Is an 80/200 Mashup Possible/Practicable? (1 Viewer)

[DRCocaCola]

This is a somewhat rhetorical question, trying to avoid the obvious answer of anything is possible with enough money.

I've done quite a bit of work on my 200, getting it set up as a great camping rig. Hopefully before LCDC, it'll be relatively "done", not that any rig ever is. I live in California and don't plan to move, so that's not the answer I'm looking for. Based on the moderate wheeling I've done, I've experienced some suspension failures, blew out a KDSS shock and I'm currently dealing with a BP-51 problem. I really like the 200 engine, interior, etc. but modifying the suspension for more aggressive wheeling and reliability would be very involved at this point, but what if...

If... IF... BIG IF, I were to look at doing a wholesale graft of the suspension, transmission, and frame (as necessary) from an 80 series, is that at all an option? Or better to look into a custom SAS/sawzall modification? This is mostly for discussion, but you never know.

 

[TeCKis300]

Other than the obvious retrofit challenges... I'm not sure the 80-series front axle is actually up to the task? The 200-series is that much heavier with more power. Also the 200-series has a track width that's a few inches wider. Spacing out an 80-series axle to necessary widths further reduces it's robustness.

Wonder if there's other HD trucks that would be possible SFA donors?

That said, curious why you're having failures with moderate wheeling, other than the shock failure? What's your overall front end setup?

 

[RET2]

Not to be glib but perhaps a reset of the brain to skinny pedal connection?

 

[DRCocaCola]

The KDSS was likely killed by a long nasty, high speed drive to Sheeps Bridge in AZ that involved 30-40 miles of baby heads. The BP-51 on the same corner is now unhappy on the bottom end, perhaps in a related development more than a year later. I overtaxed the system on that drive and paid for it, literally. But y question isn't so much to continue my current moderate wheeling, I'd stay with what I have. If I wanted to get into more technical and larger obstacles I will need more out of my suspension and larger tires. I appreciate the issues mentioned by @TeCKis300 as those are the sorts of things I'm curious about.

 

[CharlieS]

I never thought I’d say this, but maybe you should buy a jeep. They seem to be very good at technical stuff, and there is no shortage of aftermarket offerings.

 

[DRCocaCola]

I never thought I’d say this, but maybe you should buy a jeep. They seem to be very good at technical stuff, and there is. I shortage of aftermarket offerings.

Certainly an option I'm considering, even though I have an aversion.

 

[rusty87]

Not to be glib but perhaps a reset of the brain to skinny pedal connection?

This. The route to Sheep’s Bridge is a pretty standard central AZ dirt road.

 

[DRCocaCola]

This. The route to Sheep’s Bridge is a pretty standard central AZ dirt road.

I suppose it depends on the route taken. I'm not an expert on the area but we came in from the north. I exited to the west, which was not as rocky. I'm sorry I mentioned Sheep's Bridge as that's not the point of this post. I know my current set up can handle those roads without a problem.

 

[RET2]

I'm with you preferring a solid front axle but life's a series of tradeoffs.

 

[rusty87]

I suppose it depends on the route taken. I'm not an expert on the area but we came in from the north. I exited to the west, which was not as rocky. I'm sorry I mentioned Sheep's Bridge as that's not the point of this post. I know my current set up can handle those roads without a problem.

I’ll presume you came in via Dugas Road then and can confirm the very unpleasant embedded lava rock surface for miles. However, I stand by my statement. If you are breaking things on roads that clapped out ranch trucks drive every day, you are going too fast. An 80 series wouldn’t fare any better.

 

[TimCFJ40]

A proper SAS would make more sense than a 80 swap for some of the reasons already stated. The 200 series chassis is much beefier than the 80 series to start with. Alternatively, since you mentioned high speed over babyheads, a Tundra Long Travel Setup with some custom King Coilovers would do better than a Solid Axle.

 

[dsmith13]

Circling back to the original question, I would agree that an 80 series front end probably isn't stout enough for a 200 series. I know there were a couple of groups who put solid axles under Tundras, I think one was a Falken truck that ran a front Dana 60 - but there would be a lot of work to try and get things like ABS to ever work again.

 

[DRCocaCola]

Thank you. I stand my statement that my current set up could handle that road. I did drive it too fast, somewhat testing the capabilities of the KDSS. The leak was discovered within a month after that trip. It's likely related but may not be, the 200 was fine during and immediately afterward.

What I'm curious about are the potential (mostly rhetorical) question of a radical change for more technical trails than a dirt road with rocks. It'll probably never happen but as I consider a Jeep (or other solid axle options), I wonder about the potential of radical changes to the rig I love now versus starting over.

 

[grinchy]

Hypothetical solid axle conversion

I know how good our ifs system is, but this is just a hypothetical for my own knowledge, if one were to want to swap an SFA onto a gen 2 tundra, could...

www.tundras.com

How was the 105 made? Was it an 80 chassis with the 100 body on it, or was it a 100 chassis with an SFA in it? That's probably the only Toyota solid front axle with about the correct width.

