60 vs 62

Joined
May 20, 2004
Messages
809
Location
Below Da Bridge
I did a search and didn't find a thread about which is better-60 or 62?

So here it is

I'm looking to go to a wagon. Should I sell the 40 and fix my 60? or trade both for a running 62.
GO!
 
Joined
Feb 20, 2006
Messages
5,698
Location
calgary
there is a sticky in the FAQ i think, where are you located as well, there is probally someone around who would trade.
 
Joined
Jan 13, 2005
Messages
1,806
Location
Boise ID
62 are way better. a lot more power options. I dont know they are pretty much the same. the fuel injection is nice but all of the electrical stuff people dont prefer on the 62. I like mine and no problems so far.
 

sandcruiser

....back in the saddle again....
Joined
Sep 29, 2004
Messages
3,636
Location
Truckee, CA
better headlights on the 60. Ok, that's not really true. But they look better IMO.

Probably a better question: which has less rust? Neither motor is "fast", so that's not such a big consideration. Some people like the auto tranny, some like the 4speed better. The 62 has lower diff ratio (4.11? 4.10? something like that). But you don't really feel it due to the auto tranny. There are more electrical doodads (technical term) on the 62. That means: you can roll down the rear windows without stretching, but also that there are more probably failure points.

I'm sure others will chime in.
 
Joined
Dec 14, 2006
Messages
318
Location
Tahlequah OK
The battle is in looks vs. accesories. I think most people would prefer the classic styling of the 60, but there are people who want the power windows and such. The fuel injection of the 62 is obviously better. I like my 60 better (biased) because I think it looks a little bit better. I do kind of like the 62 b/c it looks like an early 90's rapper delight with those headlights. I would say go with a 60 and steal a 62's engine. And I prefer my 60's manual tranny. They both have definite advantages, and they both freakin rock vs. everything else.
 
Joined
Feb 17, 2007
Messages
888
Location
Oregon
Personal preferences. First though, not all the 62's have the power crap. Mine is all manual. The biggest difference as far as driving them after that is the auto vs. the manual. So, which do you like better? Also, as sandcruiser mentioned, it may depend on what you find to be in better shape, rust wise. These old cruisers are getting harder and harder to find in any type of good shape. The remaining good ones have all been snatched up. We all know the 62 is EFI, vs. the carbed 60, but the 60 is also a little bit torquer motor, and there really doesn't seem to be any difference in MPG between the two. I think the auto trans wipes out any MPG gains of the EFI. As far as appearance, the only difference is the headlights and bezels. If you looked at two of them from the side (or rear for that matter) without knowing which was which, you couldn't tell them apart.
 
Joined
Feb 21, 2006
Messages
358
A 60 with the 3F engine would be the ultimate vehicle!

Manual trans, manual windows, locks, part time 4wd, and a FI engine. Toyota wouldn't have been able to make em fast enough!
 

REKCUT

SILVER Star
Joined
Jan 5, 2005
Messages
4,878
Location
Rogersville, Mo.
I love a manual tranny when playing off road. It is also easy to get a 60 tranny worked on while I have heard of nothing good when it comes to rebuilding a 62 auto. Like others have said a hybrid would be the best
 
Joined
Jan 18, 2006
Messages
9,615
Location
Reno, Nevada
I have a 62, and I love it...
Its a gutless pig, but really the only time I have a problem with it is when going up hills at higway speeds. The rest of the time its a joy to drive!
What sold me was the EFI! Ill take EFI over carb anyday!
However, you wouldnt go wrong having either.
Theyre both landcruisers!

Chicago
 
Joined
Sep 29, 2003
Messages
7,830
Location
The Sunshine State
They are both great.

I can tell you with first hand knowledge that...the 62 is a good bit beefer. I have done 3 frame swaps in the past year a 60,62 and an 80...each year just about every part gets beefed up. Some of the parts are just gnarly and why they made them so beefy is beyond me. I was putting an 80 series pitman arm the 60 last night and the 80 series pitman arm is TWICE the size. The frame for instance on the 62 is a great improvement over the 60 series, beefer hangers, crossmembers etc etc...

If I started over and was going to build a beef truck for the trail I would start with a fj62 and swap the core support and the tranny for a manual..


there is my 2 cents.
 
Joined
May 20, 2004
Messages
809
Location
Below Da Bridge
Great replies

I'm in the US-Michigan-so petrol is the only option without importing or fiding a rare HJ/BJ.

The wagon I really want is an 80. ( let the bashing begin!) But these are my current optoins.

A manual can be put in the 62 in the future, so that appears to be the way to go.

Thanks!!
 
Joined
Mar 13, 2004
Messages
979
Location
Northern California
I have got a 3FE in my FJ-60 with the 5-speed and I swapped in the 62 front clip and dash to make the conversion easier. Having driven an FJ-62 for over 200,000 miles I can tell you that the 3FE bolted to the 5-speed is a joy to drive. The A440F is a good tranny, but the 5-speed seems to "wake up" the 3FE. I prefer the 62 lights but my first cruiser was a 62 so I am biased.:D I like the idea of the 2FE but I had already rebuilt/modified my 3FE's block so I just used the 3FE in the 60. One thing I miss are the power door locks of the FJ-62. If you convert to a 2FE or 3FE in the 60 you can just bolt the power side mirrors to the 60 doors and since you use the FJ-62 dash wiring harness you will have the power controls for the mirrors. They are both good vehicles and in the end I would take the one that is in the best condition.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom