hoser said:
Ahh, good question. The 105 might be the perfect compromise between the 80 and the 100 (IMHO). I would probably do it. But it still doesn't look as cool as an 80!
Anyone who upgraded from an 80 have regrets?
- Thread starter MH_Stevens
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
Ahh, good question. The 105 might be the perfect compromise between the 80 and the 100 (IMHO). I would probably do it. But it still doesn't look as cool as an 80!
hoser said:
Nope...I'd be back to the same trouble with a 105 that I am in the 100. It's a tad too big. IFS doesn't stop me...size does.
Though I would own an 80 a 105 and a 100 if the 105's were here.
hoser said:
Some improperly built 100's cracked a few T-bars in Aussie-ville. They ARB and winched up but used STOCK T-bars which are too weak to handle the weight. Have not heard of any aftermarket bars busting.
Cruiserdrew
On the way there
Trolling on the 100 forum...
I have not "upgraded", but of course have an opinion.
I don't see the 100 being different enough from every other SUV out there to own it over an 80. The 80 is the last of a long line of 3rd world trucks, that were adapted to life in North America. They are absolutely unique, and nothing like them will ever be made again.
If you own 40's and 60's it is amazing how much of the thinking/design/layout carries over into the 80. That family Land Cruiser heritage thing has it's charms. There are parts from my FJ40 that work on my 80, built 21 years later. I see the 100 as a complete departure in everything from the V8 motor to the 5 stud wheels.
100s are wonderful rigs-powerful, reliable, even capable, but they arn't that unique. Look at a Tahoe, or a Durango and the 100 shares lots of the same features. They can be made into offroaders as Shotts has sort of shown, but they arn't born to operate in primative conditions the way all former Land Cruisers were.
I like 100s and may own one one day, but I wouldn't trade an equal miles 80 for a 100.
I have not "upgraded", but of course have an opinion.
I don't see the 100 being different enough from every other SUV out there to own it over an 80. The 80 is the last of a long line of 3rd world trucks, that were adapted to life in North America. They are absolutely unique, and nothing like them will ever be made again.
If you own 40's and 60's it is amazing how much of the thinking/design/layout carries over into the 80. That family Land Cruiser heritage thing has it's charms. There are parts from my FJ40 that work on my 80, built 21 years later. I see the 100 as a complete departure in everything from the V8 motor to the 5 stud wheels.
100s are wonderful rigs-powerful, reliable, even capable, but they arn't that unique. Look at a Tahoe, or a Durango and the 100 shares lots of the same features. They can be made into offroaders as Shotts has sort of shown, but they arn't born to operate in primative conditions the way all former Land Cruisers were.
I like 100s and may own one one day, but I wouldn't trade an equal miles 80 for a 100.
Living in the Past
SILVER Star
Quote Cruiserdrew
Last time I checked the 100 is still sold all over the world just as the 80. Until the mid seventies the US got the same 40s as the rest of the world. That's when things started to change, no FF axles, H41 transmission and diesel engines. How many five speed-diesel 80s did Toyota import to the US and of you wanted lockers for $800 you had to have $4500 leather package unless you could get a dealer to special order one. I talked to a dealer in 93 about ordering one with cloth interior, hand crank windows, steel wheels, lockers. Which would have brought the price from $45,000 to the low thirties. I couldn't find a dealer willing to do it. The 100 series isn't any different. Diesel engines and five speeds were available in the 40, 60, 80, 100 series. I know the diesel is the 105 series but wasn't the six cyclinder diesel 60 series HJ61 but still a 60 series? So isn't the 105 considered in the 100 series line.
Quote: Cruiserdrew
What the rear third member and air cleaner? The 80 series compares more to the 100 series than the 40 series The coil springs and 1ZF engine are nothing like what came on the 40 and 60 series. You can put a 3FE head on the 2F but what can you interchange with the 1ZF? The 1ZF was the first Cruiser engine in the US with something other than gear to gear drive for the valves. Was that a bad thing? I don't thing so anymore than the belt driven V8. The body style change from the 60 series to the 80 series was a larger change than that of the 80 series to the 100 series.
Quote: Cruiserdrew
The thing that looks the closest to the 100 series to me is the 80 series. It just looks like the next step in design. To me anything else is just name calling. If you want to talk about a vehicle that not born to operate in primative conditions that would be the FJ Cruiser since it's a North American vehicle only and the 100 series is sold world wide.
Of course if AL Gore had invented the internet sooner I sure the samething would of happened between the 60 series and the 80 series
.
We all the know the real third world cruiser isn't the 80 series or the 100 series but the 70 series we didn't get
John
Last time I checked the 100 is still sold all over the world just as the 80. Until the mid seventies the US got the same 40s as the rest of the world. That's when things started to change, no FF axles, H41 transmission and diesel engines. How many five speed-diesel 80s did Toyota import to the US and of you wanted lockers for $800 you had to have $4500 leather package unless you could get a dealer to special order one. I talked to a dealer in 93 about ordering one with cloth interior, hand crank windows, steel wheels, lockers. Which would have brought the price from $45,000 to the low thirties. I couldn't find a dealer willing to do it. The 100 series isn't any different. Diesel engines and five speeds were available in the 40, 60, 80, 100 series. I know the diesel is the 105 series but wasn't the six cyclinder diesel 60 series HJ61 but still a 60 series? So isn't the 105 considered in the 100 series line.
Quote: Cruiserdrew
What the rear third member and air cleaner? The 80 series compares more to the 100 series than the 40 series The coil springs and 1ZF engine are nothing like what came on the 40 and 60 series. You can put a 3FE head on the 2F but what can you interchange with the 1ZF? The 1ZF was the first Cruiser engine in the US with something other than gear to gear drive for the valves. Was that a bad thing? I don't thing so anymore than the belt driven V8. The body style change from the 60 series to the 80 series was a larger change than that of the 80 series to the 100 series.
Quote: Cruiserdrew
The thing that looks the closest to the 100 series to me is the 80 series. It just looks like the next step in design. To me anything else is just name calling. If you want to talk about a vehicle that not born to operate in primative conditions that would be the FJ Cruiser since it's a North American vehicle only and the 100 series is sold world wide.
Of course if AL Gore had invented the internet sooner I sure the samething would of happened between the 60 series and the 80 series
. We all the know the real third world cruiser isn't the 80 series or the 100 series but the 70 series we didn't get
John
Cruiserdrew
On the way there
Living in the Past said:What the rear third member and air cleaner? The 80 series compares more to the 100 series than the 40 series The coil springs and 1ZF engine are nothing like what came on the 40 and 60 series. You can put a 3FE head on the 2F but what can you interchange with the 1ZF? The 1ZF was the first Cruiser engine in the US with something other than gear to gear drive for the valves. Was that a bad thing? I don't thing so anymore than the belt driven V8. The body style change from the 60 series to the 80 series was a larger change than that of the 80 series to the 100 series.
We all the know the real third world cruiser isn't the 80 series or the 100 series but the 70 series we didn't get
John
Notice I'm not debating whether 80s are better than 100s. I'm just making the point that I wouldn't trade and gave a few reasons. Wasn't what this thread was about? Don't get me wrong, it is highly likely I will own a 100 at some point. Please don't be offended.
It's funny, this thread started by asking if anyone that went from an 80 to a 100 regretted the move. Nobody has come forth and said "yes, I regret it". I find that interesting for a couple reasons.
1. A lot of 80 owners just keep on going in their 80's. That says a lot about the vehicle in general.
2. Some that have changed over really like the 100. I think that is also testimony to the fact that the 100 is a lot closer to the 80 than some people want to admit.
There's a few hard core guys in the 80's forum that truly put their rigs through the hardest of trails. Those guys have my respect. There's also a lot of guys there that do moderate off-roading and mostly daily driving too. They also have my respect. Then there's others that just like to shoot off at the mouth. They like to over-compensate and pick on every little thing to make some lame point. Those guys can
The bottom line is both the 100 and the 80 are very well built and do a lot of things very well. The 80 has a couple of advantages over the 100, namely a SFA and an easier drivetrain to work on in the field. But the 100 also has some advantages over the 80. I bet there isn't an 80 owner out there that wouldn't take more power, more comfort, and better gas mileage.
All this talk about which one looks better is drivel, pure and simple. It just one person's opinion vs. another's opinion. You say the 100 doesn't have the classic looks of the 80, I say the looks of the 80 are dated. It's all opinion, no more no less.
Where does this all get us? No where, that's where. Why don't people bust on Heeps and Hummers instead of trying to bring down other Cruiser owners? I just don't get it.
1. A lot of 80 owners just keep on going in their 80's. That says a lot about the vehicle in general.
2. Some that have changed over really like the 100. I think that is also testimony to the fact that the 100 is a lot closer to the 80 than some people want to admit.
