Expedition vehicle: 80 vs. 100

[Bear80]

I can say that there have been times I wish I had a selective brake traction control. Off the top of my head, a steep hill climb with the front locked is scary when it starts to slide laterally. Traction control can keep this from happening while still providing traction since all tires are on the ground. If the 80series had a driver selectable TRAC it would be the greatest 4x4 ever imagined.

For thread relavance, do the 80series. Rides fabulous stock and just fine lifted/outiftted on the street. The SFA kicks ass and takes names off-road. I know you guys don't have such a tender ass that you really need the smoothness of a 100series.....be a man and buy an 80series.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

be a man and buy an 80series.

Depends on how you look at it Bear. One might say:

"Buy a 100, show off your driving skill, and be a man and take that thing where the 80's roam to show them the 100's can do it too"

 

[MoGas]

So what was wrong with your 450????

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

Nothing. It's rebuilt. Well...I still have some vibes which we'll find the culprit of. It's my 100 that needs TLC. It's that time.

 

[MoGas]

Sorry, I meant the thread starter.

Well, my "new" 97 LX 450 is going back to the dealer...my trusted mechanic gave the vehicle a look and expressed concern over the mechanical reliability of the particular vehicle. He recommended to ask the dealer to take it back; fortunately the dealer had a return policy. Oh well....but I'm glad I have another chance to buy another more reliable vehicle.

After reading many threads here, I've concluded that I'm an expedition type of guy, rather than a rock-crawler. I also want the vehicle to be a good daily driver.

While searching for 80s, I can't help but find some 100s in the '98-99 range that are not too much different in price. Although I prefer the look of the 80s, I don't mind the look of the 100s. And I do appreciate some of the creature comforts of the 100s (e.g. CUPHOLDERS, rear vents for kids).

So...

For EXPEDITION/DAILY DRIVER use, what do you all think about a 100 series over an 80 series?

 

[Nay]

I can say that there have been times I wish I had a selective brake traction control. Off the top of my head, a steep hill climb with the front locked is scary when it starts to slide laterally. Traction control can keep this from happening while still providing traction since all tires are on the ground. If the 80series had a driver selectable TRAC it would be the greatest 4x4 ever imagined.

For thread relavance, do the 80series. Rides fabulous stock and just fine lifted/outiftted on the street. The SFA kicks ass and takes names off-road. I know you guys don't have such a tender ass that you really need the smoothness of a 100series.....be a man and buy an 80series.

The problem with traction control is you have to have slip before you have action, and that is not without its potential issues. I've been on two runs with the FJ Cruiser team watching those rigs in action, and the A-trac works pretty well, but I'd never take that over front and rear selectable lockers. I don't like computers making decisions for me at the most critical moments, and sometimes that microsecond of broken traction is enough to get you off a preferred line. Plus, if it malfunctions, how do you pull out a wrench and fix it if it is something you are relying on to get home?

Having been out with a good driver in a 100 series with locker(s) and 285's on OME, they have just a bit less clearance than the 80 for rock crawling so you are going to get hung up just a bit more. SFA is great, but the 80's doesn't flex much more than IFS if at all, so it isn't a major advantage except in the simplicity department.

The big differentiator between the 100 series and the 80 series is that you can run 35" tires on the 80 on a small lift, and you can't on a 100 without trimming the fenders unless I am missing something. That is a major difference in rock crawling, but not for so called expedition use.

So outside of cost of vehicle, your looks preference, and comfort, the biggest question is whether or not you want to run 35's. If you want to run 35's, the 80 is a no-brainer and the 100 shouldn't even be on your list unless you love your sawzall. If you only want to run 33's, then cost of vehicle, looks preference, and comfort are the only things that are going to much matter for extended camping trips.

If I was going on an Alaska trek, I wouldn't even want selectable lockers. You get hundreds of miles away from civilization and you better be able to fix your junk on the spot.

Nay

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

The problem with traction control is you have to have slip before you have action, and that is not without its potential issues. I've been on two runs with the FJ Cruiser team watching those rigs in action, and the A-trac works pretty well, but I'd never take that over front and rear selectable lockers. I don't like computers making decisions for me at the most critical moments, and sometimes that microsecond of broken traction is enough to get you off a preferred line. Plus, if it malfunctions, how do you pull out a wrench and fix it if it is something you are relying on to get home?

