Are these things really unreliable?
- Thread starter MarkBC
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
- Thread starter
- #22
Because, I always intellectually knew I had limited time but somehow didn't let it influence my life decisions and I've taken on way too many projects for my time. I have 2 3rd gen 4runners (plus my mom has one), and each runs but they each have their issues to work out. My rebuilt 2000 Limited has taken me through 10's of thousands of km exploring BC and never let me down, my beige manual one has taken me to Mexico a couple times, and some trips in BC and performed well. I could invest in those to get them up to a good status for reliability and 4WDability. Or I could just keep them going, not let them go downhill, and instead invest the time into the 60. Which does actually drive, but needs a reasonable amount of work to make it decent again. Plus the 80 series axle swaps I've added to my plate adds a lot of time as well. But maybe compared to my C channel fiasco, maybe not so much... and I could farm out some of the work if I find someone willing to do it.
Gimme a 60
Time Doesn’t Wait for Me, it Keeps on Rollin!
You need to keep both. I have some decent cash from the roller, and Im trying to figure out if I should fix the pickup or buy another, or fix the 60 series.
But the 60 series always takes priority, because it’s unique and special. I had a 4 runner to as well.
But, i think it’s important to have both, the 60 series is far more durable than the runners, but on the other hand the runners are sooo smooth and quiet. And just as capable as the 60.
You just gotta live with both, because no matter what you do, your gonna miss both of them.
I drug my FJ62 out of a row of abandoned vehicles at a shop w/ 180k on the clock and questionable history of maintenance. I replaced the fuel pump and fixed all the associated wiring to get it running again, then hammered on it for a few months to get it running as best I could and caught up on deferred maintenance items, then proceeded to flog it on an out of state road trip with considerable time spent cruising 70-80mph. It totalled over 3,400 miles by the time I pulled back in the drive. It never broke down on me during that time (did start smelling gas near the end, though I haven't located a leak and it's now an intermittent thing). But would I say it's reliable? **** no. Even if this truck was of less sketchy provence, I still wouldn't trust it to be cross country reliable. Part of that is simply the age of the components, part of it is I just don't think it's as well designed as some folks led me to believe. Or maybe the Toyota Reliability Coolaid drained through all the rust holes in my Cruiser before I could partake of it.
That said it's still a cool truck. I'll still keep it and continue to sink money in it to fix a few things on it and get some more use out of it. Trips in it will likely be kept within Triple A's free towing coverage (so <300mi radius).
That said it's still a cool truck. I'll still keep it and continue to sink money in it to fix a few things on it and get some more use out of it. Trips in it will likely be kept within Triple A's free towing coverage (so <300mi radius).
Gimme a 60
Time Doesn’t Wait for Me, it Keeps on Rollin!
I disagree. On the engineering part, it’s an excellent design. There are a lot of specs and parts diagrams that show the significance of the design.
My landCrusiers spec wise is more heavy duty than my dads tundra.
A lot of things in the drive train are overbuilt for the expected duty these trucks would fulfill in the States, but a lot of ancillary components and things around that drivetrain just aren't as well designed in my opinion. Not that they're terrible, just not head and shoulders above what it's contemporaries utilized and in a number of cases worse than.
I daily drive an '07 LX with 340k miles. With fastidious maintenance it drives like new and is ultra reliable.
In a few months my "new" '87 HJ61 arrives from Spain. I'm hoping to make the 60 my daily (although I mostly ride an e-bike to work). Can a car from 1987 really be a reliable primary car?
In a few months my "new" '87 HJ61 arrives from Spain. I'm hoping to make the 60 my daily (although I mostly ride an e-bike to work). Can a car from 1987 really be a reliable primary car?
I daily a 1982 FJ60
As stated above I also road trip in it (1200 miles this week). And wheel it. LifeMs to short to drive a boring vehicle.
I daily drove my fj62 for two years every day. No problems and about an hour commute round trip every day. Gas sucked.
Any suggestions how to maximize reliability? Maintenance or wear items I should address?I daily a 1982 FJ60
As stated above I also road trip in it (1200 miles this week). And wheel it. LifeMs to short to drive a boring vehicle.
Yes. All of the them. Do all of the maintenance and replace all of the wear items. At 35-40 years old there is a lot of deferred maintenance that you have to make right. But then again I started daily driving my previous 60 when it was a total misfiring, bad valved mess of hot garbage. Mentally prepare yourself for figuring out what’s wrong while chipping away at the maintenance and you can make it work. Many people have done it that way.
Example: on the first leg of the road trip this week I was running super lean at cruise on the highway - pegging my air fuel gauge at 18. I was at about 4300’ elevation and because I’ve done enough maintenance and testing I knew to check the HAC. I knew I could pull a vac hose off, plug it, and be fine until I got down to 3900’ elevation where the HAC kicks off. You get around in the engine bay and drivetrain enough and even if you have a problem you know where to look. And I’m small potatoes compared to some of the true geniuses here on Mud.
Cruisertrash already said some of the things I was thinking when I read the first post.