 

[indycole]

What I'm curious about are the potential (mostly rhetorical) question of a radical change for more technical trails than a dirt road with rocks. It'll probably never happen but as I consider a Jeep (or other solid axle options), I wonder about the potential of radical changes to the rig I love now versus starting over.

I'd look to Canguro and some more extreme Aussie builds as inspiration. A couple big pieces of the puzzle are a.) aggressive preventative maintenance (checking torques, inspecting driveline/steering, replace worn parts before they break), and b.) a dose of mechanical sympathy (bringing a spinning tires in the air down hard on grippy surfaces, moving as much weight between the axles, etc.).

In terms of build changes, I'd agree with @TimCFJ40 that a tuned suspension (2.5 or maybe even 3.0) from King could be in order. I've had some similar experiences with BP-51s (I think they're good, not great, for heavy multipurpose builds like ours). I think the front driveline is pretty solid... it's the rear that becomes the weak point according to the Australians. Extended/chopped 200s typically end up with rear diff carrier reinforcement or a drop-in replacement from JMacx.

 

[TaishoCruiser]

While I am new to the forum and a decade late to participating in the 200 series party when it comes to my personal ride, I was lucky enough to spend a little time in a 105 series, and that got me to take a serious look at swapping my last built Jeep for a 200 series to try and build an 'LC205.' Based on that time in a 105, driving the odd 200 series for work, and a few Jeeps, here are my two (or three) yen.

1) If you are are breaking shocks or KDSS parts due to speed vs rock crawling I would stay with IFS. Yes, you can build a SAS'd prerunner for Baja and King of the Hammers, but a well built IFS truck will be faster and more comfortable at speed, on anything short of a rock crawling trail imho. As others mentioned above Canguro and the Toyota Dakar team have proven that the IFS setup, with some upgrades for their racing classes, can get it done in the desert. If I wanted a solid axle pre-runner that could also hit the Rubicon though, I would begin and end with a Gladiator Mojave, no question.

2) If you decide to go with SAS on the 200 anyway, which I would love to see, try reaching out to @bjowett or @TRAIL TAILOR to see if they can set you up with an axle that will retain ABS. I reached out to a few axle builders from the Jeep and pre-running world and none of them had a front axle solution for a Toyotas after the 80-series. I believe RST and Front Range also have ABS compatible front axles for newer 4runners and Tacomas but I don't recall whether either have done an LC200 build (SAS or IFS).

3) As for going with 80 series axles like others did with the 100 series, I did an ever so brief look at that for a 200 series and shelved it. A few few issues from memory: the front axle for the 80 has a passenger side drop while the 200 series differential is offset to the driver's side - you could cut and turn the axle but you still have others issues then such as; the 80 series axles are narrow which would make packaging the suspension pretty challenging on the 200 series; the front ring gear is ... not large ; and while this info is second hand (i.e. I have not tried it or talked to anyone who has), I don't think the ABS/wheel speed sensors in the 80 series will work with the 200 series.

 

[TonyP]

Do not use an 80-Series front axle. They're not "weak" but they aren't the strongest, especially for 3UR.
A custom WMS D60 is a better option.

That said, if you want 80-Series suspension and 200-Series interior comfort; buy an 80-Series, a few buckets of Second Skin, a divorce attorney and get a Partsouq account.

 

[ikarus]

This is a somewhat rhetorical question, trying to avoid the obvious answer of anything is possible with enough money.

I've done quite a bit of work on my 200, getting it set up as a great camping rig. Hopefully before LCDC, it'll be relatively "done", not that any rig ever is. I live in California and don't plan to move, so that's not the answer I'm looking for. Based on the moderate wheeling I've done, I've experienced some suspension failures, blew out a KDSS shock and I'm currently dealing with a BP-51 problem. I really like the 200 engine, interior, etc. but modifying the suspension for more aggressive wheeling and reliability would be very involved at this point, but what if...

If... IF... BIG IF, I were to look at doing a wholesale graft of the suspension, transmission, and frame (as necessary) from an 80 series, is that at all an option? Or better to look into a custom SAS/sawzall modification? This is mostly for discussion, but you never know.

no offense to anyone here with BP-51s but I’m not sure they’re the best suspension setup you can get for a cruiser. I may be wrong but they’re not even legit 2.5” shocks, correct? If you’re really hitting stuff hard you want full custom tuned 2.5-3” shocks with remote resis, upgraded bumpstops and probably reinforced chassis points.

Hypothetical solid axle conversion

I know how good our ifs system is, but this is just a hypothetical for my own knowledge, if one were to want to swap an SFA onto a gen 2 tundra, could...

www.tundras.com

How was the 105 made? Was it an 80 chassis with the 100 body on it, or was it a 100 chassis with an SFA in it? That's probably the only Toyota solid front axle with about the correct width.

80 chassis with 100 body. Same axles as an 80, lower offset wheels to match 100 series body width.

 

[subzali]

I’m kinda posting out of my section, but since we’re talking major work in any case, I think the 200 on portals is super awesome:

Brackets, SAS? Nawh, Portals!

First 200-series I've seen on portals. This thing is a beast!

forum.ih8mud.com

 

[spazzyfry123]