Should we afford a new Toyota Sequoia?

[02nz]

You can afford to buy the car you want. But I cannot get over that a Toyota costs $60K. I have not purchased a care in 10 years. My Lexus ES did not cost even close to that much.

It's the reality of SUV's and trucks these days.

A loaded Ford Expedition or Chevy Suburban can get over $80,000.

The margins are much higher on trucks and many truck-based SUVs than on crossovers and minivans. A Highlander or Sienna at $40K will be a much more practical and comfortable vehicle than the Sequoia, even aside from the difference in price and fuel economy.

[Workaholic]

You can afford to buy the car you want. But I cannot get over that a Toyota costs $60K. I have not purchased a care in 10 years. My Lexus ES did not cost even close to that much.

It's the reality of SUV's and trucks these days.

A loaded Ford Expedition or Chevy Suburban can get over $80,000.

I agree, it's simply the reality of the society we live in. For many families, a pickup truck or SUV is sort of the "does all" vehicle and I'd venture to guess that the majority of American households probably have at least ONE of these vehicles in their driveway. They're just convenient vehicles and can be utilized for many different tasks at once. I drive an F-150 and wouldn't ever downsize to a smaller vehicle- it's serves all of my purposes and is quite comfortable to boot.

[02nz]

I like the sequoia but the tundra is the exact same thing for 45k
I'm on my third Tundra. Love it

Not remotely the same. The Tundra is a pickup truck, the Sequoia is a three-row SUV. They may share some parts but totally different segments of the market. OP has 3 kids and that's not going to be a good fit in a pickup with two rows of seats. (Again, I think a van or car-based crossover like the Highlander would be a much better choice.)

[Workaholic]

I like the sequoia but the tundra is the exact same thing for 45k
I'm on my third Tundra. Love it

Not remotely the same. The Tundra is a pickup truck, the Sequoia is a three-row SUV. They may share some parts but totally different segments of the market. OP has 3 kids and that's not going to be a good fit in a pickup with two rows of seats. (Again, I think a van or car-based crossover like the Highlander would be a much better choice.)

The problem with something like the Highlander is that if you are utilizing the 3rd row, you really have very little space behind it to store anything big or bulky. It's very limited and probably not ideal if you'll ever use it to go on trips or even try to fit suitcases in it to go to the airport. Much better to have a full-size SUV that can accommodate items without needing to have the 3rd row down.

[illumination]

You can afford to buy the car you want. But I cannot get over that a Toyota costs $60K. I have not purchased a care in 10 years. My Lexus ES did not cost even close to that much.

It's the reality of SUV's and trucks these days.

A loaded Ford Expedition or Chevy Suburban can get over $80,000.

The margins are much higher on trucks and many truck-based SUVs than on crossovers and minivans. A Highlander or Sienna at $40K will be a much more practical and comfortable vehicle than the Sequoia, even aside from the difference in price and fuel economy.

Bob Luntz, who had several senior executive positions at all the Big 3 automotive companies, including President and Vice President, blames the increase in prices on the car companies losing money on "compliance vehicles" to hit CAFE standards. So they lose money on the cars they "have to" build in order to manufacture a full size truck or SUV. That money has to be made up somewhere.

“I don’t know if anybody noticed, but full-size sport-utilities used to be — just a few years ago used to be $42,000, all in, fully equipped. You can’t touch a Chevy Tahoe for under about $65 (thousand) now,” he stated. “Yukons are in the $70 (thousands). The Escalade comfortably hits $100 (thousand). Three or four years ago they were about $60,000. What this is, is companies trying to recover what they’re losing at the other end with what I call compliance vehicles, which are Chevy Volts, Bolts, plug-in Cadillacs and fuel cell vehicles."
Bob Luntz

[finite_difference]

What are all your neighbors driving nowadays?

What does your brother-in-law drive nowadays?

I take it you want to borrow theirs?

[alfaspider]

You can afford to buy the car you want. But I cannot get over that a Toyota costs $60K. I have not purchased a care in 10 years. My Lexus ES did not cost even close to that much.

It's the reality of SUV's and trucks these days.

A loaded Ford Expedition or Chevy Suburban can get over $80,000.

The margins are much higher on trucks and many truck-based SUVs than on crossovers and minivans. A Highlander or Sienna at $40K will be a much more practical and comfortable vehicle than the Sequoia, even aside from the difference in price and fuel economy.

Bob Luntz, who had several senior executive positions at all the Big 3 automotive companies, including President and Vice President, blames the increase in prices on the car companies losing money on "compliance vehicles" to hit CAFE standards. So they lose money on the cars they "have to" build in order to manufacture a full size truck or SUV. That money has to be made up somewhere.

“I don’t know if anybody noticed, but full-size sport-utilities used to be — just a few years ago used to be $42,000, all in, fully equipped. You can’t touch a Chevy Tahoe for under about $65 (thousand) now,” he stated. “Yukons are in the $70 (thousands). The Escalade comfortably hits $100 (thousand). Three or four years ago they were about $60,000. What this is, is companies trying to recover what they’re losing at the other end with what I call compliance vehicles, which are Chevy Volts, Bolts, plug-in Cadillacs and fuel cell vehicles."
Bob Luntz

Lutz has a bit of a vendetta against EVs, and I don't think his explanation makes economic sense. If the automakers could have charged more for full size SUVs in the past, they would have. Do you really think they would have just intentionally turned away bigger profits because they didn't have a big enough loss leader to neutralize them?

