Toyota Landcruiser specs

AckwelFoley

I was looking at the website and im confused.

The Landcruiser is in a standard commercial then theres a business version and a passenger version.

The thing i don't understand is how the business version has 5 seats but is taxed and classed as a commercial and from the price it seems to reflect that as there is a 40k jump to the passenger..

Whats the difference between the passenger and business models if both have seats? How is it classed as commercial if it doesnt have cargo space?

colm_mcm

It's classed as a crewcab. The passenger one attracts full VRT. The crewcab might be priced ex VAT too?

AckwelFoley

colm_mcm wrote: »

It's classed as a crewcab. The passenger one attracts full VRT. The crewcab might be priced ex VAT too?

Im assuming because its lwb with 5 seats rather than 7 in the passenger. Not priced ex VAT.

2 seat commercial swb is 45 ish on the road. Father bought it last year. Business starts at 58..then theres a massive jump to passenger because of VRT and spec i assume

goochy

The main thing is not to buy one , horrible looking and to drive and not as reliable as people think

colm_mcm

goochy wrote: »

The main thing is not to buy one , horrible looking and to drive and not as reliable as people think

You can't get a discovery business version anymore though. I'd still have a LC over a Pajero. If you're in the market for such a thing, options are limited these days.

goochy

goochy wrote: »

The main thing is not to buy one , horrible looking and to drive and not as reliable as people think

I'd disagree on both points, great looking and lovely to drive imo.

colm_mcm

This is great looking?

Truckermal

It's practically the same model since 2003...

colm_mcm

colm_mcm wrote: »

This is great looking?

Yes imo. I love the look of big jeeps. I like the older models too pre this one and most jeeps and crew cabs.

colm_mcm

The older model was much better looking. This is just a lazy facelift of a reskin of the 2003 model.

goochy

Far from great looking , pajero looks better . New rexton looks well not sure Harris group will even bother selling it ??

colm_mcm

To be fair the Pajero still looks ok 17 years in. The LC is a better machine despite its exterior.

JohnBoy26

goochy wrote: »

Far from great looking , pajero looks better . New rexton looks well not sure Harris group will even bother selling it ??

Pajaro's are soft piles of junk though

AckwelFoley

We've had the Pajeros dor years abd got first Landcruiser last year. You simply cant conpare them on all counts..

Landcruiser by a mile.

..and personally i think it looks great..but opinions and tastes differ

As i wasonce told..if you want a reliable 4x4 just watch and see what the taliban drive. Let's just say it's mostly Toyota 4 x 4 i see lol

PADRAIC.M

Pajero are horrible compared to landcruiser as a 4x4.

goochy

Heard of problems when current landcruiser models came out and was talking to owner of 2015 vehicle who has injector problems . The Japanese haven't a clue about vehicle design though land rover not much better now with disco

Jude13

Had a land rover discovery 3 and changes it to a Landcruiser in 2015. Just got sick of pouring money into the LR for repairs. No problems so far with the LC (although its only 2 years old so we will see), not on the same level as the LR for performance or comfort but it does what it should.

dr.fuzzenstein

goochy wrote: »

Heard of problems when current landcruiser models came out and was talking to owner of 2015 vehicle who has injector problems . The Japanese haven't a clue about vehicle design though land rover not much better now with disco

Yes, those Toyotas really have a reputation of being unreliable hunks of junk that will fall apaprt soon as you look at it, now Land Rover on the other hand...

s15r330

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Yes, those Toyotas really have a reputation of being unreliable hunks of junk that will fall apaprt soon as you look at it, now Land Rover on the other hand...

I woudn't even bother replying to anyone who has a positive opinion of a Rexton...uh I just shuddered at the thought of one

dr.fuzzenstein

s15r330 wrote: »

I woudn't even bother replying to anyone who has a positive opinion of a Rexton...uh I just shuddered at the thought of one

Ah yes, the Rectum. Suggested second car, the Renault Flatulence.

goochy

I was just saying the 2018 rexton looks well . It's only just launched.
I was just making the point the main reason for buying a landcruiser is reliability and they are not bullet proof. Know someone who had current model when new out and had to give it back and was given a new one

s15r330

goochy wrote: »

I was just saying the 2018 rexton looks well . It's only just launched.
I was just making the point the main reason for buying a landcruiser is reliability and they are not bullet proof. Know someone who had current model when new out and had to give it back and was given a new one

Ah Rextons are just pure and utter muck though.

Toyota have had some problems, my grandfather had to get a new engine in a 2004ish Avensis that he bought new at the time with less than 20k miles on it.

But I still wouldn't tar the whole brand with the same brush. You're always gonnahave a fault or two slipping through the cracks with mass production. But i'm sure there are far more Landcruisers that are good than bad.

They're reliability may not be as good as the older stuff but their bar is high and they have an awful long way to fall.

maidhc

goochy wrote: »

I was just saying the 2018 rexton looks well . It's only just launched.
I was just making the point the main reason for buying a landcruiser is reliability and they are not bullet proof. Know someone who had current model when new out and had to give it back and was given a new one

The main reason for buying a landcruiser is they execute their role better than anything else on the market. Reliability is a huge component of this. I certainly haven't heard anything but good things about the cruiser. I say this as an owner of an older one too (which is actually surprisingly good to drive)

AckwelFoley

I wouldnt consider the Landrover discovery in the same workhorse bracket as the Pajero or the landcruiser..


Dont get me wrong..i like them nice looking vehicles but more of a family car for dropping the kids to school and football training for those with deep pockets.

TrailerBob

maidhc wrote: »

The main reason for buying a landcruiser is they execute their role better than anything else on the market.

This just about sums it up tbh. Others may have a more luxurious ride (discovery) a higher towing rating (defender), or be perceived as more handsome(whatever you're having yourself) but as an all-rounder the cruiser is pretty much unbeatable.

I'd buy a new one if I had 50 grand lying about, but I don't, so my nearly 300,000 mile one will do for another while.

I can understand opting for a Pajero...

Seriously though.... a Rexton?? :rolleyes:

Wildcard7

goochy wrote: »

I was just making the point the main reason for buying a landcruiser is reliability and they are not bullet proof. Know someone who had current model when new out and had to give it back and was given a new one

That's a nice anecdotal story (and if it happend to me it would probably put me off Toyota too), but realistically it's about as relevant as saying "smoking can't be that bad for your health, sure my gran lived to 92 and she smoked like a chimney".

Statistics > anecdotes.