Are old 1984-1989 land cruisers safe? (1 Viewer)

[morinder33]

We are looking into purchasing an older land cruiser between the years of 1984-1989. We can't find safety rating for cars this old and are wondering how safe they are. I have one useful site in this cases, but they have no solution on my issue. We will have our kids in their car seats in the back to consider as well as general safety in side impact and front impact accidents. Does anyone have info/resources to direct us in this regard? Any suggestions to make sure this truck is safe if we go to inspect one? Updates, repairs, restoration that could be essential or you would suggest? Thanks!

 

[wormfood]

Pretty much the same as other 1980's cars, so not really. They are well built with relatively heavy duty components, so compared to other 1980's cars they're probably pretty good, but compared to something modern it's not even close. I don't think they even had anti-lock brakes, or airbags. (maybe the later ones)

Some people might say "It's big and heavy, so it's safer than newer cars" those people are idiots.In a crash you don't want the car to be intact, you want the passengers to be intact, which means you want the car to crumple up and absorb energy until whatever is impacting reaches the safety cell, which is strong enough to not collapse. The old Land Cruisers are pretty crude in both crumple zones and safety cells, in that they don't really have them. The old Land Cruiser was still using basically the same type of construction as cars from the 50's and 60's, so I'll include this to show how much of a difference that means.

 

[Cruiserdrew]

Good hobby car, not really a safe family car. It is heavy and everything else being equal, that's a good thing. However:

-Brakes by modern standards are marginal
-The A pillar will collapse in any rollover
-There is no side impact protection other than sheet metal, unlike like all modern cars
-It's a big boxy SUV prone to roll overs and if you lift it at all, it is way more likely to roll over
-It has no airbags and a basically metal dash

I don't mean to talk you out of it, but realize what you're doing. A modern van or wagon would be a much better choice.

 

[rhah]

Pretty much the same as other 1980's cars, so not really. They are well built with relatively heavy duty components, so compared to other 1980's cars they're probably pretty good, but compared to something modern it's not even close. I don't think they even had anti-lock brakes, or airbags. (maybe the later ones)

Some people might say "It's big and heavy, so it's safer than newer cars" those people are idiots.In a crash you don't want the car to be intact, you want the passengers to be intact, which means you want the car to crumple up and absorb energy until whatever is impacting reaches the safety cell, which is strong enough to not collapse. The old Land Cruisers are pretty crude in both crumple zones and safety cells, in that they don't really have them. The old Land Cruiser was still using basically the same type of construction as cars from the 50's and 60's, so I'll include this to show how much of a difference that means.

absolutely hate this video, such a poor example.
Making sure the new car gets hit on the “frame/crumple zone” and making sure the classic gets hit on the A arm and outside the frame.
YES that car is going to crumple like a tin can as any car would.

not trying to say they are the safest but it’s a very one sided test.

If they are looking for safety I couldn’t think of a better vehicle from the late 80’s to put them in.

 

[fj40fillet]

Solid framed vehicles do not do well in accidents. I do fire/rescue and pickup trucks and older vehicles are the most fatal. Unibody vehicles do the best with their design to crumple as mentioned above. Also older vehicles lack air bags, reinforced side beam construction, seat belt retractors, ABS, stability control, rear shoulder harness seat belts, hood hooks to keep hood from dislodging and going through the windshield. Keep in mind, even newer vehicles are tested to 35 - 50 mph for crash integrity. We all drive at 80 MPH on the highways. So, nothing will protect you in these situations.

 

[MANUCHAO]

I don't mean to talk you out of it, but realize what you're doing. A modern van or wagon would be a much better choice.

^^^This...

60 series are not for everyone....
I love driving mine on long trips....

 

[wormfood]

absolutely hate this video, such a poor example.
Making sure the new car gets hit on the “frame/crumple zone” and making sure the classic gets hit on the A arm and outside the frame.
YES that car is going to crumple like a tin can as any car would.

not trying to say they are the safest but it’s a very one sided test.

If they are looking for safety I couldn’t think of a better vehicle from the late 80’s to put them in.