Having been out with a good driver in a 100 series with locker(s) and 285's on OME, they have just a bit less clearance than the 80 for rock crawling so you are going to get hung up just a bit more. SFA is great, but the 80's doesn't flex much more than IFS if at all, so it isn't a major advantage except in the simplicity department.

The big differentiator between the 100 series and the 80 series is that you can run 35" tires on the 80 on a small lift, and you can't on a 100 without trimming the fenders unless I am missing something. That is a major difference in rock crawling, but not for so called expedition use.

So outside of cost of vehicle, your looks preference, and comfort, the biggest question is whether or not you want to run 35's. If you want to run 35's, the 80 is a no-brainer and the 100 shouldn't even be on your list unless you love your sawzall. If you only want to run 33's, then cost of vehicle, looks preference, and comfort are the only things that are going to much matter for extended camping trips.

If I was going on an Alaska trek, I wouldn't even want selectable lockers. You get hundreds of miles away from civilization and you better be able to fix your junk on the spot.

Nay

Allow me to clear up a couple of things:

1. True...TRAC is no substitute for triple lockers, HOWEVER...there are plenty of off-road situations where lockers slide you and TRAC does not. On a 100 with TRAC and lockers you have the best of every situation. This is not possible in an 80. I've been in many situations where 80's were in the ditch when my 100 with TRAC was not. Then figure in ice and snow where TRAC and VSC just dwarfs lockers.

2. Clearance...right on. Man, that extra inch can sure help ya. As far as overall flex? I have to disagree. The standard OME 100 suspension vs the standard OME 80 L-suspension...the 80 has much more flex (front and rear). It's only if you combine OME 80 suspension gear (863 and N74L) that a 100 will flex similar to an 80. Even so, the 80 front has another 3-inches travel than the 100. That helps...though locked it isn't usually a deal stopper.

3. No cutting is needed to fit 315s on a 100. Only a couple extra EZ steps are required. 35's is a no brainer on either Series.

 

[Mike S]

I got my 80 after owning a 40 and a 60. They all have their strong points, but I needed a long distance driver that would go the last 50 miles of really bad roads without issues. The 80 is close to the ideal compromise between comfort and luxury and hard core expedition rig. This truck has OME suspension and 33" Revos and tracks down the road like it's on rails. Comfortable for my little 1000 to 1500 mile jaunts. This is mainly a hunting, fishing and camping rig.

I also have a Ford Expedition that has the power, and roadability of a 100 series, and much more tow capacity, but without the luxury SUV price. Sucks off the road.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

Rubicon Trail in 2007? You're invited...bring your 100 series...show off your driving skill and be a man...

Nope. Thanks though. I could bring it, use my driving skill and make it through OK. It wouldn't be near as much fun though.

You must have missed my posts on that "lift thread"? My comments about my recent "rock crawl" trip that I've done in both trucks. The 100 met it's match there. It made it with only a bent rear arm and dented rear drive shaft but it was just a whale. TOO BIG...TOO HEAVY...TOO SOFT A FRONT SUSPENSION for this type of trail. Don't get me wrong. It did awesome. This was a DIFFICULT trail that's hurt 80's (and my LX) before. But massaging the huge 100 through took the trip from PARTY to WORK WORK WORK.

When I wheel I wanna PARTY! For these rock crawl trails the 80 rules!

 

[yotawheeler]

just wondering here, i have heard mention about the engines in both ther 80 and 100 and how many or few problems they have in the 200k area....is that really all these engines will go for?! its 200-250k? i realize that these vehicles are reasonably new and wont have the same number of k's my '74 FJ40 has but my engine still runs strong and i dont even want to think about how many times the odomiter has been rolled....or for example my moms old celica that had 280+k on it before we flipped (sold) it cause it needed to be re-built and i didnt have time or energy to re-build it.....the point of this post is are these engines really only expected to last for 200k or so? or do i have the wrong impression

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

CHAT.

Amongst friends.

And to the next post by yotawheeler:

Many reports of 80s and 100s above the 200K mark. More 80s obviously as they're older. I plan on having my Cruisers to the 250K mark minimum.

 

[NorCalDoug]

just wondering here, i have heard mention about the engines in both ther 80 and 100 and how many or few problems they have in the 200k area....is that really all these engines will go for?! its 200-250k? i realize that these vehicles are reasonably new and wont have the same number of k's my '74 FJ40 has but my engine still runs strong and i dont even want to think about how many times the odomiter has been rolled....or for example my moms old celica that had 280+k on it before we flipped (sold) it cause it needed to be re-built and i didnt have time or energy to re-build it.....the point of this post is are these engines really only expected to last for 200k or so? or do i have the wrong impression

...so...you're basically saying that you have absolutely no clue how many times your odometer has spun past 100k (it could be once, twice, or never)...and you're comparing it to a newer engine that has a yet to be undertermined average lifespan?

did I get that right?

 

[Nay]

Allow me to clear up a couple of things:

1. True...TRAC is no substitute for triple lockers, HOWEVER...there are plenty of off-road situations where lockers slide you and TRAC does not. On a 100 with TRAC and lockers you have the best of every situation. This is not possible in an 80. I've been in many situations where 80's were in the ditch when my 100 with TRAC was not. Then figure in ice and snow where TRAC and VSC just dwarfs lockers.

Not having a 100, I can't necessarily disagree, but I'm also not somebody who through years of experience thinks that lockers are a major problem in side slip, and I've deliberately run limited slips on both ends to avoid this problem (a clutch driven limited slip is so much worse than a locker in side slip because you have unpredictable engagement). I also buy tires to maximize lateral traction because on or offroad that is the area of traction least in control of the driver. Great snow tires in turn dwarf TRAC and VSC by making them largely unnecessary. The key isn't controlling slip - it's not slipping in the first place to the greatest degree possible. But I don't have these features on a 4x4 only on my minivan where they do little to overcome truly low traction situations despite being used with studless snow tires.

The 80 does have one key benefit that the 100 may or may not have: AWD in low range with CDL switch. While I am not a huge believer in being open in low traction situations because breaking traction with wheelspin is not something I believe helps you, low range gearing with nothing locked including the center is an incredibly flexible platform that is mechanically in the driver's control.

2. Clearance...right on. Man, that extra inch can sure help ya. As far as overall flex? I have to disagree. The standard OME 100 suspension vs the standard OME 80 L-suspension...the 80 has much more flex (front and rear). It's only if you combine OME 80 suspension gear (863 and N74L) that a 100 will flex similar to an 80. Even so, the 80 front has another 3-inches travel than the 100. That helps...though locked it isn't usually a deal stopper.

I was talking front flex only, IFS vs. 80 series radius arms. Having been on the trail with both 100's and 3rd gen Runners, I am hard pressed to see that the 80's SFA is much of an advantage, and that's even in pretty hardcore situations. For expedition wheeling it would be just numbers on paper. The 80's front end is beefy as hell, and that is a nice thing, but that's why it was designed that way instead of for a ton of flex. Where I do think the 80's front end excels is that it shows very little resistance to climbing - you don't ever seem to drop a wheel in a hole and not have it come back out. Not sure if IFS climbs with as little resistance or not.

My guess is that your post about the 80 handling your hardcore trip better than the 100 was more about clearance than it was about suspension. I think we split hairs somewhat comparing big huge Land Cruisers vs. comparing the 80/100 to other smaller rigs that would also make very competent "expedition" vehicles.

To say it another way, money aside, you could easily make a 100 more capable than 95% of the 80's on this board, including mine. If you just have to have a SFA it wouldn't be that difficult given you'd just need to copy the 105 rather than starting from engineering scratch. Yes, you gotta pay to play, but you are going to have those kind of costs to get an 80 way out of the box, too.

3. No cutting is needed to fit 315s on a 100. Only a couple extra EZ steps are required. 35's is a no brainer on either Series.

Please do explain what the EZ steps are to fit 315's on a 100 (I'm not disagreeing, very interested as a possible long term second rig). The wheel wells are much smaller, so on a 3" lift how do you fit them without a serious restriction of up travel? A 100 would be quite cool on a smallish lift with 315s powered by a V8. Hipster mom-mobile for sure .

We can laugh all we want about comfort, but after a day of being in the 80 my backside just hurts. The idea of an "expedition" rig is something you can drive all day long in comfort, and the 80 needs aftermarket seats to fit that bill. Those will come for me before I even regear, because my arse hurts a lot more than my "OD Off" thumb.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

The 80 does have one key benefit that the 100 may or may not have: AWD in low range with CDL switch. While I am not a huge believer in being open in low traction situations because breaking traction with wheelspin is not something I believe helps you, low range gearing with nothing locked including the center is an incredibly flexible platform that is mechanically in the driver's control.

***Both drivetrains are the same in this respect. both series have CDL switches. They were standard in the 100-series.


Where I do think the 80's front end excels is that it shows very little resistance to climbing - you don't ever seem to drop a wheel in a hole and not have it come back out. Not sure if IFS climbs with as little resistance or not.