I'd also point out that the full size SUV market has moved on in a lot of ways. The new suburban/yukon/escalade are vastly more sophisticated and luxurious than they were just a few years ago. Not that long ago, a Suburban was just a Silverado with a built-in truck topper - they were relatively cheap and simple to build and used essentially the same small block V8 GM had been using since the 1950s (albeit with modern fuel injection and emissions controls). The Escalade may have been "luxury", but build quality was poor and the materials were cheap cheap cheap. The new ones stand up to the German luxury makes. Long story short, the full size SUV segment has moved upmarket.

[ThankYouJack]

I like the sequoia but the tundra is the exact same thing for 45k
I'm on my third Tundra. Love it

Not remotely the same. The Tundra is a pickup truck, the Sequoia is a three-row SUV. They may share some parts but totally different segments of the market. OP has 3 kids and that's not going to be a good fit in a pickup with two rows of seats. (Again, I think a van or car-based crossover like the Highlander would be a much better choice.)

The problem with something like the Highlander is that if you are utilizing the 3rd row, you really have very little space behind it to store anything big or bulky. It's very limited and probably not ideal if you'll ever use it to go on trips or even try to fit suitcases in it to go to the airport. Much better to have a full-size SUV that can accommodate items without needing to have the 3rd row down.

Does the Highlander 3rd row split? If so, that would free up space in the back unless you're carrying 8 passengers. Also, if someone needs more space just for an occasional trip, a cargo carrier (either hitch or roof) could be the better option before buying a much more expensive vehicle.

[TallBoy29er]

Find a used Land Cruiser. Much better than the Sequoia.

I test drove a Sequoia and compared with the LC - it was very clunky (better chassis on the LC from what I recall) - same engine at the time the LC was night and day more solid. I bought used to save considerable money and it has been very reliable and still has good resale value.

Costing over 50% more, I would hope a landcruiser would be "more solid" than a sequoia.

Key word is Used. You can find a slightly used Land Cruiser for the cost of a new Sequoia - drive them both and decide on that. I picked mine up for about 1/2 the cost of new with only 36K miles - was mint and less than 4 years old. I chose from @4 at local Toyota dealers in the area at the time.

Sure - nothing beats a new car but man a slightly used Land Cruiser is nothing to scoff at.

The Land Cruiser is an amazing vehicle.
If even thinking about going down that route, it's worth checking out the Lexus LX570.
Not exact replicas, but it is based off the Land Cruiser.
You may be able to find a nice used one cheaper than the LC....people like to pay for the LC badging.

Edited to add: 2019 LX570 w/ 20k miles for $69k (I'm sure you could go below that as well). Just used for ballparking cost.
https://www.cargurus.com/Cars/l-Used-Le ... =291728561

[Workaholic]

I like the sequoia but the tundra is the exact same thing for 45k
I'm on my third Tundra. Love it

Not remotely the same. The Tundra is a pickup truck, the Sequoia is a three-row SUV. They may share some parts but totally different segments of the market. OP has 3 kids and that's not going to be a good fit in a pickup with two rows of seats. (Again, I think a van or car-based crossover like the Highlander would be a much better choice.)

The problem with something like the Highlander is that if you are utilizing the 3rd row, you really have very little space behind it to store anything big or bulky. It's very limited and probably not ideal if you'll ever use it to go on trips or even try to fit suitcases in it to go to the airport. Much better to have a full-size SUV that can accommodate items without needing to have the 3rd row down.

Does the Highlander 3rd row split? If so, that would free up space in the back unless you're carrying 8 passengers. Also, if someone needs more space just for an occasional strip, a cargo carrier (either hitch or roof) could be the better option before buying a much more expensive vehicle.

No idea if the 3rd row splits but yes that would be helpful.

I guess the other question is if the OP ever plans on towing anything behind it- boat/trailer/etc. Would be impossible with a Highlander.

I guess I'm in the camp of buy a little more than you know you need instead of buying something that is on the edge. Much easier to have buyer's remorse if you don't get "enough" vehicle for your needs. I don't think I'd ever regret buying too much vehicle though.

[alfaspider]

I like the sequoia but the tundra is the exact same thing for 45k
I'm on my third Tundra. Love it

Not remotely the same. The Tundra is a pickup truck, the Sequoia is a three-row SUV. They may share some parts but totally different segments of the market. OP has 3 kids and that's not going to be a good fit in a pickup with two rows of seats. (Again, I think a van or car-based crossover like the Highlander would be a much better choice.)

The problem with something like the Highlander is that if you are utilizing the 3rd row, you really have very little space behind it to store anything big or bulky. It's very limited and probably not ideal if you'll ever use it to go on trips or even try to fit suitcases in it to go to the airport. Much better to have a full-size SUV that can accommodate items without needing to have the 3rd row down.

Does the Highlander 3rd row split? If so, that would free up space in the back unless you're carrying 8 passengers. Also, if someone needs more space just for an occasional strip, a cargo carrier (either hitch or roof) could be the better option before buying a much more expensive vehicle.

No idea if the 3rd row splits but yes that would be helpful.

I guess the other question is if the OP ever plans on towing anything behind it- boat/trailer/etc. Would be impossible with a Highlander.

I guess I'm in the camp of buy a little more than you know you need instead of buying something that is on the edge. Much easier to have buyer's remorse if you don't get "enough" vehicle for your needs. I don't think I'd ever regret buying too much vehicle though.

