Which vehicle is capable.....

Couldn't disagree more.

I have owned several of each as tour vehicles. As good as the turbo six was in the 100 series the 200 is a way better vehicle by far, its not ever a close comparison.

I have set up one of my 200s as a tourer, with 180,000 ks on the clock it drive just as good today as the day I bought it.

As with new vehicles more sensors more likely it to go wrong. Touch wood never had a sensor go wrong with my prado.

However did come across a 100series petrol which died at karajini with engine check light on, trying to explain to 3 x 20's something Germans that only way to properly assess situation was a obd2 code reader, suspect it was a toyota special as mine didn't fit the plug - engine started a few minutes after left turned off then followed them and towed it very slowly to info centre so at least they had pay phone and way of calling for assistance.

200 apart from USA based utes is widest around and depending on tracks used will get alot of bush striping. but liek all v8's depends how right foot is applied to how much fuel is used - I kind of smrik when i read people are happy getting 15l or more per 100km whilst i trundle along with a average of 11l/100 cruising at 100 on speedo

I thrashed my 200s daily, including a twice daily 0.80 mtr water crossing into Jim Jim, Twin Falls and Koolpin gorge, with 6 pax in it.

The only reason you hear crap stories about the 200 series, are from those that can't afford them.

Best Toyota ever made.

I'm not sure of the motivation, but I do know that since 2008 when I got my first 200, most of the "issues" raised about 200's on general forums like this one are only known to non owners.

Sure 200's have their issues like any vehicle I guess. But for some reason the frequency or magnitude of the issues are grossly exaggerated on many posts. Some problems of friends, or relatives 200's here, have never been heard of on LCOOL's 200 group, where about 4000 owners post around 3 - 4 times as many threads per day as the whole of EO but just on 200's. I notice the same thing happens to the Y62.

If you want real world OWNER advice from people on any Landcruiser, join LCOOL. much of the reports here should be filed in the fiction section.

I have no idea why this happens.

Hello Peter,

My HDJ100 is a 2006 that has 17 inch alloys. In 6 years and several outback trips and numerous trips I have never had a issue.

Peter you can't fit any 16" tyres on a 200 period.

17" tyres were hard to source in the bush about 7 - 8 years ago. Though I guess either 16, or 17" Landcrusier tyres would have been easier to source than tyres for less common 4wds or trucks even then. 17"s are commonly available in Mud or AT these days with tons of choice.

I would have thought that 17" Landcrusier profile tyres would be much more likely to be in stock than for less common vehicles. If I was a tyre dealer I would stock tyres suitable for Landcrusier 100, 200, 70, Prado, Patrol. The rest can be dammed and wait. It's not just the wheel size, it's the profile that matters too.
If it's lots of sidewall your after, the standard 100 sidewall height is only 6mm different to a 200's standard sidewall height. If that is still a concern a 200 with 285 70 17's will have 7mm more than a 100 and still have more power. Or 275 70 17 will be the same.

If you don't mind me asking, why do you see no 16" as such a big issue? I've spent many trips in deserts, most less travelled than the Simpson and have never wished I had 16". Well not in the last 8 or so years anyway.
Other issues that help in a simpson crossing are better traction control, a Torsen center diff and the ace in the hole CRAWL which will dig you out of a sand hole.

Tell me a 100 is better than this. Go to about 5:20 for when it starts to work. Look mum no hands.



or this Go to about 3:40 TURN THE SOUND OFF..

Any reduction in sidewall height or tyre diameter will reduce sand performance (all other things being equal), simply because the tyre foot print will be reduced and pressure reduction will have reduced effect.
That is a matter of physics.
You might make up for some of that loss using other techniques, but that loss will not be regained.

Cheers,
Peter
OKA196 motorhome

Yes in isolation that is true. However a tyre on a 16" rim doesn't necessarily have more sidewall than that of a 17" rim. Look at trucks. It's all about the profile. A 33" or 35" tyre on a 17" rim will have more sidewall that that of a 31" on a 16" rim. The tyres are 10mm wider too, adding to the "footprint" I guess. With standard 275 wide tyres the 100's "Footprint" will be almost identical to the 200"s 285 wide footprint yeah?

With everything else not being equal that doesn't answer why a 100 with 16"s would be better than a 200 with 17"s crossing the Simpson????

I can remember a similar argument when the 80 series was changing from 15" to 16" tyres.

And it is a coincidence that the French Line is more torn up each year?
We were camped for a week there recently and watched a big variety of vehicles and techniques climb the same couple of dunes.
The conclusions were inescapable from our perspective in terms of how the damage was being done.

Cheers,
Peter
OKA196 motorhome

I love that video of the crawl control - it sort of asks more questions for me than it answers.

I think its only on the petrol ? - would that mean the petrol is the one to get for traction.

I would have thought that after a minute or so , I'd have given up saying that's its bogged for sure.

I wonder just why it took 5 minutes - was it crawling a millimetre at a time then just got something solid ?

In both vids the vehicle only started moving once the steering wheel was being moved side to side a bit.

To answer the OPs question.

I have owned 5 x 100series, 3 x OKAs for Peter_n_Margaret's benifit and 2 x 200 series.