Yeah these trucks were absolutely engineered with reliability in mind. But there are way too many variables over 35-40 years for anyone to make an accurate blanket assessment of "current" reliability for the 60/62 model. Environment (salt, etc), PO budget, damage, care, parts quality, routine maintenance, etc.
I grew up in the rust belt and learned to work on vehicles there. Never again. I would never even consider buying any truck that's ever spent a winter in salt or lived by the ocean. Rust is the obvious part, but less often discussed is the resulting corrosion on electrical connectors and inside components that just lead to a never ending stream of "issues". You can't blame reliability engineering for this especially if corrosion free specimens exist that don't exhibit the same stream of issues. I feel for the guys & gals dealing with that stuff, it's a real factor. I've been there. Thankfully I'm not now.
To drop some common phraseology that I feel is applicable here: "You gotta pay to play" and they're a "Labor of love". It's unreasonable to expect to buy a 60/62 (or any Toyota of that vintage) because "I read they're legendary reliable" and not expect to be addressing things on a regular basis. But, if you are pro-active, understand vehicles, and budget isn't the always the biggest factor in your personal situation, then I think the platform can still be utilized with a reasonable expectation of reliability.
Yeah these trucks were absolutely engineered with reliability in mind. But there are way too many variables over 35-40 years for anyone to make an accurate blanket assessment of "current" reliability for the 60/62 model. Environment (salt, etc), PO budget, damage, care, parts quality, routine maintenance, etc.
I grew up in the rust belt and learned to work on vehicles there. Never again. I would never even consider buying any truck that's ever spent a winter in salt or lived by the ocean. Rust is the obvious part, but less often discussed is the resulting corrosion on electrical connectors and inside components that just lead to a never ending stream of "issues". You can't blame reliability engineering for this especially if corrosion free specimens exist that don't exhibit the same stream of issues. I feel for the guys & gals dealing with that stuff, it's a real factor. I've been there. Thankfully I'm not now.
To drop some common phraseology that I feel is applicable here: "You gotta pay to play" and they're a "Labor of love". It's unreasonable to expect to buy a 60/62 (or any Toyota of that vintage) because "I read they're legendary reliable" and not expect to be addressing things on a regular basis. But, if you are pro-active, understand vehicles, and budget isn't the always the biggest factor in your personal situation, then I think the platform can still be utilized with a reasonable expectation of reliability.
I mean, thats the kind of stuff that actually put Toyota on the map. Nobody pulls an abandoned Jeep out and does this. Honestly this is like the real life version of the TopGear Hilux demolishment and subsequent startup... nobody expected it to be reliable at that point, but hey it ran.
@toy_tek I grew up and lived in Toledo, Ohio until I was 18. Right on the border with Michigan, 50 minutes south of Detroit. The home of Willys and Jeep. The still do final assembly on Wranglers there at a huge factory Daimler built when they owned Jeep.
The amount of XJs, K-cars, and other “American” vehicles that were hanging on by a thread was astounding in retrospect. Just zombie cars with rotted subframes, rod knock at 100k miles, interior bits falling off everywhere, they shouldn’t have been on the road. A car with 150k miles was considered as good as dead. No amount of maintenance would as going to save it from itself, from poor engineering. So you hit the nail in the head with Toyota’s engineering during the initial vehicle design phase setting them apart. Some domestic brands have mostly figured that out these days, but they hadn’t back then. It was baked into Toyota’s company philosophy to over engineer vehicles. There’s an argument to be made for Jeep’s 4.0L straight six, it had its fans, but I’d take the 2F any day.
And I haven’t even gotten to the rust. Toyota’s had their issues there - I had a 2002 Tacoma that had the frame recall - but those older domestics seemed to rust the minute they left the factory, no matter the climate.
The amount of XJs, K-cars, and other “American” vehicles that were hanging on by a thread was astounding in retrospect. Just zombie cars with rotted subframes, rod knock at 100k miles, interior bits falling off everywhere, they shouldn’t have been on the road. A car with 150k miles was considered as good as dead. No amount of maintenance would as going to save it from itself, from poor engineering. So you hit the nail in the head with Toyota’s engineering during the initial vehicle design phase setting them apart. Some domestic brands have mostly figured that out these days, but they hadn’t back then. It was baked into Toyota’s company philosophy to over engineer vehicles. There’s an argument to be made for Jeep’s 4.0L straight six, it had its fans, but I’d take the 2F any day.
And I haven’t even gotten to the rust. Toyota’s had their issues there - I had a 2002 Tacoma that had the frame recall - but those older domestics seemed to rust the minute they left the factory, no matter the climate.
Ohio gang represent!Same, but a farm community closer to Cleveland.
Outside of the engine and transmission, what can an owner do to improve reliability?
Drive it consistently. I think this is the source of a lot of issues, especially with a truck like the 60 series that doesn't lend itself to a 30 minute daily commute.
People are too cheap to pay for all the gas and think of them as hobby cars, so they end up sitting for long periods of time. This can result in issues like the seized water pump mentioned earlier in the thread, along with a host of other gremlins.
Thankfully wont be an issue with my turbodiesel! Folks seem to report mid-low 20s mpg on the 12HT