Highlander can tow 5,000lbs. That's plenty for a small fishing or speed boat. How big of a boat do you need to tow? I'm guessing if you have something big to tow, or are likely to acquire something big to tow, you already know it.

[kenoryan]

I like the sequoia but the tundra is the exact same thing for 45k
I'm on my third Tundra. Love it

Not remotely the same. The Tundra is a pickup truck, the Sequoia is a three-row SUV. They may share some parts but totally different segments of the market. OP has 3 kids and that's not going to be a good fit in a pickup with two rows of seats. (Again, I think a van or car-based crossover like the Highlander would be a much better choice.)

You have to sit in the back seat of a Tundra to know what I'm talking about. Plenty of room for 3 kids. And if you get a hard tonneau cover for the bed, that makes a huge storage space for stuff. And easy to tow a boat.

[02nz]

Find a used Land Cruiser. Much better than the Sequoia.

I test drove a Sequoia and compared with the LC - it was very clunky (better chassis on the LC from what I recall) - same engine at the time the LC was night and day more solid. I bought used to save considerable money and it has been very reliable and still has good resale value.

Costing over 50% more, I would hope a landcruiser would be "more solid" than a sequoia.

Key word is Used. You can find a slightly used Land Cruiser for the cost of a new Sequoia - drive them both and decide on that. I picked mine up for about 1/2 the cost of new with only 36K miles - was mint and less than 4 years old. I chose from @4 at local Toyota dealers in the area at the time.

Sure - nothing beats a new car but man a slightly used Land Cruiser is nothing to scoff at.

The Land Cruiser is an amazing vehicle.
If even thinking about going down that route, it's worth checking out the Lexus LX570.
Not exact replicas, but it is based off the Land Cruiser.
You may be able to find a nice used one cheaper than the LC....people like to pay for the LC badging.

Edited to add: 2019 LX570 w/ 20k miles for $69k (I'm sure you could go below that as well). Just used for ballparking cost.
https://www.cargurus.com/Cars/l-Used-Le ... =291728561

I laugh every time the Land Cruiser is recommended here as a family hauler. It's only slightly less appropriate a recommendation for the OP's circumstances than a Miata.

I drove a Land Cruiser daily for work for about a year. It's an amazing vehicle ... for certain purposes. But if OP's purpose is to haul a 3-child family in comfort, the Land Cruiser is probably one of the worst choices possible. Clumsy handling, uncomfortable ride (by modern standards), awkward entry/egress, little room, dated interior, even more dated infotainment, cramped interior (for the size of the vehicle), exorbitant price, horrible fuel economy. But other than that, yeah, perfect!

A new Highlander is half the price of that used LX570 and infinitely more comfortable.

[TallBoy29er]

I laugh every time the Land Cruiser is recommended here as a family hauler. It's only slightly less appropriate a recommendation for the OP's circumstances than a Miata.

I drove a Land Cruiser daily for work for about a year. It's an amazing vehicle ... for certain purposes. But if OP's purpose is to haul a 3-child family in comfort, the Land Cruiser is probably one of the worst choices possible. Clumsy handling, uncomfortable ride (by modern standards), awkward entry/egress, little room, dated interior, even more dated infotainment, cramped interior (for the size of the vehicle), exorbitant price, horrible fuel economy. But other than that, yeah, perfect!

A new Highlander is half the price of that used LX570 and infinitely more comfortable.

To each their own.

[ThankYouJack]

I like the sequoia but the tundra is the exact same thing for 45k
I'm on my third Tundra. Love it

Not remotely the same. The Tundra is a pickup truck, the Sequoia is a three-row SUV. They may share some parts but totally different segments of the market. OP has 3 kids and that's not going to be a good fit in a pickup with two rows of seats. (Again, I think a van or car-based crossover like the Highlander would be a much better choice.)

The problem with something like the Highlander is that if you are utilizing the 3rd row, you really have very little space behind it to store anything big or bulky. It's very limited and probably not ideal if you'll ever use it to go on trips or even try to fit suitcases in it to go to the airport. Much better to have a full-size SUV that can accommodate items without needing to have the 3rd row down.

Does the Highlander 3rd row split? If so, that would free up space in the back unless you're carrying 8 passengers. Also, if someone needs more space just for an occasional strip, a cargo carrier (either hitch or roof) could be the better option before buying a much more expensive vehicle.

No idea if the 3rd row splits but yes that would be helpful.

I guess the other question is if the OP ever plans on towing anything behind it- boat/trailer/etc. Would be impossible with a Highlander.

I guess I'm in the camp of buy a little more than you know you need instead of buying something that is on the edge. Much easier to have buyer's remorse if you don't get "enough" vehicle for your needs. I don't think I'd ever regret buying too much vehicle though.

My Pilot 2nd and 3rd rows can split which is nice. I've towed a ~19ft ski boat with it before and it's rated at 3,500 towing capacity compared to 5,000 pounds of a Highlander. I've also seen some Subaru Outbacks towing pretty large boats (although I wouldn't recommend that).

I guess I'm in the camp of maybe being too practical. FWIW, I have a friend who had a Sequoia and felt it was too big. Another friend bought a Tundra and sold it after a bit because he thought it was too big and tough to fit in parking spaces. So some people have regrets for buying a larger vehicle than they need.

[OldBallCoach]

I just saw a nice 2011 LC with 115K on it for 35,000...buy it and spend 2500 on it to get it tight and drive it for another 100K easy...maybe add in another 3K for brakes and tires and you are golden. Just a thought...Sequoia is NOT a LC but its nice too.

[02nz]

I just saw a nice 2011 LC with 115K on it for 35,000...buy it and spend 2500 on it to get it tight and drive it for another 100K easy...maybe add in another 3K for brakes and tires and you are golden. Just a thought...Sequoia is NOT a LC but its nice too.

The Land Cruiser fans are beyond parody.

[rebellovw]

Find a used Land Cruiser. Much better than the Sequoia.

I test drove a Sequoia and compared with the LC - it was very clunky (better chassis on the LC from what I recall) - same engine at the time the LC was night and day more solid. I bought used to save considerable money and it has been very reliable and still has good resale value.

Costing over 50% more, I would hope a landcruiser would be "more solid" than a sequoia.

Key word is Used. You can find a slightly used Land Cruiser for the cost of a new Sequoia - drive them both and decide on that. I picked mine up for about 1/2 the cost of new with only 36K miles - was mint and less than 4 years old. I chose from @4 at local Toyota dealers in the area at the time.

Sure - nothing beats a new car but man a slightly used Land Cruiser is nothing to scoff at.

The Land Cruiser is an amazing vehicle.
If even thinking about going down that route, it's worth checking out the Lexus LX570.
Not exact replicas, but it is based off the Land Cruiser.
You may be able to find a nice used one cheaper than the LC....people like to pay for the LC badging.

Edited to add: 2019 LX570 w/ 20k miles for $69k (I'm sure you could go below that as well). Just used for ballparking cost.
https://www.cargurus.com/Cars/l-Used-Le ... =291728561

I laugh every time the Land Cruiser is recommended here as a family hauler. It's only slightly less appropriate a recommendation for the OP's circumstances than a Miata.

I drove a Land Cruiser daily for work for about a year. It's an amazing vehicle ... for certain purposes. But if OP's purpose is to haul a 3-child family in comfort, the Land Cruiser is probably one of the worst choices possible. Clumsy handling, uncomfortable ride (by modern standards), awkward entry/egress, little room, dated interior, even more dated infotainment, cramped interior (for the size of the vehicle), exorbitant price, horrible fuel economy. But other than that, yeah, perfect!

A new Highlander is half the price of that used LX570 and infinitely more comfortable.

The OP wants a Sequoia so the LC is a solid recommendation. We had a family of 4 and it was wonderful - I couldn't think of anything better for the snow of the Sierras, Utah, CO and AZ high desert - for me it has performed perfectly. I will be replacing it with a Subaru as I'm planning on giving it to my son - I'm a bit bummed about that but I promised...

[OldBallCoach]

I just saw a nice 2011 LC with 115K on it for 35,000...buy it and spend 2500 on it to get it tight and drive it for another 100K easy...maybe add in another 3K for brakes and tires and you are golden. Just a thought...Sequoia is NOT a LC but its nice too.

The Land Cruiser fans are beyond parody.

Yea we kinda are...LOL...its like the Jeep Thing, you wouldnt understand...

[02nz]

Costing over 50% more, I would hope a landcruiser would be "more solid" than a sequoia.

Key word is Used. You can find a slightly used Land Cruiser for the cost of a new Sequoia - drive them both and decide on that. I picked mine up for about 1/2 the cost of new with only 36K miles - was mint and less than 4 years old. I chose from @4 at local Toyota dealers in the area at the time.

Sure - nothing beats a new car but man a slightly used Land Cruiser is nothing to scoff at.

The Land Cruiser is an amazing vehicle.
If even thinking about going down that route, it's worth checking out the Lexus LX570.
Not exact replicas, but it is based off the Land Cruiser.
You may be able to find a nice used one cheaper than the LC....people like to pay for the LC badging.

Edited to add: 2019 LX570 w/ 20k miles for $69k (I'm sure you could go below that as well). Just used for ballparking cost.
https://www.cargurus.com/Cars/l-Used-Le ... =291728561

I laugh every time the Land Cruiser is recommended here as a family hauler. It's only slightly less appropriate a recommendation for the OP's circumstances than a Miata.

I drove a Land Cruiser daily for work for about a year. It's an amazing vehicle ... for certain purposes. But if OP's purpose is to haul a 3-child family in comfort, the Land Cruiser is probably one of the worst choices possible. Clumsy handling, uncomfortable ride (by modern standards), awkward entry/egress, little room, dated interior, even more dated infotainment, cramped interior (for the size of the vehicle), exorbitant price, horrible fuel economy. But other than that, yeah, perfect!

A new Highlander is half the price of that used LX570 and infinitely more comfortable.

The OP wants a Sequoia so the LC is a solid recommendation. We had a family of 4 and it was wonderful - I couldn't think of anything better for the snow of the Sierras, Utah, CO and AZ high desert - for me it has performed perfectly. I will be replacing it with a Subaru as I'm planning on giving it to my son - I'm a bit bummed about that but I promised...

Seriously?! The Land Cruiser is smaller than the Sequoia and costs 70% more ($85K vs $50K starting price). Now there's a reason for that - for a very, very small niche. But the Land Cruiser is even less suited for family-hauler duty than the Sequoia, which at least has the benefit of more interior space and independent rear suspension (for better ride and ability to fold 3rd row flat).

[DesertDiva]

FWIW - we owned a Sequoia about 8 years ago and were in a multi-car freeway pileup east of LA. It took a beating in the accident but we were safe.

[Carguy85]

Have had a Highlander, 2 4runners, 4 tundras, and a sequoia. Currently a 17 sequoia and a 20 crewmax tundra are in the stable. I understand many want the latest greatest but I suppose I’m old fashioned and want the most reliable highest quality (in my eyes) vehicle for my dollar. The Sequoia 3rd row is very spacious but yes with it up there is minimal luggage room. Check legroom specs across the board....I did. However it folds in 2 sections if only one person needed to be in the very back. We have used a cargo rack that plugs into the hitch for longer road trips which helped greatly. I think the luxury options people pay for are mostly gimmicky at best and very wasteful priced to make maximal profit ... how much more luxury does one need than maybe heated leather, Bluetooth, backup cam? How much does it really add to the experience? Two of the three above of course are now standard on every new car. How utterly worthless is a navigation system now or even the entertainment package (tv/dvd player) both of which my wife though she had to have in the Sequoia....smartphones/iPads have certainly by now negated this. My vote would be for a Crewmax tundra with a camper shell... although it only holds 5 but can tow about 2000lbs more. If you didn’t have to tow then mow doubt that an Odessy is more practical and has a bit more 3rd row leg room...although I’m partial to Toyota so it would be a Sienna...unfortunately my wife in no way was going to do a “minivan”.

[Workaholic]

I think the luxury options people pay for are mostly gimmicky at best and very wasteful priced to make maximal profit ... how much more luxury does one need than maybe heated leather, Bluetooth, backup cam? How much does it really add to the experience? Two of the three above of course are now standard on every new car. How utterly worthless is a navigation system now or even the entertainment package (tv/dvd player) both of which my wife though she had to have in the Sequoia....smartphones/iPads have certainly by now negated this.

I'd beg to differ, I find certain options to be worth the money and quite useful. A few that I find value in- radar cruise control, heated steering wheel, multi-adjustable seats, apple carplay, and multi-zone climate control. I do agree some features are gimmicky but a lot of features can be quite useful. Unfortunately most of the time you have to add multi-thousand dollar packages to get the features you want so instead of adding a $500 option, you're adding a $3500 package of stuff you may not want.

[Workaholic]

I just saw a nice 2011 LC with 115K on it for 35,000...buy it and spend 2500 on it to get it tight and drive it for another 100K easy...maybe add in another 3K for brakes and tires and you are golden. Just a thought...Sequoia is NOT a LC but its nice too.

The Land Cruiser fans are beyond parody.

Unless you're commuting through the Mohave desert, the Land Cruiser is about the worst vehicle you can buy besides a Hummer H1. To actually drive on a daily basis on a freeway, there are much, much better choices.

[White Coat Investor]

We looked at a Sequoia several years ago when cross-shopping a Tahoe and Expedition. The Toyota was horribly dated then, and both GM and Ford replaced their platforms since then. I shake my head whenever I see anyone considering buying a new Sequoia.

I prefer the term "proven" to dated. Toyota buyers don't generally care about "style". They want trustworthy, reliable, and durable. And that's what they get with a Sequoia. No changes needed since 2008? Perfect. That's exactly the kind of car I want. I actually slightly prefer my 2005 over our 2016 for style.

Now get off my lawn!

[stoptothink]

I just saw a nice 2011 LC with 115K on it for 35,000...buy it and spend 2500 on it to get it tight and drive it for another 100K easy...maybe add in another 3K for brakes and tires and you are golden. Just a thought...Sequoia is NOT a LC but its nice too.

The Land Cruiser fans are beyond parody.

Unless you're commuting through the Mohave desert, the Land Cruiser is about the worst vehicle you can buy besides a Hummer H1. To actually drive on a daily basis on a freeway, there are much, much better choices.

Seriously. Great off the pavement and very durable/reliable, that's where the benefits of an LC (compared to a Sequoia or other much cheaper competitors) ends. They have cult status. I have two good friends that are members of that cult and their LCs are garage queens; only taken out a few times a year for trips through the desert.

[Workaholic]

We looked at a Sequoia several years ago when cross-shopping a Tahoe and Expedition. The Toyota was horribly dated then, and both GM and Ford replaced their platforms since then. I shake my head whenever I see anyone considering buying a new Sequoia.

I prefer the term "proven" to dated. Toyota buyers don't generally care about "style". They want trustworthy, reliable, and durable. And that's what they get with a Sequoia. No changes needed since 2008? Perfect. That's exactly the kind of car I want. I actually slightly prefer my 2005 over our 2016 for style.

Now get off my lawn!

I don't necessarily believe that is the case- look at how drastically Toyota has styled their best-selling Camry and Avalon models? They're hardly anything like their predecessors.

The reason Toyota hasn't updated their Sequoia is because they realize they cannot be competitive in the full-size SUV marketplace. It is simply dominated by Ford and GM and while Toyota cars sell like hotcakes, their full-size SUV and pickup don't. I'd wager Toyota decided to shift their focus to models they know will sell well instead of putting resources into vehicles that aren't giving them the ROI they're after. Quite the opposite is true of Ford and GM though as they're investing huge resources into full-size SUV's and trucks while giving up on selling sedans.