There's a few hard core guys in the 80's forum that truly put their rigs through the hardest of trails. Those guys have my respect. There's also a lot of guys there that do moderate off-roading and mostly daily driving too. They also have my respect. Then there's others that just like to shoot off at the mouth. They like to over-compensate and pick on every little thing to make some lame point. Those guys can
The bottom line is both the 100 and the 80 are very well built and do a lot of things very well. The 80 has a couple of advantages over the 100, namely a SFA and an easier drivetrain to work on in the field. But the 100 also has some advantages over the 80. I bet there isn't an 80 owner out there that wouldn't take more power, more comfort, and better gas mileage.
All this talk about which one looks better is drivel, pure and simple. It just one person's opinion vs. another's opinion. You say the 100 doesn't have the classic looks of the 80, I say the looks of the 80 are dated. It's all opinion, no more no less.
Where does this all get us? No where, that's where. Why don't people bust on Heeps and Hummers instead of trying to bring down other Cruiser owners? I just don't get it.
Greg B said:There's a few hard core guys in the 80's forum that truly put their rigs through the hardest of trails. Those guys have my respect. There's also a lot of guys there that do moderate off-roading and mostly daily driving too. They also have my respect. Then there's others that just like to shoot off at the mouth. They like to over-compensate and pick on every little thing to make some lame point. Those guys can
Hey Andy, I think he's got your number. I guess this means you'll have to actually take your 80 on the next 80Con...
Cruiserdrew
On the way there
dclee said:Hey Andy, I think he's got your number. I guess this means you'll have to actually take your 80 on the next 80Con...
Right-Everyone knows 40s are better than 80s which are better than 100s...
QED: 40s are better than 100s.You will likely see my FJ40 on the 80con again-it's just better.
I promise, though, one of these years, my 80 will go through the Rubicon. It's already dented and scratched, but the FJ40 is just at home there. Once I take the 80 through there, my wife will force the sale of the FJ40. That's no joke, she hates it. Since I just passed smog, you'll see the 40 at least 2 more years.
Hijack...both the 80 and the 100 make awesome rigs for expedition type travel. I've seen that repeatedly. I can see that being a bigger part of my life as I get older. I still have the need for rocks, though, and the 100 is just too hard to move through that environment. I'm sure Amando had fun on the Rubicon, but he worked his butt off to go through, and we all worked our butts off to get him through.
I really think the 100 is a solid truck, but it has enough differences from the 80, both good and bad, that the calculus falls on the 80 side for me at this time. Once I sell the 40, should I get a 100 or a 55??? Being old school, I'm thinking 55
Greg B said:There's a few hard core guys in the 80's forum that truly put their rigs through the hardest of trails. Those guys have my respect. There's also a lot of guys there that do moderate off-roading and mostly daily driving too. They also have my respect. Then there's others that just like to shoot off at the mouth. They like to over-compensate and pick on every little thing to make some lame point. Those guys can
I happen to be one of the moderate off-roader (with the scraped rockers and bent-up trailer hitch to prove it) + daily driver (since it's my only vehicle) 80 owners, so I'm not sure who you're referring to with the "shooting off at the mouth" and "overcompensating" comments. However, I do find it interesting that you resort to indirect name-calling instead of responding to the points made. If you read through the list of problems LC purists have with the 100 that I posted, you'll see some very solid reasons as to why.
BTW you really shouldn't talk about overcompensating since most 100-owners bought their rigs for use as a tough-looking, high-status minivan.
Last edited:
alaskacruiser said:I happen to be one of the moderate off-roader (with the scraped rockers and bent-up trailer hitch to prove it) + daily driver (since it's my only vehicle) 80 owners, so I'm not sure who you're referring to with the "shooting off at the mouth" and "overcompensating" comments. However, I do find it interesting that you resort to indirect name-calling instead of responding to the points made. If you read through the list of problems LC purists have with the 100 that I posted, you'll see some very solid reasons as to why.
BTW you really shouldn't talk about overcompensating since most 100-owners bought their rigs for use as a tough-looking, high-status minivan.
What the hell do you think most 80's in the US were sold for? Get off your high horse and recognize that the 80 and the disco started the yuppie high-status SUV craze. They've depreciated enough so that folks can afford to wheel them and mod them without investing the $$$ they commanded when first introduced.
A locked 80 is a world beater; plain and simple. I want one; I'll have one eventually. But to think that all 80's would simply take a 100 behind the woodshed is idiotic. The world is round, there are different wheeling conditions and in alot of those conditions the 100 is better. The obvious advantages of braking, people moving, cargo moving, hauiling, gas milieage and others are already thown out there. I'm going to strike a nerve and bring up OFFROADING.
