It may have been that decades ago, but why do all the car experts publish that the current GX series is based on the 10 year old 4Runner design? Are they all misleading folks, or is the difference in the noise?
I just think it depends on the definition of "based on". I'll be happy to agree that the 4R and the GX are identical.
For grins, a new guy on the block just looking at the current specs, equipment, photos, the 4R and GX differences look the same as the difference between the Laredo and Summit.
Sure. Completely different suspensions, engines, transmissions, electronics, driver assistance. Different interior, exterior. The rear hatch from the 4R is a door on the GX and only a handful of minor parts are interchangeable - but those are interchangeable with most Toyota/Lexus. But you're right, other than that they're the same. The Laredo being a capable basic vehicle like a 4R, where the Summit is softer for a more lux boulevard ride, with loads of sound deadening, a different suspension transfer case, rear diff, with higher line leather interiors fancy wheels and styling touches, but still with plenty of off road and top notch nasty weather capability (with the right tires). Like the GX.
But the body bits, most interior and engine/tranny parts are the same. The Laredo and Summit are trim levels on an identical platform. The 4R and GX are two completely different cars based on the same frame. For the GC, I'd say it IS like the difference between the GC and the Mercedes GLE - that is the same comparison.
Toyota has made it a habit to blame customer maintenance, or operator error for a slew of design flaws and Toyota fans buy it. Its a company cultural thing, I mean with the Toyota process its impossible for Toyota to be at fault, must be the customers being stupid....
Toyota fans like to tout that they are strong as dirt, which was the case decades ago when they were simple machines. I had a Nissan that was strong as dirt reliable, but brutal on the highway, I don't think it even had AC.
Absolutely correct. The things that make the 4R/GX so reliable are the things it doesn't have. The old Cherokee were also reliable but they also lacked the bells and whistles that we've grown accustomed to. Today Toyota/Lexus is just another car in reliability and durability terms.
Right. Because they've added all of the crap that breaks to all of the other cars in the lineup. If you took away the air suspension, put in an AM/FM radio and halogen lights, then the GC would also be reliable.
I think many get caught up with off road capability where 99 out of 100 of these vehicles will never see a logging road let alone a trail.
You bet'cha Its no question, jeep offers competitive products for that hobby, you see tons of them on the trail. In the real world for most, its uncomplicated nasty weather performance, towing, handling feel, safety that make a difference. The WK2 is a lot easier to drive in nasty weather than just about anything else that you'd want to spend hours behind the wheel with. Just push the throttle and go. And it drives nice year round, stable on the highway and byways.
Absolutely agree. The GC is an all-weather vehicle that can be a daily driver. Getting around is not as dependent on driver skill as the 4R or Lexus, both of which require some manual intervention to activate part time traction aids.
Depends on the trim levels. Not much you need to do with the GX unless you get into really serious issues. At that point you need to flip some buttons on the GC too. Jeep and Dodge used similar drive trains to current Lexus stuff years ago, my 2001 Dakota had something that looks and operated identical to the Lexus components, but they have moved on from that old architecture to much more capable software controlled components in the WK2 and Durango.