It's a standard offset frontal impact test, which is a really common type of crash. I don't think they had to go out of their way to show that a car from the 50's isn't safe in a crash.

 

[Cruiserdrew]

^^^This...

60 series are not for everyone....
I love driving mine on long trips....

I like driving mine too, but never kid myself that it's a good family car. It's a great camping adventure car. But the family needs something with more modern brakes, impact protection, comfort, power and economy. And any carbureted car in 2020 is an unfortunate relic of the past. So a long way to say that an original FJ62 is pretty acceptable, an original FJ60 with a 2F is a slow and cranky dog. And I still drive one occasionally!

 

[Live to Ski]

Well, they do have a) front disc brakes, b) seat/shoulder belts, c) head rests.

Definitely better than the prevously owned a) '69 jeep wagoner, b) 1950 DJ-2a...both of which lacked the above

Did I say I'm luck to be alive

 

[chapel gate]

as a new born, i was driven home on my mothers lap, no seat belts, in the front passenger seat of a series 2 landrover. over the top of the moors on a very snowy march of 76..

 

[Michael Hanson]

Hi, Let’s hear from people who have actually been in wrecks in them. We have been hit several times extremely hard in fj40s up to fj80s. The other cars were destroyed including a Volvo, ford and Chevy. All our cruisers I drove home except for two. One had a busted radiator and one was 60 feet down a cliff upside down. Most of the time our 5 kids were in the cruisers ,only once was someone hurt, that was a in a 40 rear ended at a stop light and the lady on the phone applied no brakes at over 50 plus miles per hour! Are they safe.. very. That’s why we have 9 of them. Mike

 

[stayalert]

In about 1988 I hit ice on the highway going 60MPH and spun around backwards...While going backwards I hit the end of a run of guardrail (a post) dead center....I flipped end over end several times and the vehicle (a '78 FJ40 ) came to a rest on its wheels. It was totaled but I crawled out with a scratch on my hand. Roll bar + seat belt = igood stuff

 

[kerplunk]

By modern standards, they really just aren't.
84-89 would be an FJ60? Make sure the frame isn't rusted.
It is a heavy body on frame vehicle with solid axles. The strength is in the frame, which I don't believe is designed to crumple absorbing impact.
In certain scenarios, straight front on collisions with a lighter newer car, it's possibly safer, being heavier, solid frame, etc.. But mostly, before hitting something head on, people swerve... And then it looks like the video above... Hit from behind, I've seen one drive away that crumpled a newer (mid 90's) car that hit it and sent the driver to the hospital, but people in cars hit from behind typically do pretty well (especially a nice square impact, not from the side).
As many people's stories will show, the truck is much more likely to drive away than anything with crumple zones and airbags. Not sure that's what's really what's important?

 

[rustybucket]

Hi, Let’s hear from people who have actually been in wrecks in them. We have been hit several times extremely hard in fj40s up to fj80s. The other cars were destroyed including a Volvo, ford and Chevy. All our cruisers I drove home except for two. One had a busted radiator and one was 60 feet down a cliff upside down. Most of the time our 5 kids were in the cruisers ,only once was someone hurt, that was a in a 40 rear ended at a stop light and the lady on the phone applied no brakes at over 50 plus miles per hour! Are they safe.. very. That’s why we have 9 of them. Mike

Is about physics. The the higher the mass number in kilograms ah, the less shock it will absorb from a passenger vehicle. The equation is simple calculated in Newton energy.

 

[RAYJON]

I don’t know 60’s but a 80 series will take a hell of a hit, Freind of mines parents were stopped and were hit head on in a 80 with air bags, the f150 that hit them folded up, they were able to open the doors and get out. The driver of the f150 had to be cut out. Now it did total the 80 as the bumper was into the motor, but the passenger compartment was solid.. look at some of the rigs that have rolled at highway speeds on mud, cruisers will take a lot of damage and protect the occupants.. bumpers and sliders help absorb/transfer damage...

if it’s a daily go 100 or 200 Body integrity and stiffness improved with each generation, the whole side of a 100 series is one stamping at the time it was the largest automotive stamping ever done.. was done to create a stiffer body and improve side impact protection,