New Toyota Sequoia

[Nick M3]

Originally Posted by JST

Right, but they've already got the Land Cruiser...which they've already ALSO federalized as the Lexus, but decided not to sell here for reasons.

I just don't see the logic in knecapping the utility of your mom and dad mobile in order to chase some overlanders who probably would have happily bought the Lexus or certainly would have bought a slightly downmarket version of the Lexus called the Land Cruiser.

Plus, if you're trying to sell to the overlanders, Land Cruiser has a hell of a lot more cache than Sequoia.

I think this maybe suggests that Toyota thinks it can capture most of the soft roader market with the Highlander, but I do not think that's right. Although to me the Highlander is gargantuan, to people like my SIL it's a tiny lil thing that they would never consider.

What I’m saying is that it’s pretty clear that Toyota didn’t want to bother with anything beyond cosmetic engineering. And if you’re going to pick *one* execution and do it around the world, it’s not the IRS AWD one.

[Jeff_DML]

Originally Posted by Nick M3

I don’t really see what the flat floor kludge has to to with a live axle. If anything, a live axle ends up giving you more clearance than an IRS.

Video I watched says the floor needs to be higher because of it

[Nick M3]

Originally Posted by Jeff_DML

Video I watched says the floor needs to be higher because of it

I don't get it. IRS has a body mounted diff that is generally mounted HIGHER. You've got halfshafts going from there to the wheels.

Doesn't make sense to me.

[JST]

Originally Posted by Nick M3

I don't get it. IRS has a body mounted diff that is generally mounted HIGHER. You've got halfshafts going from there to the wheels.

Doesn't make sense to me.

My understanding of this is that the floor is higher in SUVs with live axles because you need to leave space for the differential (and the rest of the axle) to move around and articulate. That's one of the reasons that the Expedition went to IRS; it let them lower the flower and make more space for the folding third row.

You can see here the difference between the IRS Expedition (top) and the F-150; the former doesn't have the big kick-up in the frame that the latter does, and actually runs the halfshafts through windows in the frame.

[Jeff_DML]

My 4runner has a solid rear axle and third row that folds flat but the floor is about 6 inches higher then the non-3rd row 4runner.

[Nick M3]

Originally Posted by JST

My understanding of this is that the floor is higher in SUVs with live axles because you need to leave space for the differential (and the rest of the axle) to move around and articulate. That's one of the reasons that the Expedition went to IRS; it let them lower the flower and make more space for the folding third row.

You can see here the difference between the IRS Expedition (top) and the F-150; the former doesn't have the big kick-up in the frame that the latter does, and actually runs the halfshafts through windows in the frame.

You can U box the frame to give the rear axle room to move. I don't see how that would be any different from those bigass spring/shock mounts on the expedition frame. The F-150's frame design just looks like the easiest way to build it given the nature of a pickup.

Dunno.

[JST]

Originally Posted by Nick M3

You can U box the frame to give the rear axle room to move. I don't see how that would be any different from those bigass spring/shock mounts on the expedition frame. The F-150's frame design just looks like the easiest way to build it given the nature of a pickup.

Dunno.

I mean, I'm just telling you what I've read. Maybe Ford is lying about why it went to IRS in the Expedition, but that was one of their explanations.

[John V]

Yeah, it is an articulation problem. It's not so much the pumpkin as it is the rigid tubes that are attached to it plus the locating links (or leaf springs) in a live-axle configuration. This forces the frame members out towards the wheels and up as compared to an IRS rear end.

[RMR]

I know there is a hybrid version of the Sequoia coming. The non folding flat rear seating may be for the system that runs it?? Not sure though

[Jeff_DML]

Originally Posted by RMR

I know there is a hybrid version of the Sequoia coming. The non folding flat rear seating may be for the system that runs it?? Not sure though

Batteries for it in the tundra are under the rear bench seat but not sure where they stuck them in the Sequoia so you could be right.