[02nz]

I just saw a nice 2011 LC with 115K on it for 35,000...buy it and spend 2500 on it to get it tight and drive it for another 100K easy...maybe add in another 3K for brakes and tires and you are golden. Just a thought...Sequoia is NOT a LC but its nice too.

The Land Cruiser fans are beyond parody.

Unless you're commuting through the Mohave desert, the Land Cruiser is about the worst vehicle you can buy besides a Hummer H1. To actually drive on a daily basis on a freeway, there are much, much better choices.

Seriously. Great off the pavement and very durable/reliable, that's where the benefits of an LC (compared to a Sequoia or other much cheaper competitors) ends. They have cult status. I have two good friends that are members of that cult and their LCs are garage queens; only taken out a few times a year for trips through the desert.

Great. If OP is looking to for "garage queens" that will be used a few times a year and for membership in a "cult", we know what he should get. As for hauling around 3 kids to soccer practice ...

(BTW, isn't there something absurd about paying WAY more for a vehicle for its durability/reliability and then almost never using it?)

[T4REngineer]

I just saw a nice 2011 LC with 115K on it for 35,000...buy it and spend 2500 on it to get it tight and drive it for another 100K easy...maybe add in another 3K for brakes and tires and you are golden. Just a thought...Sequoia is NOT a LC but its nice too.

The Land Cruiser fans are beyond parody.

Unless you're commuting through the Mohave desert, the Land Cruiser is about the worst vehicle you can buy besides a Hummer H1. To actually drive on a daily basis on a freeway, there are much, much better choices.

Seriously. Great off the pavement and very durable/reliable, that's where the benefits of an LC (compared to a Sequoia or other much cheaper competitors) ends. They have cult status. I have two good friends that are members of that cult and their LCs are garage queens; only taken out a few times a year for trips through the desert.

Great. If OP is looking to for "garage queens" that will be used twice a year and for membership in a "cult", we know what he should get. As for hauling around 3 kids to soccer practice ...

[Disrespectful comment removed by moderator oldcomputerguy] To some people, those trips are the main source of family vacations and wonderful memories are formed with your family in doing them. Sure being 50+miles from any human in the Needles is not everyone's idea of fun but for those that do enjoy it - Toyota's fit the bill nicely but it can certainly be done in a Ford or GMC.

And the horror of having to use a LC to bring 3 kids to soccer practice, I mean the closest comparison to a LC is what a horse drawn carriage.....

Not saying this is what the OP wants or needs as they didn't give us information or even ask about vehicles just the financial side of the choice

1st world problems and attitudes - If someone wants a LC great, if they want a Rolex great, if they want a high end road bike great if they want to drive a 25year old Ford great - everyone has different values so while we can state facts about objects it should stop at that and we all know the facts about the dated LC platform from the folks who seem to have nothing better to do then post endlessly about the downsides of a LC

[JD2775]

We looked at a Sequoia several years ago when cross-shopping a Tahoe and Expedition. The Toyota was horribly dated then, and both GM and Ford replaced their platforms since then. I shake my head whenever I see anyone considering buying a new Sequoia.

I prefer the term "proven" to dated. Toyota buyers don't generally care about "style". They want trustworthy, reliable, and durable. And that's what they get with a Sequoia. No changes needed since 2008? Perfect. That's exactly the kind of car I want. I actually slightly prefer my 2005 over our 2016 for style.

Now get off my lawn!

I don't necessarily believe that is the case- look at how drastically Toyota has styled their best-selling Camry and Avalon models? They're hardly anything like their predecessors.

The reason Toyota hasn't updated their Sequoia is because they realize they cannot be competitive in the full-size SUV marketplace. It is simply dominated by Ford and GM and while Toyota cars sell like hotcakes, their full-size SUV and pickup don't. I'd wager Toyota decided to shift their focus to models they know will sell well instead of putting resources into vehicles that aren't giving them the ROI they're after. Quite the opposite is true of Ford and GM though as they're investing huge resources into full-size SUV's and trucks while giving up on selling sedans.

Ummm, what? The Tacoma has dominated the mid-size pickup market for years now

EDIT: you probably meant their full sized pickup, after re-reading your comment. Nevermind

[Workaholic]

We looked at a Sequoia several years ago when cross-shopping a Tahoe and Expedition. The Toyota was horribly dated then, and both GM and Ford replaced their platforms since then. I shake my head whenever I see anyone considering buying a new Sequoia.

I prefer the term "proven" to dated. Toyota buyers don't generally care about "style". They want trustworthy, reliable, and durable. And that's what they get with a Sequoia. No changes needed since 2008? Perfect. That's exactly the kind of car I want. I actually slightly prefer my 2005 over our 2016 for style.

Now get off my lawn!

I don't necessarily believe that is the case- look at how drastically Toyota has styled their best-selling Camry and Avalon models? They're hardly anything like their predecessors.

The reason Toyota hasn't updated their Sequoia is because they realize they cannot be competitive in the full-size SUV marketplace. It is simply dominated by Ford and GM and while Toyota cars sell like hotcakes, their full-size SUV and pickup don't. I'd wager Toyota decided to shift their focus to models they know will sell well instead of putting resources into vehicles that aren't giving them the ROI they're after. Quite the opposite is true of Ford and GM though as they're investing huge resources into full-size SUV's and trucks while giving up on selling sedans.