I can confidently say the 200 is well in advance of all of those, I must say I have never owned a Nissan Robin something I will proudly take to the grave. LOL

Once again expert opinions by people that have never owned a 200, take it or leave it.

In the next episode they roll it off a cliff Oh hang on that's the Hilux, my bad.

Wow, I can see the positives now , pull up walk past problem area with billy and mugs, start a fire to boil up the cuppa and hey presto your magic carpet arrives to continue your journey, set and forget.

I wonder how far it will go if you inadvertently nod off and if so does it come with a GPS tracker to find it ?

Hello All,

Thanks for the information. Good insight to the owners of 200 have had a great run to date.

Robin, Crawl was only available on the Petrol until about 2010. It's been standard on all 200's since then.

There are lots of Tundra videos showing CRAWL in action and it is something to see as it works. It kind of builds up the sand under the wheels which takes a few minutes sometimes. Sometimes it starts to dig out of the sand almost straight away.

I've used it where there is no solid sand at all and it works great. It's a great feature in soft sand. It's hard to believe that it works as well as it does, so I understand the cynicism of a few posters here who are not familiar with it. I do a bit of desert touring and it never ceases to amaze me.


Peter, I think you are drawing a very long bow to suggest that 200's are the reason the French line is cut up LOL. I would say it more down to it being the route for people who want to cross in 2 days and the first timer route. Why anyone use the French Line is beyond me. It's a busy, chopped up traffic jam. About as isolated as Bourke St Melbourne. Actually most of the E-W Simpson is getting like that.

Hello Tony,

I am unsure if the French line being cut up is from traction control.

You still see posts where people brag to say they did it in 2wd, they do not understand that 4wd isn't actual 4WD until diff lock is pressed.

Also tyre pressure. People brag they did not need to lower tyre pressure and it was easy....

Not aware of the damage they have caused.


Out of interest Tony, what suspension do you have in the 200? Old man emu nitro charger sports? Do you run a secondary fuel filter?

Thanks

Mick,

I have Bilsteins with King springs. I had several suspension setups on my old 200 and was never really happy in deserts until I got that setup.

The other thing I did for my new vehicle is ditch the ARB Bullbar in favour of a Smarbar. Without getting into a debate of the overall merits of that bar, I was never happy with the weight of the ARB bar - with the weight forward and high. They made the 200 bar stick out a lot and very heavy for some reason. 100kg plus the winch ( despite ARB claiming it weighs "about" 80kg when pushed). It made the front of the vehicle "boat" in scalloped approaches to dunes.

A saving of about 55kg and it shows. With lighter duty suspension it rides a lot better in deserts. Best thing I did on the new 200.

Sorry Mick. I forgot to answer your question on the filter. I just run the standard filter. I always carry 2 spares for when the water or clogged light comes on. After reading about 30 pages on LCOOL on this subject I am not sure if it's better, worse or same with an additional filter.

Peter, 17" are the new 16" just like 16" were the new 15".
Get any tyre you like now in 17"
And the 200series takes 70 and 75 profile tyres - actually takes taller tyres than any previous Landcruiser wagon.

Hey Peter_n_Margaret I believe your OKA wheels are 19.5 inch, just trying to understand your point.?

Yes, our OKA has 305/70R19.5. (928mm diameter). They still have a lot of rubber between the rim and the road. The original 9.00 x 16s at 936 mm diameter (now 255/100R16 and 923mm diameter) were better in sand (but too low in load capacity for our vehicle).
Even better are 325/85R16 MXL military tyre at 984mm and many owners are using these very successfully for serious desert work.

Oversimplified, but a simple calculation indicates sidewall height.
305 x 70% = 213mm
255 x 100% = 255mm
325 x 85% = 276mm
That plus tyre overall diameter will indicate the relative footprint lengths.
Try it with some of the tyres fitted to later 4WDs.

Cheers,
Peter
OKA196 motorhome

Hmm It appears that you just proved your earlier points wrong Peter. If someone shouldn't buy a 200 because it has 17" instead of 16: rims, I guess 20.5" rims are right out of the question.

How does that logic work? You ignored the conversation about larger tyres for the whole conversation then used that same point to justify 20.5" rims.

Though at least you got the conversation to the point where you let us know you have an OKA, which is better than (insert 4wd mentioned in topic here). Who would have thought?

:-)

Job done I guess.

The bottom line is that for the same tyre diameter on the same vehicle, a 16" tyre will out perform any tyre on a larger diameter rim, in sand.
Many modern 4WDs don't give you the choice any more and I suggest that is a retrograde step.

I think it was the guys at Mound Dare who declared that a late model Range Rover was unsuitable for the Simpson because of the low profile tyres fitted.

Cheers,
Peter
OKA196 motorhome

As would any 4wd fitted with low profile road orientated tyres. Very few OEM fitted tyres on 4wds are suitable for extreme offroad use.

Like most 4wders in the know, you change the Range Rover tyres to something suitable for offroad use, as you do for just about all makes - I have.

You would need to look at doing the same with top self Toyota products with their 285/50R20 tyres - so maybe all Toyotas should be banned from the Simpson along with Range Rovers.