Looking at an 80 series, had some Qs [Archive]

Brian894x4

01-02-2007, 06:23 AM

I've been thinking about replacing my SAS ’89 Toyota truck with a Land Cruiser 80 series for several years now and I've looked off and on for the last couple of years.

I like my truck, but I know a very lightly modified LC80 with factory lockers would fit the bill better with what we do. It would have the same off road capability as my truck, but lot more power, more room, more comfort, better ride, etc. My truck is great off road, but is slow as a dog, cramped (single cab truck) not very comfortable, slow and handles like a lifted solid axle truck with no sway bars...in other words...not very good. Did I mention it was slow?

I've never driven an LC80, although I've read up as much as I can about them over the years and I've seen plenty in person. I’m currently cramming as much as I can since there’s a real possibility I might be getting one soon. Can anyone think of a reason that I shouldn't trade out my truck for LC80? I’m asking you guys, because you use ‘em for exactly what I would use it for. Not necessarily hardcore wheeling, but long distance expedition travel.

I'm currently considering a '94 LC with factory lockers and about 100K miles for around $9K. How does that sound? If this one doesn't pan out, I know there will be others.

I'd basically be starting a whole new build up, which on the one hand would be a bummer after having spent so many years and money on my truck, but then again, I could put all those lessons I learned into building the Cruiser and start completely fresh, building it exactly like I want the first time.

One major lesson I learned from my truck is that I don’t need or want an extremely over modified rig…read…no giant lift and tires. I was thinking that I would just go with 33” MTRs like my truck. Speaking of which, will my pick-up’s 15x8” wheels with 33s fit on a ’94 Cruiser? I understand that will on the 91-92, but are there any changes to the brakes or otherwise that would prevent them from clearing on the ‘94s? Initially would leave the suspension and height stock. I don’t anticipate doing anything more in the future than changing out springs to compensate for the weight I’ll surely be adding with gear and equipment.

Running boards will be the first to go and I’ll consider getting rid of the fender flares too. Next will be ARB bulbar and winch, dual batteries, roof rack (from the truck, for now) roof top tent possibly later.

If the rear seat is actually two seats, that would awesome. I’d like to remove one seat and put the cooler and storage boxes in it’s place and still leave room for a 3rd passenger.

Anyway, sorry for rambling. Right now I’m in the debate stage. Whether I should really be done with my truck and go Land Cruiser or not. I love my truck, but it’s old, motor and tranny will soon need an overhaul and it only carries 2 people, the wife and I. Certainly won’t too work out so well if little kiddies start arriving. I want something that I can modify, take on long trips and keep for many years to come. The truck has served me well, but in the end, it's really just a rock crawler, overloaded to serve as an expedition rig. It works...but with many drawbacks.

What do you all think?

Should I replace this:

http://www.brian894x4.com/images/Modspage01g.jpg

With this:

http://images.autotrader.com/images/2006/12/29/214/925/1426479623.214925379.IM1.MAIN.565x421_A.562x421.jp g

DaveInDenver

01-02-2007, 02:03 PM

I've thought about some of this, too. I've never owned a Cruiser wagon, but did have a FJ40 and have a few points to make.

First, cost. Everything on Cruisers is more expensive. Rebuilding a FJ40 compared to my relatively newer '91 Hilux is probably the most extreme example to be sure, but it's my experience that maintenance will cost you more. In my case the difference was huge since the 22R-E/W56 combo is about the cheapest combo to maintain from Toyota and a '78 2F/H42 w/ 300K miles is a constant battle to just find parts, forget the cost. So the cost change between a 80 series and third gen pickup might be less obvious.

Second, you will notice the size. This is good and bad, but mostly I think it's personal choice. You get used to squeezing your truck through trees and switchbacks, for example, that the 80 will scrape and drag. But the interior is like a cave and this is good! I found the Cruiser wagons, at least the 62 and 80, have less visibility out the front (over the hood is a big difference) and side than my pickup. The rear visibility in the wagon is good, but I have a camper shell blocking my back window. Also, a 80 series would not fit in our garage with another car in there (ours is a 2 car garage, but being built around 1920 their definition of a big garage is vastly different than modern times).

