100 Series vs 80 Series (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter DesertCruiser
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2004
- Threads
- 274
- Messages
- 23,205
- Location
- Chandler, AZ
- Website
- www.tontorecreationalliance.org
If you really believe that, why do you let your teenage son drive one?
:whoops: More Shotts BS exaggerations, if your going to write this type of BS how about some data?
What's the tested 60-0 distance on the 100? A quick search netted a '94 Consumers Reports test, the 5150 lb 80 stopped in 136', I call that a respectable number for a '94 truck. The same article tested the Plymouth Voyager, 3835 lb, 137', Pontiac Trans Sport, 3890 lb, 145' and the Honda Passport, 4080 lb, 141'. So just how does stopping faster than vehicles that weigh more half a ton less than it, make it "worst in it's class"?
I have little use for the backseat, so if I felt the need to "upgrade" to an IFS truck it would be the FJC over the 100. Shorter, better approach/departure angles, coil springs, much better aftermarket support and probably a better all around wheeler than the 100.
If you really believe that, why do you let your teenage son drive one?
More Shotts BS exaggerations, if your going to write this type of BS how about some data?
A quick search netted a '94 Consumers Reports test, the 5150 lb 80 stopped in 136', I call that a respectable number for a '94 truck. The same article tested the Plymouth Voyager, 3835 lb, 137', Pontiac Trans Sport, 3890 lb, 145' and the Honda Passport, 4080 lb, 141'. So just how does stopping faster than vehicles that weigh more half a ton less than it, make it "worst in it's class"?
I have little use for the backseat, so if I felt the need to "upgrade" to an IFS truck it would be the FJC over the 100. Shorter, better approach/departure angles, coil springs, much better aftermarket support and probably a better all around wheeler than the 100.
I think the problem with this discussion is trying to define what "better" means. No vehicle is all things to everyone. If someone is looking for a 80 or even a FJC they aren't looking for a 100 series.
If you really believe that, why do you let your teenage son drive one?
More Shotts BS exaggerations, if your going to write this type of BS how about some data?
A quick search netted a '94 Consumers Reports test, the 5150 lb 80 stopped in 136', I call that a respectable number for a '94 truck. The same article tested the Plymouth Voyager, 3835 lb, 137', Pontiac Trans Sport, 3890 lb, 145' and the Honda Passport, 4080 lb, 141'. So just how does stopping faster than vehicles that weigh more half a ton less than it, make it "worst in it's class"?
I have little use for the backseat, so if I felt the need to "upgrade" to an IFS truck it would be the FJC over the 100. Shorter, better approach/departure angles, coil springs, much better aftermarket support and probably a better all around wheeler than the 100.
Kevin: Are you REALLY going to argue about 100 vs 80 brakes!? That's an argument an 80 owner can't win. There's no comparison and you-all know it...unless you've never driven a 100. You know as well as me that decending some of these grades in AZ your ass is almost off the seat while your leg is hot on the brake pedal....especially after they get wet. They are WEAK!
The 100's brakes work effortlessly even with 35's. The system doesn't care. Come on Kev, I know you prefer 80's but we're talking brakes.
My son is 18....it was his choice to take the 80 or get something else. Isn't the choice his? We you a big boy when you were 18?
A quick search netted a '94 Consumers Reports test, the 5150 lb 80 stopped in 136', I call that a respectable number for a '94 truck. The same article tested the Plymouth Voyager, 3835 lb, 137', Pontiac Trans Sport, 3890 lb, 145' and the Honda Passport, 4080 lb, 141'. So just how does stopping faster than vehicles that weigh more half a ton less than it, make it "worst in it's class"?
Kevin: When you put a 35-incher on an 80 the system cannot handle it well. You know this. The 100 can handle a 35 and with ease. I couldn't hardly tell the difference in the 100.
If you can live without a true Land Cruiser then a Wrangler Unlimited JK is an extremely superb vehicle. I'd take it over a FJC in a heartbeat!
