Of the three, '97 4runner, '97 LC and 2000 LC, the '97 LC gets the worst gas mileage and has the worst power/weight ratio, I believe, although not by much in terms of power.

But the '97 is the most off road capable with the front and rear solid axles and it's pure durability. The '97 engines are known for lasting hundreds of thousands of miles, 300K + (miles), but do occasionally have head gasket issues and it's sometimes recommended that the HG be replaced at around 130-150K just to be safe.

The '97 4runner is the smallest, but good economy, decent power and pretty darn durable. Something you could drive to work everyday and take to the mountains on the weekends.

The 2000 LC seems like a great rig. It's very durable just like the '97, but has IFS more suited to the highway, like the '97 4Runner. The 2000 4.7 V-8 engine makes more power. I'm not sure of the durability of the 4.7 V-8. I haven't heard of any major issues and that engine is found in the Tundra and 2003 and later 4Runners, so it can't be that bad. Parts and service will probably be easier to come by with the 2000 going forward, since it shares the same platform as the current 2007 Land Cruiser.

If it were me, I think the '97 4Runner is a great daily driver, the 2000 LC is a great luxery 4x4 for mostly highway trips (don't get me wrong it's good off road too) and the '97 would be a great weekend expedition 4x4, camping rig for the ultimate in durability and combined highway and off road capability at the sacrafice of fuel economy.

This is just book knowledge, I've never owned any of the three. <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />