2009 Land Cruiser: Bad Taste Meets Expendable Income

We enjoy the Sunday NYT auto page, despite its frequent fumbles. But this week’s flop review of the 2009 Land Cruiser was, well, a flop. The new Cruiser is a like an old friend gone fat, the reviewer writes, he's hard to recognize at first glace, but conjures up good memories of the old days. Good analogy. But a friend’s next questions to the fat man should be this: What the fuck happened?
We love vintage Cruisers (our favorite is the FJ40, the short wheelbase model that began in 1960). Over a 30-year run, the truck had a Carhart meets Hello Kitty feel to it, with paint in mustard and funky blues that looked stolen from a '50s Ferrari. Diamond plate looked great covering rust holes.
But by 1991, the Cruiser’s DNA had thinned so far it embarrassed the family. No longer was it the truck your private school son took to college and covered with Phish stickers.
The bloated 2009 Cruiser looks neither rugged nor rich – it resembles nothing more than a Dodge Durango, which Dodge gives away for half the Toyota’s $60,000 tag. The new Cruiser says my other car is a Prius, but I’ve got horses and an exurban McMansion and twice a year I need to haul dirt. Compromises can be made, but this truck gives up too much. If you must have a Cruiser, buy a fine example like this ’87 on ebay. Put $10,000 into it and drive it forever. You’ll have money left over for something really cool.
The Times dropped the ball on this review. Still it’s good to see a Toyota truck in the paper without third-world warriors in the bed packing Kalashnikovs.