Ummm, what? The Tacoma has dominated the mid-size pickup market for years now

Re-read what you highlighted...notice I said FULL SIZE. Yes the Tacoma has dominated the midsized market for decades but for many years, they had no competition there.

[JD2775]

We looked at a Sequoia several years ago when cross-shopping a Tahoe and Expedition. The Toyota was horribly dated then, and both GM and Ford replaced their platforms since then. I shake my head whenever I see anyone considering buying a new Sequoia.

I prefer the term "proven" to dated. Toyota buyers don't generally care about "style". They want trustworthy, reliable, and durable. And that's what they get with a Sequoia. No changes needed since 2008? Perfect. That's exactly the kind of car I want. I actually slightly prefer my 2005 over our 2016 for style.

Now get off my lawn!

I don't necessarily believe that is the case- look at how drastically Toyota has styled their best-selling Camry and Avalon models? They're hardly anything like their predecessors.

The reason Toyota hasn't updated their Sequoia is because they realize they cannot be competitive in the full-size SUV marketplace. It is simply dominated by Ford and GM and while Toyota cars sell like hotcakes, their full-size SUV and pickup don't. I'd wager Toyota decided to shift their focus to models they know will sell well instead of putting resources into vehicles that aren't giving them the ROI they're after. Quite the opposite is true of Ford and GM though as they're investing huge resources into full-size SUV's and trucks while giving up on selling sedans.

Ummm, what? The Tacoma has dominated the mid-size pickup market for years now

Re-read what you highlighted...notice I said FULL SIZE. Yes the Tacoma has dominated the midsized market for decades but for many years, they had no competition there.

Yep I just edited my post as you replied. I saw that

[OldBallCoach]

I just saw a nice 2011 LC with 115K on it for 35,000...buy it and spend 2500 on it to get it tight and drive it for another 100K easy...maybe add in another 3K for brakes and tires and you are golden. Just a thought...Sequoia is NOT a LC but its nice too.

The Land Cruiser fans are beyond parody.

Unless you're commuting through the Mohave desert, the Land Cruiser is about the worst vehicle you can buy besides a Hummer H1. To actually drive on a daily basis on a freeway, there are much, much better choices.

Seriously. Great off the pavement and very durable/reliable, that's where the benefits of an LC (compared to a Sequoia or other much cheaper competitors) ends. They have cult status. I have two good friends that are members of that cult and their LCs are garage queens; only taken out a few times a year for trips through the desert.

Well I drive my about 40 miles each way back and forth to work ever day and its worked fine for me for a lot of years...but to each his own as they say!! Getting my new one tomorrow...should need a new one again in about 7 years if things stay as is for me...but then life is full of interesting times.

[Hoosier CPA]

Interesting to read all the comments - learn a lot here.

As I said earlier, I plan to be in the market for a full-size SUV in about 2 years. I keep seeing the Sequoia is essentially the same as in 2008 or so, is rated at 13/17, and is still about the same price as the newer/more recently updated Tahoe or Expedition. But to many on here those are acceptable trade-offs for better reliability and resale. I suppose the difference between the 13/17 and the 15/20 the Tahoe gets won't add up to much $ over time.

[OldBallCoach]

I just saw a nice 2011 LC with 115K on it for 35,000...buy it and spend 2500 on it to get it tight and drive it for another 100K easy...maybe add in another 3K for brakes and tires and you are golden. Just a thought...Sequoia is NOT a LC but its nice too.

The Land Cruiser fans are beyond parody.

Unless you're commuting through the Mohave desert, the Land Cruiser is about the worst vehicle you can buy besides a Hummer H1. To actually drive on a daily basis on a freeway, there are much, much better choices.

Seriously. Great off the pavement and very durable/reliable, that's where the benefits of an LC (compared to a Sequoia or other much cheaper competitors) ends. They have cult status. I have two good friends that are members of that cult and their LCs are garage queens; only taken out a few times a year for trips through the desert.

Well I drive my LC about 40 miles each way back and forth to work ever day and its worked fine for me for a lot of years...but to each his own as they say!! Getting my new one tomorrow...should need a new one again in about 7 years if things stay as is for me...but then life is full of interesting times.

[JD2775]

The Land Cruiser fans are beyond parody.

Unless you're commuting through the Mohave desert, the Land Cruiser is about the worst vehicle you can buy besides a Hummer H1. To actually drive on a daily basis on a freeway, there are much, much better choices.

Seriously. Great off the pavement and very durable/reliable, that's where the benefits of an LC (compared to a Sequoia or other much cheaper competitors) ends. They have cult status. I have two good friends that are members of that cult and their LCs are garage queens; only taken out a few times a year for trips through the desert.

Well I drive my LC about 40 miles each way back and forth to work ever day and its worked fine for me for a lot of years...but to each his own as they say!! Getting my new one tomorrow...should need a new one again in about 7 years if things stay as is for me...but then life is full of interesting times.

Curious what is the main function of your Land Cruiser? Do you use it for family outings? Camping? Road Trips? Off-roading? Or is it just a comfy commuter?

[OldBallCoach]

I use my LC as a super safe comfy commuter, shorter road trips 3-4 hours...usually longer than that I will fly...excellent in bad snowy weather, dependable beyond belief...and in case of an accident as my wife was in last week...solid and safe....Its not fancy like a Navigator or Caddy...they just work for me...quiet as well...many times I will ride in the back and read or make calls...just works for me...