Take the soupy muddy conditions that we see in my part of the country: We live in a sub-tropic/tropic climate that is just plain nasty to wheel in when the rains are here. Now let's look at the 80, with 6% in the US that are locked, that leaves alot of mall cruisers that are going nowhere in these conditions. Matter of fact, that leaves 94% sitting in the parking lot, sitting with the minivans you like to bring up so often. Take your longer traveling suspension and stick in on the shelf and watch the dust pile up on it b/c it will not be what gets you through the mud. Oh, look here comes a stock 100 with A-Trac which is standard equipment. There is no doubt it will go through more low-traction situations than an unlocked 80 ever dreamed of. Standard vehicle vs. standard vehicle. Add in the fact that there are a helluva lot more 100's with at least a rear locker or lsd and then you would really romp on 94% of the 80's and be neck in neck with the other 6% in these conditions.
They don't rock crawl in the amazon, nor in central america, nor africa. They need to get through boggy conditions and out of the box, a 100 is better than 94% of 80's at that task. One could ask, "so then where are all of the 100's in these places?" Well, their in the same places that the 80 was in when it was new. Only in the hands of the rich in those countries, waiting to become cheap enough to get down there. The economies are the only things on the rocks in many of these places. There is nothing about my LX that has changed my opinion that it is indeed of the quality that Araco and Mr. T are known for.
In conclusion, I still want a fully locked 80.
But I'm not gonna take a bunch of crap from someone with an unlocked 80 either critiquing a 100 for being close to a minivan when in fact their vehicle is much closer. Minivans can be quite reliable 3rd world vehicles too. What separates the cruiser from them is suspension, and traction. Standard 80's have more suspension, standard 100's have more traction. Both with optional equipment available from the factory are awesome. The locked 80 will always go where the 100 won't; I don't deny that. But I promise you there are plenty of places the 100 will go that an unlocked 80 will not go; sitting sied-by-side with the Ford Aerostar you referenced in another thread.Derek, John, hoser, and Andrew have made pretty good comparisons and Derek and John both have one or more of each to compare so I'll bow out now and let them continue with their fun and games.
tab- You seem to want to make this about "my truck" (unlocked) vs. "your truck". A little childish, but OK you asked for it: funny you choose to talk so much about the benefits of ATRAC and my lack of lockers on stock trucks when:
1. your truck isn't even equipped with ATRAC
2. your model year (and the one before it) were only available with a rear locker (no front). It was available as an OPTION only, just like the 80s. Most 98-99 100s are unlocked.
3. your truck has a very weak 2 pinion front diff (see the "front diff explosion / ford aerostar" thread for more). To be honest, in the mud example you presented, I'd be tiptoeing out there with a 2-pinion'd 100- with all that wheel-spin, come down wrong and that front diff is a disaster waiting to happen.
4. your truck has no viscous coupler in the center diff, so I'm afraid you'd be stuck with 1 wheel drive in high range while a non-locked "standard" 80 would have 2.
Wow, so far in this "stock" comparo, your unlocked, un-ATRAC'd, 2-pinion-front-diff'd, un-VC-TC'd 100 just isn't looking all that hot.
To quote your own line: "In conclusion, I still want a fully locked 80 (and I can and will do an OEM F/R locker retrofit- can you? Oh...sorry. But I'm not gonna take a bunch of crap from someone with an un-ATRAC'd, 2-pinion-diff'd 100 either critiquing a 80 for being close to a minivan when in fact their vehicle is much closer."
BTW- the percentage of locked 80s out there is thought to be 8%.
Moreover, you never really addressed any of the other points I made in the "Landcruiser purists" post- the minivan comparo just struck a nerve, I guess. Sorry about that- believe it or not, this is all in good fun. It's the norm for previous-series LC owners to rag on newer LC-owners since most of the newer owners are still in the latte stage (present company excluded), while a larger percentage of previous-series owners are more into the wheeling.
1. your truck isn't even equipped with ATRAC
2. your model year (and the one before it) were only available with a rear locker (no front). It was available as an OPTION only, just like the 80s. Most 98-99 100s are unlocked.
3. your truck has a very weak 2 pinion front diff (see the "front diff explosion / ford aerostar" thread for more). To be honest, in the mud example you presented, I'd be tiptoeing out there with a 2-pinion'd 100- with all that wheel-spin, come down wrong and that front diff is a disaster waiting to happen.
4. your truck has no viscous coupler in the center diff, so I'm afraid you'd be stuck with 1 wheel drive in high range while a non-locked "standard" 80 would have 2.
Wow, so far in this "stock" comparo, your unlocked, un-ATRAC'd, 2-pinion-front-diff'd, un-VC-TC'd 100 just isn't looking all that hot.