I've got to admit the 100 definitely has better brakes than the 80, but since the brake issue seems to be the only definitive 100 series strength- I'll still stick with the 80 and put aftermarket brakes and pads if it starts bothering me. All the other cute gizzmos and slightly more comfortable interior still do not make up for IFS. No matter how much money you sink into an already expensive 100 series, you will end up with more breakage than a much less expensive 80 series with minor mods. The threads by Slee and others seem to prove this.
1999 LC
Braking Distance (60-0 mph): 150 ft.
1998 LC
Braking Distance (60-0 mph): 140 ft.
Braking 60-0 mph: 135 feet (2005 model)
2003 LX470
Braking Distance (60-0 mph): 124.24 ft.
I think we should define "breakage".
Other than front diffs, what "breakage" on the 100's? 120K of wheeling on a 100 and I only have bent arms to complain about. What else?
Thise are not from Consumer Reports though it doesn't matter. We all have driven these things with big tires and we all know the outcome.
I am not going to reiterate what has already been defined as 100 series breakage by myself and others in this post (beating a dead horse). However I think that with limited funds (under $10k) you can buy and build an 80 series and turn it into a much more rounded trail rig than the 100 series with the same mods. Someday when the 100 series' prices drop and more aftermarket goodies are available we can have a legit disscussion of whether the 100 can out wheel an 80. Until then.....
For Landcruisers, presumably without AHC, Consumer Reports shows "excellent" suspension reliability for all years back to 98. Considering what some of us do with these vehicles, that's amazing.
The Lexus, where AHC has been standard since 98, has 1 year with a "poor" rating, 2 with a "fair", 2 with a "good" , 2 with "very good", and only 1 with "excellent."
There's obviously a AHC trade-off between comfort and complexity/reliability.
T.
The Lexus, where AHC has been standard since 98, has 1 year with a "poor" rating, 2 with a "fair", 2 with a "good" , 2 with "very good", and only 1 with "excellent."
There's obviously a AHC trade-off between comfort and complexity/reliability.
T.
Oh of course....$10K and some mods and the 80 is a killer wheeler. Why do you think I own two?
It all depends on ones needs, wants, and wallet.
Is that "breakage". I've never broke anything on the trail short a rear arm and driveshaft. Slee busted an outer CV though he admitted error and that an 80 would have broke there too.
If you really believe that, why do you let your teenage son drive one?
More Shotts BS exaggerations, if your going to write this type of BS how about some data?
A quick search netted a '94 Consumers Reports test, the 5150 lb 80 stopped in 136', I call that a respectable number for a '94 truck. The same article tested the Plymouth Voyager, 3835 lb, 137', Pontiac Trans Sport, 3890 lb, 145' and the Honda Passport, 4080 lb, 141'. So just how does stopping faster than vehicles that weigh more half a ton less than it, make it "worst in it's class"?
I have little use for the backseat, so if I felt the need to "upgrade" to an IFS truck it would be the FJC over the 100. Shorter, better approach/departure angles, coil springs, much better aftermarket support and probably a better all around wheeler than the 100.
You might think differently after seeing this FJC
http://www.4x4grace.com/Coppermine/displayimage.php?album=59&pos=27
Oh of course....$10K and some mods and the 80 is a killer wheeler. Why do you think I own two?
It all depends on ones needs, wants, and wallet.
There's no question that the 80 gives you more wheeling for your dollar, but that's not really what this thread is about.
What I'd really like to see is a something like a 94 80 with $6K in mods go up against an 06 100 with $6K in mods. Take the two out to do some agressive crawling, some water passages, some sand runs, etc.
That would be truly interesting, and would do a lot more to determine how the two compare in real situations. We just need someone willing to bash their new 06.
Not fair....$6K in mods get's you a 6" lift on a 80. 3" on a 100. 80 has free lockers. $3K in the 100.
What's fair? What I wheel with myself and most others:
3" 80 vs 3" 100
Locked 80 vs locked 100
35" tires on both
Apples to apples the 100 will hang with that 80 almost everywhere short the most extreme trails while proving far more comfort and safety let alone the on-road benefits after the run is over. This has always been "my point" on these threads. Of course a 6" lifted 100 will blow away a 3" lifted 100 on the Rubicon or the like. DUHHHH! And that's an extreme trail where the 80 will win in a 3-to-3 inch comparison also.
Last edited:
Never broke either.
