[cruiser88]

early 80s will rust.......

Originally Posted by motoloco

If you have to crank that much, a little fuel in your oil is the least of your issues:meh


BACK to the subject: The 80 series with a 3fe will be a little slower and get a little less MPG than a comprable tuned 62, the 80 wont rust and WILL ride much nicer BUT the coolness factor is just not the same. Tough to beat 4w discs, coils, and no rust issues (if taken care of).

[Mace]

Originally Posted by ThePookieBear

Hey guys, I'm here at great personal risk... I'm thinking of committing heresy and selling my 80 to get a 62. What I would like is to hear some opinions from someone who has had, or has driven, both an FJ80 and an FJ62.

My main questions for now are...

1- Mechanically, which is easier to work on? Seems to me it would be the 62 but... thats why I'm asking.

2- What is the parts availability like for the 62 and are lots of parts interchangeable. Like if I order a part at Autozone that they have for an 80 3FE, will it fit a 62? Also, are 62 parts more expensive than 80 parts, and are 62 parts getting particularly scarce?

3- Drivability.... most likely the 80 will be a better ride from the coils, but is the 62 zippier than the 80 since it is lighter? And does that allow for slightly better mileage with the 62?

4- Will the 62 comfortably, and most importantly easily (for the engine's sake), hold 60 or 65 on the highway? (I live in the flats, so no worries of mountain passes.)

5- Lastly, I would like to find if someone lives near Wichita, KS that owns a reasonably well tuned 62 that I could drive to compare to my 80. If so, I would appreciate it greatly.

Anyway, thanks for any answers guys, Michael.

(And don't tell my 80 brethren I've been over here.)

Edit: Thought of one more question. The semi-floater on my 80 is extremely trouble free and reliable. Is it the same axle as the ones on the 62, or is it at least similar in strength and how trouble free it is?

1. Mechanically they are similar. Not much easier about the 62.

2. Parts are not that much different.

3. later 80's have significantly more power than a 62. Earlier 80's are dogs just like the 62.

4. ohh god yes...

5. Is there a Kansas section of Mud??

Originally Posted by KayakPanic

easy there mace...

the engine threw a rod (according to a mechanic) because the gas ate away at all of the bearings/seals etc. I have not tried to restart the vehicle however, so I am taking him at his word (pretty sure he charged me to blow the motor).

cups= as explained in last thread: "fuel sits in the cups underneath the jets"
the cups, where the fuel sits when you look down into the carb from above, that the jets spray into! and the fuel is not sealed anywhere in a carbed vehicle, it evaporates from the cups.

the dead subaru got 34 miles per gallon with a fresh oil change. other than needing a clutch, it probably ran better than most cars half its age. and i was able to pay off the entire car in 4 months by simply not driving my fj40, in the gas money saved, when gas was $4.20/gallon during the last republican administration!

one reason that my carbed trucks have ALWAYS started easier in the cold than EFI, if because I can clean and adjust the carb, but not the EFI (except with fuel additives).

If your subaru dumped that much fuel into the chamber. The computer was seriously screwed up.

Dude, the cups below the jets only hold a couple of CC's of fuel.. The accelerator pump puts more fuel into the motor than those "cups" can hold

how much do you drive in 4 months and how much did you pay for that car??

So your subaru that ended up flooding out and wrecking the motor, was harder to start than a carbed motor you had?? That is not really surprising...

[ThePookieBear]

Oh I'll have to check on the Kansas section. We'll see, sounds like a good idea.