To quote your own line: "In conclusion, I still want a fully locked 80 (and I can and will do an OEM F/R locker retrofit- can you? Oh...sorry. But I'm not gonna take a bunch of crap from someone with an un-ATRAC'd, 2-pinion-diff'd 100 either critiquing a 80 for being close to a minivan when in fact their vehicle is much closer."
BTW- the percentage of locked 80s out there is thought to be 8%.
Moreover, you never really addressed any of the other points I made in the "Landcruiser purists" post- the minivan comparo just struck a nerve, I guess. Sorry about that- believe it or not, this is all in good fun. It's the norm for previous-series LC owners to rag on newer LC-owners since most of the newer owners are still in the latte stage (present company excluded), while a larger percentage of previous-series owners are more into the wheeling.
Last edited:
Cruiserdrew said:
You actually believe this?
alaskacruiser said:BTW you really shouldn't talk about overcompensating since most 100-owners bought their rigs for use as a tough-looking, high-status minivan.
As did all the soccar moms and the like when the 80's were new.
tabraha said:What the hell do you think most 80's in the US were sold for? Get off your high horse and recognize that the 80 and the disco started the yuppie high-status SUV craze. They've depreciated enough so that folks can afford to wheel them and mod them without investing the $$$ they commanded when first introduced.
A locked 80 is a world beater; plain and simple. I want one; I'll have one eventually. But to think that all 80's would simply take a 100 behind the woodshed is idiotic. The world is round, there are different wheeling conditions and in alot of those conditions the 100 is better. The obvious advantages of braking, people moving, cargo moving, hauiling, gas milieage and others are already thown out there. I'm going to strike a nerve and bring up OFFROADING.
Take the soupy muddy conditions that we see in my part of the country: We live in a sub-tropic/tropic climate that is just plain nasty to wheel in when the rains are here. Now let's look at the 80, with 6% in the US that are locked, that leaves alot of mall cruisers that are going nowhere in these conditions. Matter of fact, that leaves 94% sitting in the parking lot, sitting with the minivans you like to bring up so often. Take your longer traveling suspension and stick in on the shelf and watch the dust pile up on it b/c it will not be what gets you through the mud. Oh, look here comes a stock 100 with A-Trac which is standard equipment. There is no doubt it will go through more low-traction situations than an unlocked 80 ever dreamed of. Standard vehicle vs. standard vehicle. Add in the fact that there are a helluva lot more 100's with at least a rear locker or lsd and then you would really romp on 94% of the 80's and be neck in neck with the other 6% in these conditions.
They don't rock crawl in the amazon, nor in central america, nor africa. They need to get through boggy conditions and out of the box, a 100 is better than 94% of 80's at that task. One could ask, "so then where are all of the 100's in these places?" Well, their in the same places that the 80 was in when it was new. Only in the hands of the rich in those countries, waiting to become cheap enough to get down there. The economies are the only things on the rocks in many of these places. There is nothing about my LX that has changed my opinion that it is indeed of the quality that Araco and Mr. T are known for.
In conclusion, I still want a fully locked 80.
Derek, John, hoser, and Andrew have made pretty good comparisons and Derek and John both have one or more of each to compare so I'll bow out now and let them continue with their fun and games.
WAY TO GO TAD! GET WORKED UP BUDDY!
I have had both and the 100 is twice the vehicle than the 80 for 95% of the users out there.
For me, I chose the 100 as my family hauler for 1 reason. It can double as my tow rig.
I just got the ARB in the back and took it out on some steep, loose stuff and the combo of it and the ATRAC system is pretty impressive.
If you want to build a wagon from stock and take it out and build it to beat it the 80 is the best choice IMHO.
For me, I chose the 100 as my family hauler for 1 reason. It can double as my tow rig.
I just got the ARB in the back and took it out on some steep, loose stuff and the combo of it and the ATRAC system is pretty impressive.
If you want to build a wagon from stock and take it out and build it to beat it the 80 is the best choice IMHO.
NO regrets at all, I love the 100's, both have been 100% trouble free.
for me I really like the added room the 100's offer, as well as the V8.
for me I really like the added room the 100's offer, as well as the V8.
alaskacruiser said:
Fine, I'll go back to your original post and address the innaccuracies and the over-compensating.
alaskacruiser said:BTW you really shouldn't talk about overcompensating since most 100-owners bought their rigs for use as a tough-looking, high-status minivan.
Funny you say this, as some have already called you on this, the 80 was in the same boat 15 years ago. There are very few 80 owner's on this board that bought their rig new. So, when the price came down, it was an affordable platform to modify. The 100 is becoming the same way.
