Are 60 Series to big for rock crawling? (1 Viewer)

Cruiserdrew

On the way there
SILVER Star
Joined
Mar 15, 2003
Messages
15,922
Location
Sacramento, CA
60s wheel just fine. Often better than short wheel base trucks. But, don't expect to get back unscathed. I'm in the minority, but I don't give a crap about the "value" of my FJ60. It's a truck I like to go to Rubicon or Dusy in. It's likely not going to last much longer. Just the way it is. I'm 100% willing to write it off at any time. But I don't want to, until I'm done with 4wd trails. To wheel an FJ60 though, you need very low gears, so concentrate your efforts there.
 

rhah

Admit it, your cruisers jealous
Joined
Dec 23, 2010
Messages
707
Location
ottawa, kansas
This rig lives on the rocks, fat asses make all trails tight and tight trails not as tight anymore.

that sir is to nice of a rig to beat on the trails and rock crawling

but I may have the rig your looking for 🤔

1DC43F1D-EBCC-463B-AB36-1456B4C53317.jpeg
 
Joined
Feb 7, 2012
Messages
50
Location
Western Australia
I understand the thought of putting a nice one in cotton balls and bubblewrap, but these things were built for a purpose.
When I got mine there was not a scratch underneath it - I think it was used for towing and for long haul travel on roads.
It has a few scratches on it now.....
I don't treat it like a piece of junk and would rather not damage it at all, but I bought it so I could find out of the way places. Where I am that means mostly sand tracks and beaches, but there are a few trails around.
Like someone else said though, I normally travel alone and so I turn back from anything I think I can't get back out of.
The funniest thing for me with regard to this thread in particular is that mine has a dirty great big LPG tank hanging underneath the stock petrol tank. People here talking about the "long tail" of the 60, makes me chuckle because mine is not only the standard "long", but also the LPG tank hangs there - think mounting a 35x12.50 (at least) in the standard under carrier.

Needless to say I regularly bounce the bash guard under the LPG tank onto things. It used to be a nice smooth curved plate. Now it has a resemblance to a golf ball surface. I like to think I have made it more aerodynamic.....

But it has never stopped me.

A full 60 will never be an out and out rock crawler, but they are really capable.
And let's face it - people cut, bob, and frame, minitrucks for rock crawling - if you are THAT serious about it, then a 60 is just not for you. (Although I have seen pics of cut, bobbed, and frames 60's as well.....)
 
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
942
Location
Moscow, ID
I'd just like to jump in and point out some facts:

2003 4runner is:
- Longer than a 60 by 5" (189" vs. 184")
- Wider than a 60 by 5" (76" vs 71")
- 40 pounds heavier (4280 lbs vs. 4240 lbs curb weight for a stock one)

If that truck fits on the trails you like, a 60 will, too, period. I don't care if 4runners were originally smaller than a cruiser; a 2003 is bigger than a 60!
 
Joined
Feb 6, 2018
Messages
7
Location
Texas
I'd just like to jump in and point out some facts:

2003 4runner is:
- Longer than a 60 by 5" (189" vs. 184")
- Wider than a 60 by 5" (76" vs 71")
- 40 pounds heavier (4280 lbs vs. 4240 lbs curb weight for a stock one)

If that truck fits on the trails you like, a 60 will, too, period. I don't care if 4runners were originally smaller than a cruiser; a 2003 is bigger than a 60!
Thanks for that info, wouldn't have thought that looking at them. What about wheelbase?
 
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
942
Location
Moscow, ID
Thanks for that info, wouldn't have thought that looking at them. What about wheelbase?
Looks like 110" for the 4runner and 108" for the 60. So, tiny fraction better break-over angle for the 60, and that 2" probably contributes to the ass-dragging our trucks love to do....


On this topic, this difference in size between old and newer Yotas is never clearer than when I park next to a 2003+ Taco or Tundra. The 60 is closer in overall size and footprint to an XJ Cherokee than a 100/200-series.
 

MoaByte

SILVER Star
Joined
Dec 13, 2014
Messages
1,274
Location
Moab
60's are not that big. Just perfect for a 5' 9" average Joe. Any taller, you will have to leave the tailgate down when camping.
 
Joined
Jan 6, 2012
Messages
8,696
1St, 2nd, or 3Rd Gen 4runner with solid axle up front would be a better choice for rocks. 1st gen probably being the best. They are lighter, smaller, and have lots of crawler upgrades readily available.
 
Joined
Feb 7, 2012
Messages
50
Location
Western Australia
I'd just like to jump in and point out some facts:

2003 4runner is:
- Longer than a 60 by 5" (189" vs. 184")
- Wider than a 60 by 5" (76" vs 71")
- 40 pounds heavier (4280 lbs vs. 4240 lbs curb weight for a stock one)

If that truck fits on the trails you like, a 60 will, too, period. I don't care if 4runners were originally smaller than a cruiser; a 2003 is bigger than a 60!
Don't go clouding the issue with facts!!!!! :rofl:
 

MoaByte

SILVER Star
Joined
Dec 13, 2014
Messages
1,274
Location
Moab
I haven't seen a 60 based rock crawler in Moab (this doesn't mean it hasn't happened). I did see a 60 with a busted axle getting towed down the Rim Trail back in 97. Most crawlers are tube framed buggies with a few beat panels and a grill from the vehicle that inspired it. The enthusiasm I hear about my old stock 1980 pickup because it isn't cut up is phenomenal. Many 4runner and pickups are running Cruiser axles though.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom