Enough of the Rubicon crap! It's one trail and not what we're discussing here. I've talked to plenty of folks...true experts...it's "excrutiating work" to get an 80 through. A FJ40 or near-stock Jeep Wrangler are vehicles that "glide through". Does that make them a better choice regarding this thread?
100 vs. 80 (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter jmjnewbold
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
Enough of the Rubicon crap! It's one trail and not what we're discussing here. I've talked to plenty of folks...true experts...it's "excrutiating work" to get an 80 through. A FJ40 or near-stock Jeep Wrangler are vehicles that "glide through". Does that make them a better choice regarding this thread?
Actually, yes it does make them a better choice if that is your intended purpose and want a short wheel based vehicle. If you want to wheel a wagon through there, threads like this help a person to understand what would be better for them. The Rubicon comment, as I read it, was used as an illustration and yet you say enough. How many times have you shown your 100 on that one technical spot where it's leaning on the slider? Chiva is it? It too is one trail and yet you return to that picture and comment endlessly as a source to prove your 100 is a crawler. Fair is fair.
The "Cali" guys have probably run more wagons on the "Con" than anyone I can think of. Are they your "experts"?
I just wish Toyota would wake up and sell all levels of 70s and 200s in the states with gas and diesel engines. They are already produced. That way you could order one the way YOU want it and not the way some Toyota Marketing clown wants you too.
Being able to order from the various Toyota lines would be sweet.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but it wasn't me that brought it up. It was Mxndrnks back in post #128.
BTW, who are your "true experts"? Have they ever taken an 80 through there, as well as a 100, at the same time? Since I've actually done the trail more times than you (zero), and know most of the people who have taken wagons through there, and was on the same trip as the only 100 I am aware of (besides Toyota) to go through there, I will state as fact that the 80 is MUCH less frustrating on that trail than getting the whale of a 100 through without major body damage! And yes, there were a couple high-centers attributable to the IFS. Even that 100's driver stated that he would never do that trail again in that truck. It was too nerve-wracking.
Ah, a TRUE expert speaks! In fact, I believe the entire drive-train on the 70 is identical to the 80 except for the rear leafs versus coils (but which give it more load carrying). Same hubs, same axles, same diffs, prop shafts, even the same T-case, transmissions (manual), and engines. So I think it it safe to say that the 80 is just about as "heavy-duty" as the 70.
And to Fishy's comment, that is also an issue in the 70, having to do with the high-pinion setup with reverse cut gears. That was an engineering decision that was a compromise, as many things are. High-pinion for clearance, strong in forward, but weaker in reverse (but hopefully you're not in reverse too often on the trail). I can live with it.
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2002
- Threads
- 550
- Messages
- 44,823
- Location
- Canton, Mississippi
- Website
- www.seeandeatms.com
Derek, please stop prodding Shotts! 
I know the Land Cruiser market is VERY skewed away from the US.
That said, the 5.7 V8 200 series with all the bells and whistles is a US rig to the bone.
I would be very interested to see the numbers of how many of these $75,000 machines are sold anywhere but the US and the Middle East.
I know the Land Cruiser market is VERY skewed away from the US.
That said, the 5.7 V8 200 series with all the bells and whistles is a US rig to the bone.
I would be very interested to see the numbers of how many of these $75,000 machines are sold anywhere but the US and the Middle East.
Trunk Monkey
Moderator
The 100 is 20 better than the 80.
From what I saw when I was in Japan at the factory, Derek's statement is pretty close to the truth.
Available engines: 1GR-FE/1HZ (turbo and non)/1VD-FTV/3UR-FE/1UR-FE/2UZ-FE
Auto and manual gear boxes
Part time and full time xfer cases
Full floaters/SF
Aisin manual hubs or drive flanges
OEM snorkels
So many different options.
uHu
Bridgeburner
Just get into a good position in a large international NGO with connections straight into TMC, then order any model and pick exactly which part of the production line you want involved. Is great fun. Just like going to a tailor.
No one is arguing that a 70 series doesnt meet the needs.... But using your logic if the 70 series already met those needs for what the past 25 years now???? why the need for a 105 series? and why not a 205 series?????
Since people cant read between the lines.... the improvements in the 200 series front suspension and the fact that rear sf axle
You out of everyone on this forum would see more issues than most Toyota service departments seeing how your customers seem to push the trucks harder than most....So, I am pretty sure that Toyota was getting the same feed back. Therefore the new improvements in the 200 series can meet the needs that the 105 provided before. Where it cant, they still offer the 70 series. So... the demand and superiority of the 105 as so many have tried to point out here must not be there! It is basic economics... supply and demand... Apparently the demand isnt there. I.e. no 205
And if people don't think a 200 series can cut it in harsh 3rd world environments, then spend a little more time doing research. They ARE being armored and used in place like A-stan and Iraq.
As I stated in my post.....PROBABLY... Seeing as I cant get my hands on a 2010-2011 70 series to compare to a 80 series that runs anywhere from 13 to 20-21 years older.... where built for completely different targets (I.e. luxary vs. utilitarian) there is no way for me to really know for sure.
But you have already pointed out
I cant imagine there could possibly be anything else that would affect the comfort.....
As I have said repeatedly... All cruisers are great! If I could have one of each I would. They all have their place and some will meet that need better than others......Just depends on what the individual need is.
SO TRUE.... now watch how many try to argue something I just wrote.....
Last edited:
Trunk Monkey
Moderator
Yes, mxn found the button.
Yes, mxn found the button.
Thanks to you.....
... I never knew how that worked before....
Actually, you are incorrect about the design/production/implementation of the 105 series for a very short period of time in very specified markets: namely Australia/Africa/NGO organizations. It had nothing to do with popularity.
It was meant as a "bridging" vehicle only for those markets in preparation for the next generation of the LC's.
The need for the 105 series was because the 100 was not durable enough in important markets.
Instead of loosing those important customers trading in their old 80 series for a new Land Cruiser- only to find it cannot do the job anymore- Toyota wanted to keep those customers (and reputation) so they made something that could handle it (i.e.; essentially, they put the 80 back into service with the 100 body).
The 105 was a necessary product to protect the Land Cruiser brand and hold customers.
Toyota didn't make it for the fun of it.
-----------
The Land Cruiser brand is supposed to be designed as "the last vehicle on earth".
That's Toyota's words. They needed to make a worthy 100 series so the need for the 105.
Interesting concept.... What were the years of the 105 manufacture?
According to this:
Toyota Data Library
"Then in 2000, along with minor changes and improvements introduced, for theft prevention an engine immobilizer system and other security systems were added to all grades as standard equipment. Though the Land Cruiser 100 continues to evolve on the path of the passenger car, there are still users overseas who drive it offroad. To meet these needs such as in Australia and other rugged environments, Toyota has created an Land Cruiser 105-series with rigid coil springs in the suspension. No matter how much it takes on the aura of luxury, the Land Cruiser is never far from its roots as an offroad vehicle."
If the above link is correct, the 105 wasnt introduced until the 100 had already been out for 2 years...indicating there was a need....If it was only available for a "limited" time... what happened to that need?
So again, what changed? I am not arguing that there wasn't a need for the 105.... just asking why they don't feel there is a "need" any longer? Why are they not worried about "loosing those important customers trading in their old" 105 "series for a new Land Cruiser- only to find it cannot do the job anymore?"
With only 4% of the total sales being in the US we cant argue to meet our demands. Either the demand for such a vehicle is not there or the improvement to the 100/200 series IFS and SF rear have shown to meet the needs of 90% of the users out there. For that remaining 10% we have the 70 series.....
Which takes us back to the original point of this thread. The 100 series will meet the demand and needs for 90% of those driving on or offroad. Yes the modifications are more limited at this time. But it isn't going to limit 90% of the people from going where ever they want. So, all this talk about inferior IFS and SF rear is really non existent unless you are in that 10% that needs to worry about breaking an axle or R&P. If you are in that small 10% then you have your choice of an 80 series or even better options out there....
For many people, a Corolla is more valuable than a Boss 302 or Hemi Cuda. It doesn't make the Corolla better.
That's the leap in logic that I'm getting reading this.
Not saying the 100 is a Corolla! The 100 is a fantastic suv. It's so hard to find a clean 80 that if I were buying today, it would most likely be a LX or GX470. Clean 80's are so hard to find. Age and care + value for the dollar are factors in used vehicle sales.
I agree that if you are happy with it and it meets your needs and desires, why not. In the real world, if you are happy with whatever you drive, than that's the only thing that's important.
SFA's advantage is not in "rock crawling" for most of the world when it comes to Toyota's suv + trucks.
SFA's advantage is durability and simplicity.
But ownership experience is different than a technical discussion on the merits of the 80 vs. 100.
That's the leap in logic that I'm getting reading this.
Not saying the 100 is a Corolla! The 100 is a fantastic suv. It's so hard to find a clean 80 that if I were buying today, it would most likely be a LX or GX470. Clean 80's are so hard to find. Age and care + value for the dollar are factors in used vehicle sales.
I agree that if you are happy with it and it meets your needs and desires, why not. In the real world, if you are happy with whatever you drive, than that's the only thing that's important.
SFA's advantage is not in "rock crawling" for most of the world when it comes to Toyota's suv + trucks.
SFA's advantage is durability and simplicity.
But ownership experience is different than a technical discussion on the merits of the 80 vs. 100.
