ll start seeing $100,000 Toyotas? The price of autos is getting ridiculous.
$80K is ridiculous for any SUV, period. What kind of market is this aiming at, and evidently succeeding at drawing in given the $5k dealer mark-up?
It’s been all down hill since the FJ60 went away
I think the 75 (or is it 78 now) is still in production. And why would a low geared work truck platform be too “old and underpowered” for Tibet? The LC80 was a fine vehicle, but the 100 with its V8 was already overpriced and underwelming. Maybe they were brought in by the UN or american companys with Gov. contracts who really didn’t care much about cost VS performance. Or they were luxury vehicles for the privilaged and tourists. Either way, 80K for the new LC is silly. Crimity! can you image trying to field repair that thing? At least with a Range Rover you get an interior worth looking at while you wait for the LC75 or LR Defender130 to come tow you back to the hotel.
Juniper: OK William I think its time you took this beauty (or beast) off road up to its axles and let us know. Is it a Land Cruiser or a Country Club Cruiser?
Did you mention the range? At 13 MPG I don’t want to get too far into the bush.
I would love to put the LC through its paces off-road (Toyota, are you listening?).
But consider this: Even if the 200 Series is a phenomenal off-road monster, who cares. You could buy two or three FJ Cruisers for the same money. And who is going to pay upwards of $80K for a machine and then pinstripe its paint four-wheeling through scrub? I don’t think we’ll see many 2008 Land Cruisers beating around off-road for another 7-10 years. The good news is that a 7-year old 200 will probably still be in pretty good shape.
As for range, the LC has a 25.4 gallon fuel tank, so at 13 mpg it probably has a range of 300 miles of city driving. Unless you’re turning monster after market tires or plowing through sand all day, it’ll probably get 10 mpg off-road, so it’d be good to mule occupants upwards of 200 miles.
Well to-do folks/kids go on volunteering/trekking/safari trips and see LC’s everywhere, even though those machines are strippers compared to what we get here. But it reinforces the image, and makes T. big bucks.
LMAO – nailed it on the head. And if I did live in the “3rd world” and all Toyota could offer me was 13mpg I’d be pissed. In the age of $90+ for a barrel of oil Toyota should do much better, especially for those that don’t have extra $$ for gasoline.
Then again, Toyota’s got that green image off the Prius which makes this atrocity ok.
That’s a bit optumistic on the off road milage. Unless oyu count dirt roads as off road. My 4 Runner used to get 2 or 3 mpg when running trails. You’re reving really high in low range and going no where fast.
Toyota should include a standard “My other car is a Prius” bumpersticker with these.
‘Toyota should include a standard “My other car is a Prius” bumpersticker with these.’
I think “My other car is a Lexus LS600.” would be more appropriate
LS600″h”
One thing I will grant Toyota is that they do actually have a very good grasp of who their costumer base is and what they really want.
This is why a LC with whooping $80,000 price tag will still command a $5,000 dealer premuim even in today’s depressed SUV market in the USA. If anything Toyota understands that the Sequoia might be the large SUV in their portfolio which might be in for a rough ride in the near future.
The $63,000 LC sells because Toyota has successfully placed it at the high-end part of the market by selling a successful SUV in every other SUV segment. The LC is not a Sequoia! The Sequoia exist because the LC was already too expensive and is equiped with sophisicated hardware that the shopping mall crowd does not need nor are they willing to pay for.
The Sequoia is the SUV that Toyota intends to deal with the American SUV Fade crowd and it is price accordingly. The LC is meant for a very different crowd, that is why you do not see them all over the place! This is a serious off-road/ bad-road/ trail vehicle in the same sense that a 911 is a serious sportscar. While I will admit it can’t go places that a FJ cruiser or Wrangler can go, but it can go places that just about every other vehicle on the market CAN’T.
Back to price, one thing I have noticed for a long time is Toyota Limited version of many of their products do have a prestige value to them. Whether it be a Seinna Limited, Highlander Limited, Sequoia Limited, or a LC you do tend to find them populating the drivways in the more affluent neighborhoods in the USA. It is this prestige factor for vehicles like the Seinna Limited and Honda Odessey Touring that caused other vehilces like the MB R-class to fail in the market place.
Shiney: A large portion of the driving these Land Cruisers do is up huge, steep mountain roads. They don’t spend their lifetimes crawling through mud in low range. I was in a Chinese made 4-banger minivan and LC’s would constantly be blowing by us while we were struggling to do 40km/h up the side of the mountain.
A lot of things are different outside of the industrialized world.
First off, oil prices are not a consideration when an off-road vehicle is your only option. Are you going to ask these people to drive Corollas? Mileage is even less of a consideration when almost all of these are paid for by either a company or the government. It’s not like your average Tibetan/Kenyan/etc. Joe could go out and buy a Land Cruiser when he can barely feed his family. And if he could afford one, he is probably so rich that he doesn’t care about gas prices anyways.
Second, looks do not matter either and especially not sporting performance. It’s all about practicality, and Toyota understands that is part of the personality/mystique of the Land Cruiser. Think about how ugly the original HMMWV was.
Also, obviously third world versions of this car will not have a lot of the electronics and certainly not the comfort items like leather. Makes little difference to the underlying mechanicals which are dead reliable and powerful.
To cruise around suburbia, this car is an atrocity. But for many people in the world it is an absolute necessity, and Toyota deserves credit for fulfilling that need.
If I were honest to God in the market for a Land Cruiser, I’d buy a pristine FJ60, and spend the rest on prostitutes.
A well equipped Wrangler Unlimited Rubicon goes for around $31,000. What is the point of the LC again?
Robert Schwartz :
December 14th, 2007 at 10:18 am
OK. I give up. Why? What earthly need does this thing possibly serve? Is Toyota just taunting us? Who really won the Second World War?
Elite businessmen and bankers. :)
It sounds like something my brother-in-law would consider buying. He has a Hummer H2 and an Escalade, and I don’t really know why he has either. But he’d only buy it used after a big depreciation hit.