***Surprisingly the 100 climbs the huge ledges just as EZ as the 80...from my experience on the same trails

My guess is that your post about the 80 handling your hardcore trip better than the 100 was more about clearance than it was about suspension. I think we split hairs somewhat comparing big huge Land Cruisers vs. comparing the 80/100 to other smaller rigs that would also make very competent "expedition" vehicles.

***90% of the issue on this crazy trail was the issue of size. LONG. WIDE. HEAVY. Then yes...I bent that rear arm because I needed another inch clearance.


Please do explain what the EZ steps are to fit 315's on a 100 (I'm not disagreeing, very interested as a possible long term second rig). The wheel wells are much smaller, so on a 3" lift how do you fit them without a serious restriction of up travel? A 100 would be quite cool on a smallish lift with 315s powered by a V8. Hipster mom-mobile for sure .

Not sure about the size of the wheel wells? They fit and work just fine though. Here's all it takes:

Dang....my site's down. I can't get the link. I'll post tomorrow.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

http://shottscruisers.smugmug.com/gallery/984600

You don't NEED to bump-stop the rear. I did...didn't want the rubbing. If you add N74L then you gain back your articulation plus 0.6" despite the bump-stop addition.

 

[e9999]

ssssssssssshhhhhhhhhhh....don't tell Eric ....lest we be deleted

nah, this is Ken's to deal with. I'm just enjoying the sights here....


tech content: I'm building my 80 for exped.... Will do all I want / need.
100 maybe later when it has come down a bit from its stratospheric price range....

 

[waydownunder80]

well

after reading 4 pages of that i`ve come to the conclusion that no one has driven the 100 series with DIESEL POWER! 1hd-fte is intoxicating and is the only part i would put in my 80`but they still have problems too,just today i changed out a injection pump because of a crook spool valve,and the weak front diff issue,also torque converter not unlocking

 

[Beowulf]

... a engine re-build i would consider that to be the END OF ITS LIFE SPAN which seems to be around 200-250k from what i have read in this thread, that is my understanding. i wanted to know if i had misunderstood or if my assumption was correct

* The 1FZ-FE was engineered to be rebuilt 2 times. (~600k miles) I think IdahoDoug has posted the stats before but this is what I remember.

There have been a few engine rebuilds/replacements that we are aware of. Many were a result of a failed HG. (Junk, Robbie, Dave) while a few have been a result of lean fuel conditions (S/C, wiring)

IMHO, your assumption is incorrect.

-B-

 

[LandCruisers4Life]

Well, my "new" 97 LX 450 is going back to the dealer...my trusted mechanic gave the vehicle a look and expressed concern over the mechanical reliability of the particular vehicle. He recommended to ask the dealer to take it back; fortunately the dealer had a return policy. Oh well....but I'm glad I have another chance to buy another more reliable vehicle.

After reading many threads here, I've concluded that I'm an expedition type of guy, rather than a rock-crawler. I also want the vehicle to be a good daily driver.

While searching for 80s, I can't help but find some 100s in the '98-99 range that are not too much different in price. Although I prefer the look of the 80s, I don't mind the look of the 100s. And I do appreciate some of the creature comforts of the 100s (e.g. CUPHOLDERS, rear vents for kids).

So...

For EXPEDITION/DAILY DRIVER use, what do you all think about a 100 series over an 80 series?

You could go with either and be happy. Both are extremely modifiable, and rugged. It's personal choice on that one!

 

[LandCruisers4Life]

just wondering here, i have heard mention about the engines in both ther 80 and 100 and how many or few problems they have in the 200k area....is that really all these engines will go for?! its 200-250k? i realize that these vehicles are reasonably new and wont have the same number of k's my '74 FJ40 has but my engine still runs strong and i dont even want to think about how many times the odomiter has been rolled....or for example my moms old celica that had 280+k on it before we flipped (sold) it cause it needed to be re-built and i didnt have time or energy to re-build it.....the point of this post is are these engines really only expected to last for 200k or so? or do i have the wrong impression

In these times, 200K miles on a vehicle isn't very much in my opinion. I would think that Toyota would engineer them to last for at least 400 - 500K without a whole lot of trouble. With a rebuild or two, they SHOULD last a million miles. That's my opinion however. I've seen old Toyotas with hundreds of thousands of miles on them and still running strong, starting at the first turn of the key.