Our decision is to stick with the mini trucks, so we'll end up with a 4Runner in the end. It's hard to argue that an 80 series with mild mods is about the best all around vehicle, though.

locrwln

01-02-2007, 02:19 PM

Well I was in your shoes, so I'll give you my opinion. I had an '88 4runner SAS'd on 35's, dual cases...you get the idea. It was a great trail rig, but left a lot to be desired on the road. I never really "fit" in the 4runner. It was a SR5 so it had the super adjustable seats and I could never get comfortable. That and I got tired of Rockcrawling. So I sold it.

I picked up a '97 LX450 with lockers. If you are done with the rocks, you will be very pleased. I know there are people who use them on the hard stuff, but I think there is too much body and too much hanging down. I have done some desert trips, road trips and local trails and it does it all, extremely well. I have 285's (33's) with the OME mediums. It rides great, better than stock.

The rear seats are independant so you can remove only one side if you want.

The only downsides are while it has more power than your 22re, it's still not a powerhouse and they love gas. Most guys, including me average around 13-14 mpg. That goes down when the heavy armour gets added. After a long day on the trail, you aren't beat up and your wife will love the added luxury and ride.

I think if you drive one, you'll like it. Gotta go, but if you have anymore questions, just ask.

Jack

upcruiser

01-02-2007, 03:22 PM

I'm running a '92 with heavy OME 2.5" lift all around. Love the truck. The big thing with me is interior space. My ex gf had an '89 4 runner which was a great truck in many ways. It was easier to squeeze into tight places but not really THAT much more then the 80. The 4 runner just didn't have enough interior volume though for what I use trucks for. The 60's are better then the 80s with regards to interior space, but the 80 is pretty damn good. I built a 6' bed in the back of mine that runs from touching the back hatch up to the back of the front passenger seat (seat is adjusted for a comfortable recline for passenger and back on the seat rail adjustment). Gas mileage isn't a strong suit on any of the 80s due to weight and full time 4wd.

The OME I'm runnig work GREAT. Love them much more then the stock setup. They fit 33x12.50's with absolutely no rubbing, actually room to spare. I ran 33x9.50's with no lift and they worked great with plenty of room. The lift helped get the belly of the beast up and out of the junk though. The stock gearing is fine with 33's. Good mix of highway cruising and offroad crawling IMO. I think the best thing about the 80's is the fact that with a $700 suspension kit from OME, it becomes a pretty damn capable machine with nothing else needed.

Supposedly, and others correct me if I'm wrong, on the '93's + you can grind the rear brake caliper down to allow fitment of 15" wheels.

Overall, I think you'd probably be pretty happy with an 80. The ride is vault-like and pretty comfortable for the amount of machine you have. I think the big thing you'll notice is weight, mpg, and mechanical complexity moving from the truck.

pskhaat

01-02-2007, 04:11 PM

My truck is great off road

I love the look of your truck!!!

but long distance expedition travel.

Next to a quad-cab Unimog, it is very difficult to beat an LC for expedition travel! Ignoring my bias for LCs, I think the LC fits the expedition ticket if you have more than 1 person. Often I travel alone just due to the age of my kids currently and I often wish I had something lighter. This desire changes greatly when the wife and kids are along and the LC really does shine. With proper springs (Toyota US imported `luxury' ride springs :( ) upgrade, the LC carries a LOT of passenger stuff. As earlier mentioned, not as much as a 60 series, but the 80 is pretty good.

Due to the wagon design however, the 80 does not carry a lot of tools and equipment very well. You can't without care and caution throw in the the high-lift and toolboxen, and crap that always accompanies trips like ours. Most of that stuff needs to be obviously well strapped and placed or put on a rack or the like. IMO with a truck, it's much easier to pack and prepare whilst the wagons take a lot more time and effort.