[thatme]

We have a GX460 and a Sequoia. The GX is similar to the 4Runner and still tows better than a van. I hate the GX for towing my enclosed trailer - the Sequoia is MUCH better at towing, it's not even close. My wife's Limited Sequoia was $52K new so there are deals to be had. I would definitely get the Sequoia with those two choices if towing will factor into it at all.

[Iowa David]

One suggestion is to compare the monthly insurance for each vehicle you’re comparing. I was recently surprised to see that the insurance for a new vehicle was nearly double when compared with my current vehicle. The Sequoia may be higher of the two and may sway your decision.

[Living Free]

OP, how heavy is your boat? It seems that the Odyssey has enough towing capacity to handle it right now, or you could use the highlander, is that correct? Only buy a vehicle with more towing capacity if you decide you're definitely buying the heavier boat.
With 3 kids I'd certainly favor the minivan. It will serve your purpose better (the 99.5% of the time that you're driving it and not towing a boat) and save you money (both in terms of upfront cost and ongoing expenses).

[TarHeel2002]

OP, how heavy is your boat? It seems that the Odyssey has enough towing capacity to handle it right now, or you could use the highlander, is that correct? Only buy a vehicle with more towing capacity if you decide you're definitely buying the heavier boat.
With 3 kids I'd certainly favor the minivan. It will serve your purpose better (the 99.5% of the time that you're driving it and not towing a boat) and save you money (both in terms of upfront cost and ongoing expenses).

This statement is probably true about the Odyssey serving our purpose 99.5% of the time vs the Sequoia (towing). It doesn’t help that I watched a Sequoia review last night and marveled at how “cool” it was ...lol.

On another note the Odyssey seems to have such a better interior vs the Sienna. That continuous variable transmission of the 2021 Sienna seems questionable too..not as responsive as the Odyssey V6.

The boat I haul now is about 2800lbs..the Highlander does fine with that ...well under the 5000lbs limit. If we ever upgrade boats the new boat could be 5000-5500lbs possibly. Trying to resist that purchase too

[TarHeel2002]

Two years later…

We decided to preorder a 2023 XLE hybrid Sienna and are 3 months into waiting to take delivery. ‘Out the door’ price will be around 49k. No dealership markups other than $1200 paint and upholstery protection add on.

I’m still casually looking at 2021/2022 used V8 Sequoias that hover in the 62k ‘out the door’ price range. I love the bulletproof drive train on these things but when I really think about my day to day use it’s hard for me to justify 13-14mpg and another 15k in upfront cost. That being said, I do love the Sequoia still.

It’s seriously an apples to oranges comparison between these two vehicles other than they both check the box of being able to haul my family of 5 around with some added luggage.

We test drove both vehicles. We loved the Sequoia, sitting up high, safe feeling durable vehicle. We also liked the nimble car like feeling of the Sienna as well as the 35-36mpg. Sienna interior doesn’t feel as solid as the Sequoia.

I want both!

[TheOscarGuy]

Two years later…

We decided to preorder a 2023 XLE hybrid Sienna and are 3 months into waiting to take delivery. ‘Out the door’ price will be around 49k. No dealership markups other than $1200 paint and upholstery protection add on.

I’m still casually looking at 2021/2022 used V8 Sequoias that hover in the 62k ‘out the door’ price range. I love the bulletproof drive train on these things but when I really think about my day to day use it’s hard for me to justify 13-14mpg and another 15k in upfront cost. That being said, I do love the Sequoia still.

It’s seriously an apples to oranges comparison between these two vehicles other than they both check the box of being able to haul my family of 5 around with some added luggage.

We test drove both vehicles. We loved the Sequoia, sitting up high, safe feeling durable vehicle. We also liked the nimble car like feeling of the Sienna as well as the 35-36mpg. Sienna interior doesn’t feel as solid as the Sequoia.

I want both!

The highlander is almost a cross between the two. Well maybe a smaller cross maybe third row isn’t as spacious as either but it’s good enough.

[FrugalConservative]

The durability and reliability of the new Sequoia isn't proven yet. It's significantly more complicated that the older gen. I'm willing to bet it wont be as bulletproof as the previous generation.

Also, the non folding seats and harsh ride took it off my list. As you, I like the older generation, but it's a darn dinosaur and the used prices are just too high.

[TheOscarGuy]

I use my LC as a super safe comfy commuter, shorter road trips 3-4 hours...usually longer than that I will fly...excellent in bad snowy weather, dependable beyond belief...and in case of an accident as my wife was in last week...solid and safe....Its not fancy like a Navigator or Caddy...they just work for me...quiet as well...many times I will ride in the back and read or make calls...just works for me...

That’s my dream vehicle but never could justify spending so much. This was back in 2015 when used 2008-2009 would cost 30-35K and my wife balked at high cost of a used vehicle.
I wish it was 2015, the prices since LC discontinued have gone through the roof!
I keep hearing that Toyota might introduce it again but who know when! I am interested in seeing what they do with 4Runner. If they keep it in Tahara, I won’t care if its a 4 cylinder and buy it!

[angelescrest]

It would replace the Camry ..which is still running great!

In your situation I would replace the Camry with an Odyssey and then when the Highlander needs to be replaced you can buy the Sequoia if you want it.

The Highlander and the Sequoia are too similar to get a lot of utility by owning them both at the same time.

This is great advice. It’s what I would do, except I’d go with an AWD Sienna.