Neither the 1FZ-FE or 3F-E are fast engines, and both give up efficiency for reliability; read drink fuel like Cap't Coors drinks beer. The 1FZ-FE is one impressive machine, but the 3F-E has some benefits too (like it's ability to be `simplified') for the expedition-keen, so don't overlook the 1991-1992 FJ80s either.

will my pick-up’s 15x8” wheels with 33s fit on a ’94 Cruiser

Have to grind the rear calipers.

I want something that I can modify, take on long trips and keep for many years to come.

Years ago I sold my first FJ40 and was seriously considering moving teams and getting a D90 off the lot. I knew however that I wanted to have more room and with my fiancée at the time, knew in time and luck there'd be wee ones and the D90 (very sadly, BTW) sunk on the pro/con list and the 80 series made it. I don't think you'd be dissapointed, but I guarantee you you'll miss your truck.

Scott Brady

01-02-2007, 04:47 PM

The 80 series will not dissapoint. I personaly rate it as the greatest expedition SUV every imported to the US. Add a roof tent and some camp mods and you are on your way :sombrero:

Brian894x4

01-02-2007, 06:11 PM

Thanks guys for all the info.

If I decide to buy the LC, I'll probably keep the truck...at least for a while...kind of sentimental and hard to sell it, plus I'd never get more than the tiniest fraction of what I put into it, but it would more than likely go into storage and not be used much at all.

The mpg of the Cruiser has always scared me, but I get about 15-16mpg with my truck and I can't run less than premium fuel because my tired, carbonized 22RE pings like mad. Will the Cruiser run on regular gas? If so, that should equalize my cost of fuel to my truck. Fuel economy is not a huge issue, since my truck and any new LC I buy would not be a daily driver, just a weekend and expedition rig. But I am concerned about where fuel prices are headed say in the next few years.

Has anyone done or heard about Slee's manual hub, part time conversion? And if that actually improves gas mileage?

Regarding grinding down the rear caliper, to fit 15" wheels, is the required grinding minor?

Thanks for the all the info.

Hltoppr

01-02-2007, 06:30 PM

The FJ/FZJ 80s will run on regular 87 octane gas no problem...now if you plop a blower on the FZJ with methane injection....you're also gonna need premium....but that's another story.

The front hub conversion IIRC, is only available for the 91/92 model years, and FWIW isn't really cost effective, as the mileage increases are nominal at best. I personally really liked the full time 4wd for snowy/slick roads.

I don't know about the 15" wheel grind down....

You can (they're expensive, about $400 each) get factory steel 16" wheels for the cruisers....but for the $$ I'd just stick with a set of aftermarket steelies...

-H-

Brian894x4

01-02-2007, 07:41 PM

Well the one I was looking at is from Illinois until they moved to Oregon in 2005 and I can see rust in the pictures he sent me, so I'll skip it.

I feel better about not buying it as I'd rather get exactly what I want, which is a white Cruiser (that one was green) in really good shape from the Western U.S. The regular gas thing would definately help with the mileage concerns and pretty much equate the cost to drive with my truck. The only reason I was thinking about my 15" wheels is that I have brand new 33" MTRs (I love these tires) on 15" rims and I would much rather just slap those on a new LC and put my old 35s back on the truck. That would save me about $1000+ in new wheels and tires for the LC. If did buy new, I'd definately would go with nice cheap black steelies. I love that look.

I had a couple people ask me why I would want to retire the truck for a Land Cruiser. The truck has served me well and works great for day trips into the mountains, which I've been doing a lot of lately with our researching abandoned logging railroads, but for multiple day camping trips, where we spend endless hours driving over paved roads and dirt roads, it leaves a lot to be desired as far as comfort and especially handling. The 100 h.p. engine with 5300lb weight is really just frustrating to drive, especially cross country, with a top speed about 65-70 mph and considerably lower on any kind of grade. The bed is nice to be able to just store anything you want back there, but is really horrible as far as getting to stuff. Having to climb into the bed to get anything that's not accessible from the rear is annoying and even more so, when you have a single cab and can't store hardly anything in the cab. A 4 door wagon would solve those problems. The motor is tired and the transmission makes noise, so I'd have to spend a chunk of change to overhaul both of those in the next year or two, if I kept it as my primary expedition rig. I'm just not as confident with it anymore out in the extreme remote deserts of the NW on multi-day trips as I used to be without dumping a bunch of money into it. Don't get me wrong. It's a good reliable rig, but I guess I'm a bit paranoid when it comes to being stranded in the middle of nowhere.

These days, I rarely run trails just for the sake of off roading. It's now all about reaching and exploring remote historical sites and extreme capability is less of a concern now, compared to extreme durability, reliability and overall comfort for long trips.

Thanks for all the info. Back to looking. I'm not in a hurry, my truck still works and I'd rather wait to find that really special deal.

Sgt Grunt

01-02-2007, 08:01 PM

I agree with what Scott said about the 80 being one of the greatest all around expedition trucks in the US, I would add, if not the world. They are still in production in Venezuela.

Some of the down sides of them is Mileage, age, and expense of parts. I would recommend finding one that is as new and or as low of miles as possible. Also you will need to do most of the following, or at least I would to feel comfortable taking it on long trips or wheeling it a little harder than in it's previous life. All the standard stuff, brakes, oils, axle service, plugs, wires, also the head gasket, and heater hose on the back of the block (also known as the PHH, pesky heater hose).

I would go with 16 inch rims, 285's seem to be a great size. I ran steel 16's and lost a ton of power with the extra weight and went back to after market aluminum. I have run 315's since lifting it.

Factory lockers seem to be an item that everyone wants, I have ARB's and prefer them to factory. If you plan to change gears then I would not seek out a truck with them, if the right truck has them then so be it. However you do not need to change gears if you only plan to run 33's or 285's.

I would recommend looking at Slee's site for the newbie guide to 80's.

I have loaded my 80 to the hilt with gear and what not and if I was to build another one there would be a few minor changes I would make. If you want to PM me I can give you my .02 on that.

There is a built 80 for sale on ebay as well, located in Colorado. Looks pretty nice.

cruiser guy

01-02-2007, 08:45 PM

I don't think you'd be disappointed with an '80 series but they are not fast either. The Land Cruiser was made to get you there and it will do that very well! If you want more power a '100 series has the V8 but it's not the same as the earlier ones as far as ruggedness.

I love my '82 BJ60 and will continue to drive that for years yet!

adventureduo

01-02-2007, 09:09 PM

Yep, fully loaded i was doing about 63mph-65mph on our latest trip following other RV's up steep grades. Lots of torque, not a ton of HP.. just make sure to get the 4.5 liter 1993 or later.

Brian894x4

01-03-2007, 12:10 AM

Scott,

What made you decide on the 4 door Tacoma over the Land Cruiser 80?

upcruiser

01-03-2007, 12:37 AM

Yep, fully loaded i was doing about 63mph-65mph on our latest trip following other RV's up steep grades. Lots of torque, not a ton of HP.. just make sure to get the 4.5 liter 1993 or later.

Loaded to the gills my '92 does just fine. The 3FE's have their own special virutues. For a weekend expedition rig power-wise they are just fine. If you can find a primo '91-'92 I wouldn't hesitate to pull the trigger on it personally. You'll find some who actually prefer it over the FZJ for overlanding.

Scott Brady

01-03-2007, 12:53 AM

Well, these were my reasons:

1. High speed trail and road performance and handling
2. Cargo Capacity/volume
3. Brand New Platform, no prior owner

However, there are advantages to the 80, like security, durability and a few luxuries. But for the type of driver and traveler I am, the Tacoma is a better choice.

At the end of the day though, both are exceptional!

blupaddler

01-03-2007, 05:11 AM

This is a really great discussion.

Both Scotts have made some really good points. And having seen Sgt. Gunt's 80 in Pismo, his is REALLY nice.

Some things I have to add. The 80 is comfortable like everyone else has stated. I am approaching 170k on mine. And I am actually starting to think about "expedition life." Make sure you get one with low, LOW miles. Look at Pasquales, he found one with like 40 or 60K on it. But you'll pay a higher price too. I have replaced a bunch of stuff on my 80 due to PM. Mainly b/c the truck is 12 or 13 years old. There is something to say about getting a brand-new truck like Scott chose to.

Regarding the Part-Time kit. Slee now makes it for ALL years. I don't know of anyone who has actually done the conversion yet. I have thought about, but, it's still just a thought.

Other points...
1. Gas mileage sucks, expect anywhere from 11-14mpg. But you can use regular gas.
2. Easy to work on, lots of room in the engine bay. Coil springs can be swapped out in 30 minutes.
3. Hood is HUGE!
4. More power than your truck, numbers wise yes. But that 212hp is at 4600 RPM. I don't know how everyone drives in WA, but it's difficult to keep up here in SoCal sometimes. Basically, don't expect to get anywhere quickly. But, I guess if you wanted to do that you'd be looking at something else. ;)
5. Parts are expensive. Join www.ih8mud.com then you can get parts at cost from a super cool, and very knowledgeable guy named Cruiser Dan or C-Dan for short.
6. Slee's newbie guide... http://sleeoffroad.com/newbie/newbie100.htm Or just give him a call. 1-888-4x4-slee Everyone there is really helpful, and knowledgeable.
7. Check out a thread running now over at mud, regarding ownership. And it's started by the parts guy!
http://forum.ih8mud.com/showthread.php?t=124556
8. There have been some with headgasket issues.
9. Also, there is a re-curring problem with the EGR on some models. I am unsure of which years. But I know mine is included.
10. Some go through O2 sensors as well. Some people are on their third set. I just changed mine out this weekend.

I can't emphasize enough to buy a low-mileage vehicle. With a proven maintanence record. Just base-lining the vehicle with hoses, belts, axle rebuilds, etc will run you over $1000 in just parts alone.

You'll miss your truck. As big as the 80 seems, I still occassionally miss having a truck. There sure a lot of nice Double Cabs around here.

:friday:

Hope I didn't ramble on too much.
Good luck.
:1888fbbd:

Skillet

01-03-2007, 07:08 PM

My response is...

ChuckB

01-03-2007, 07:37 PM

I just wanted to add this is a great thread!! Most likely an FZJ80 or possibly an FJ80 will be my next purchase.

Any thoughts on an FJ80 converted to run an H55F manual tranny and the manual hub conversion mentioned above??

pskhaat

01-03-2007, 07:56 PM

Any thoughts on an FJ80 converted to run an H55F manual tranny and the manual hub conversion mentioned above??

Very doable, H42 which provides a consistent 20% lower gearing across the board of 4 gears allowing some leeway on diff gearing and of course the H55f wonder. I probably wouldn't do the part-time hubs, just the part time tcase because the drivelines need to be modified.

You can also retrofit a 3F or 2F carb onto the 3F and re-use many 2F parts available world-wide.

Brian894x4

01-03-2007, 08:15 PM

My response is...

Yes, yes, that's EXACTLY the kind of build I was looking to do. The only difference is I want MTRs. Do you mind if I ask how much lift and what size tires are on there?

Thanks again for the additional comments.

Scott, I love your truck and how it’s set up. If cost wasn’t a problem, I would like to have both a 2004 or earlier DC taco and an 80 series. At this point, I’m thinking an 80 series will fit my needs better and will be cheaper to buy…at least initially.

Comparing a ‘93+ LC with my truck’s power/weight ratio. My truck weighes 5300lbs for a trip…sometimes heavier. I’ve heard that built Land Cruiser 80s can weigh as much as 6600lbs. So I’ll just use that figure. Based on 212hp for the LC and 116hp for my truck…

The LC will weight as much as (but probably less than) 24% more than my truck. But….

The LC has 82% more h.p., which means that power to weight ratio will be 58% better than my truck or better. Of course, the auto tranny, gearing/tire ratio of the LC will lessen the effectiveness, but it will still be much better than what have.

As far as torque, the LC’s 275ft/lbs is 96% better than my truck’s 140ft/lbs.

I’ve explored other options as well, including rebuilding my truck’s 22RE, doing an engine transplant, etc. All are still viable, but the problem is that it’s money that can never be recovered and the single cab truck just doesn’t fit into a future family scenario as well as 4 door SUV. If my truck was a 4Runner instead, I might be more inclined to rebuild or engine transplant it.

I have looked at ’91-’92 models. They are so incredibly cheap, even with low miles. Older Toyota pick-ups are going for more money. It’s tempting consider one of them, but then the economy and power to weight ratio is far less than the newer models. I guess the 3FE is still a good motor. An old design, but after running the 22RE all these years, I’ve come to seriously respect Toyota’s older designs.

I'm going to take my time to look and decide. The truck will likely never be sold, just semi-retired. And I could go another season or two driving it, if I don't find a good deal on an LC.

Skillet

01-03-2007, 08:39 PM

Yes, yes, that's EXACTLY the kind of build I was looking to do. The only difference is I want MTRs. Do you mind if I ask how much lift and what size tires are on there?

Thanks again for the additional comments.

Scott, I love your truck and how it’s set up. If cost wasn’t a problem, I would like to have both a 2004 or earlier DC taco and an 80 series. At this point, I’m thinking an 80 series will fit my needs better and will be cheaper to buy…at least initially.

Comparing a ‘93+ LC with my truck’s power/weight ratio. My truck weighes 5300lbs for a trip…sometimes heavier. I’ve heard that built Land Cruiser 80s can weigh as much as 6600lbs. So I’ll just use that figure. Based on 212hp for the LC and 116hp for my truck…

The LC will weight as much as (but probably less than) 24% more than my truck. But….

The LC has 82% more h.p., which means that power to weight ratio will be 58% better than my truck or better. Of course, the auto tranny, gearing/tire ratio of the LC will lessen the effectiveness, but it will still be much better than what have.

As far as torque, the LC’s 275ft/lbs is 96% better than my truck’s 140ft/lbs.

I’ve explored other options as well, including rebuilding my truck’s 22RE, doing an engine transplant, etc. All are still viable, but the problem is that it’s money that can never be recovered and the single cab truck just doesn’t fit into a future family scenario as well as 4 door SUV. If my truck was a 4Runner instead, I might be more inclined to rebuild or engine transplant it.

I have looked at ’91-’92 models. They are so incredibly cheap, even with low miles. Older Toyota pick-ups are going for more money. It’s tempting consider one of them, but then the economy and power to weight ratio is far less than the newer models. I guess the 3FE is still a good motor. An old design, but after running the 22RE all these years, I’ve come to seriously respect Toyota’s older designs.

I'm going to take my time to look and decide. The truck will likely never be sold, just semi-retired. And I could go another season or two driving it, if I don't find a good deal on an LC.

My Cruiser is...

OME 4" comps in the rear.

OME 850J's in the front.

OME Shocks, N73 front & N74E in back.

Tires are 305's on stock rims.

She sits about 3" higher than stock with all of the weight I carry (suspension only).

Auxillary 44 gallon tank, refer, Hanna sliders, drawer system, CTT, 4x4 labs rear bumper, ABR front with winch, dual battery, etc, etc.

I put 1.5" spacers from Trailgear behind the wheels which helps spread the footprint out. I figured, 3" up and 3" out lends to the stability.

If I had to get new shocks, I would get the longer ones, more compatible with the J springs but I already had these. No biggy, I think you just loose a little travel when getting in the serious rocks but I am more of an expedition type guy anyway.

My problem with MTR's is that they have no treadwear warranty, last half as long and get noisy really quick on the highway. Not to mention, they get out of balance much easier than the A/T.
I have the MTR's on my 40 and I had them on my Taco. Love the tires and they way they look but I just wanted these to last a while.
Plus, I have never been stuck with the AT's.

I really like the setup now.

Hope this helps you spend some more money.

:beer:

blupaddler

01-04-2007, 03:59 AM

Jeb, Your 80 ROCKS!!!:bowdown:

Brian good luck with your search...

:REOutIceFishing:

Skillet

01-04-2007, 04:43 PM

Jeb, Your 80 ROCKS!!!:bowdown:

Brian good luck with your search...

:REOutIceFishing:

Thank you Robb.
Yours ain't so bad either!
Especially with your lovely wife and fine pooch riding shotgun!

:rally_guys:

Life_in_4Lo

01-05-2007, 11:32 AM

The only downside is the lack of HP. Once it gets up to speed, it's no problem. I can cruise at 80mph and it's totally rock steady and you don't feel it at all. Hit some grades and you gotta stay on it, downshift, pwr button to keep up the speed.
You really feel disadvantaged most of all in traffic where you can't "zip" around but obviously, that's just how a big suv is. Build up any suv and it feels the same as you add weight and tires.

Offroad, it just gets better and better the tougher the trail gets. I love how everything is designed to be rebuilt, repacked and re-kickassed! hehe.

I have 285/70 16 MTR's and I like them alot. Smooth and great offroad. They will get louder as they wear but oh well, no biggie. I do think I'll try a different tire- but only b/c I want to try something new.

I think a SC'd 80 is about perfect but I can't part w/ $3000 for it so...

If you can find someone selling a built, clean 80... might be worth it
http://forum.ih8mud.com/showthread.php?p=1705390

TiredIronGRB

01-09-2007, 08:01 PM

Can't beat an 80...
http://www.4x4grace.com/Coppermine/albums/userpics/10001/normal_MG102106_045.JPG
http://www.4x4grace.com/Coppermine/albums/userpics/10001/normal_GrayRock06_099.JPG
http://www.4x4grace.com/Coppermine/albums/userpics/10001/normal_MG102106_088.JPG

Mlachica

01-15-2007, 05:02 PM

I too am contemplating selling my truck...With the arrival of our second son I'm leaning towards the 80 for its size and security. This thread has been really helpful.

There have been some with headgasket issues.

How common is this? I'm hoping not as common as with the 3.0 v6 toyota came out with. Would occassionally checking the torque on the head bolts help?

locrwln

01-15-2007, 05:09 PM

I too am contemplating selling my truck...With the arrival of our second son I'm leaning towards the 80 for its size and security. This thread has been really helpful.

How common is this? I'm hoping not as common as with the 3.0 v6 toyota came out with. Would occassionally checking the torque on the head bolts help?

I think the figures on Ih8mud.com puts it at around 10%. I just went through a blown HG on mine. And there isn't really anyway to tighten the head bolts without removing the cams, and at that point, you might as well replace the HG. So far, no one has had any failures with the newly designed HG.

Jack

rusty_tlc

01-15-2007, 07:36 PM

This thread sucks, it's making the 80/100 decision harder.

I'm in a similar place with my FJ40, only I'll be keeping the 40 and using it for the tougher trails. We are leaning towards the 100 because of the IFS, higher HP and in general a newer vehicle.

The double cab Taco is a nice rig but we just weren't that comfortable in it. It is still on the short list, but pretty far down.

pskhaat

01-15-2007, 09:47 PM

I will chime in that my 80 indeed has had to have it's HG changed and it has for the most part been run and cared for by me who does in fact care for his vehicle (save a few incidences :) ) like M1 after break-in, all factory parts and regular coolant flushes. The HG is a failure on Toyota's part, but either does or will need to be taken into account on every 80 you'll buy (unless it's been replaced).

pskhaat

01-15-2007, 09:50 PM

80/100 decision harder

The only thing I can say to this is that on the 100, you have to remove your intake manifold to get to the starter and they also much prefer high-test fuel and the front diff in the 98-99 is a known 2-pinion weak spot. Just food for thought, and no rhetoric since I own both an 80 & 100 series.

Mlachica

01-16-2007, 12:33 AM

blupaddler

01-16-2007, 01:10 AM

[QUOTE=MlachicaI think it's time to sell the taco![/QUOTE]

NO! Say it isn't so!
Actually, I would offer to trade with you. But I would miss my 80.

But, should you decide to sell your Taco. Let me know when you buy an 80. I can certainly help you with any mods. I will give you a hint on the first, and my next...Perfect Switch!

Now go buy an 80!

cruiser guy

01-16-2007, 01:50 AM

We are leaning towards the 100 because of the IFS, higher HP and in general a newer vehicle.

The IFS would be a drawback for me. Sure, the IFS gives you a better ride BUT there is more crap there to fail and that is a negative to me.

rusty_tlc

01-16-2007, 02:14 AM

The only thing I can say to this is that on the 100, you have to remove your intake manifold to get to the starter and they also much prefer high-test fuel and the front diff in the 98-99 is a known 2-pinion weak spot. Just food for thought, and no rhetoric since I own both an 80 & 100 series.
Good points to consider.

rusty_tlc

01-16-2007, 02:29 AM

The IFS would be a drawback for me. Sure, the IFS gives you a better ride BUT there is more crap there to fail and that is a negative to me.
True, there are a lot of down sides to IFS. But I do like the ride on a washboard road compared to a solid axle.

locrwln

01-16-2007, 02:39 AM

True, there are a lot of down sides to IFS. But I do like the ride on a washboard road compared to a solid axle.

Dan, you and Joanne should take the LX for a spin and you can run it over some washboards if you like. With the Bilsteins and OME mediums it rides great. Even with the stock springs and the Billies, it rode good.

Plus it will give you an idea on the power with stock gearing/33's. Post HG the power is actually pretty nice. Of course I had a valve job done and the injectors cleaned and flowed.

Darcie and I have talked about it and if we were looking now and trying to decide between the 80/100 the decision would be very difficult.:rockon:

Jack

rusty_tlc

01-16-2007, 03:01 AM

Dan, you and Joanne should take the LX for a spin and you can run it over some washboards if you like. With the Bilsteins and OME mediums it rides great. Even with the stock springs and the Billies, it rode good.

Plus it will give you an idea on the power with stock gearing/33's. Post HG the power is actually pretty nice. Of course I had a valve job done and the injectors cleaned and flowed.

Darcie and I have talked about it and if we were looking now and trying to decide between the 80/100 the decision would be very difficult.:rockon:

Jack
We have an advantage. Between you and Dan we can get an idea of what to expect from both rigs

BTW Brian sorry about the highjack. I'll go back to my own thread now.

Brian894x4

01-17-2007, 12:46 AM

We have an advantage. Between you and Dan we can get an idea of what to expect from both rigs

BTW Brian sorry about the highjack. I'll go back to my own thread now.

No worries, discuss anything you want. It's all good. :beer:

Wanderlusty

01-29-2007, 05:58 PM

The IFS would be a drawback for me. Sure, the IFS gives you a better ride BUT there is more crap there to fail and that is a negative to me.

Ok, just out of curiosity (as I am a Jeep guy....) but how hard would a SAS into a 100 be? Say use a front axle from an 80, even?

What else changed between the 80 and 100...because so many seem to prefer the 80 despite the newest ones being about 10 years old now?

ChuckB

01-29-2007, 06:17 PM

I don't know all the details on this topic, but if I remember from reading on ih8mud.com, I think the 80 axle isn't wide enough. I could be wrong though haven't looked at it in a while. I think the more "hard-core" crew prefers the 80 for is SFA. Plus, since it hasn't really been done here in the states atleast, its going to be serious $$$$$$. There are many people perfectly happy with their 100s just the way they are. I think mainly it comes down to how you are going to use the vehicle. I think many people would agree that the best "all-around" vehicle would be an 80 with a 100 very close behind it. And this mostly comes from the fact that the 100 is slightly bigger, not because of the IFS.