Four Wheeler Magazine said:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

S

ShottsUZJ100

Joined
Apr 2, 2003
Threads
168
Messages
8,524
Location
Tucson, AZ
They mentioned it had the Tundra's 9 1/2" rear axle.

They also said it was NOT HOT that it had an aluminum rear diff carrier.

What's the negative of an aluminum rear diff housing? Is it more puncture prone? More flex prone?
 
Last edited:
You sure they didn't meant "front" diff housing?

The front diff housing probably is, since Toyota has been using aluminum for at least some front IFS diff housings since at least the 1995 Tacoma as far as I know.

My guess is they meant the front diff and the reason is probably bad experience with "domestic" vehicles with front aluminum diffs. I've read a few times where diffs, like in the Durango will explode.

But I wouldn't compare a $63,000 Japanese designed and built Toyota to anything put out by the rolling junk makers here in America.
 
Last edited:
Brian894X4 said:
You sure they didn't meant "front" diff housing?

The front diff housing probably is, since Toyota has been using aluminum for at least some front IFS diff housings since at least the 1995 Tacoma as far as I know.

My guess is they meant the front diff and the reason is probably bad experience with "domestic" vehicles with front aluminum diffs. I've read a few times where diffs, like in the Durango will explode.

But I wouldn't compare a $63,000 Japanese designed and built Toyota to anything put out by the rolling junk makers here in America.
Click to expand...

Nope. It's the rear diff and it's the Tundra's axle. Also in the mag is the 2009 Sequoia and it rests on the Tundra platform.

So is a rear aluminum diff going to be light duty?
 
Well, I don't mean to argue, but I'm not doubting that the magazine said that, but I'm questioning if they are correct.

I mean, its not like it's the first time a 4x4 magazine mis stated something about a Toyota.

Besides, I thought the Tundra axle was a 10.5" ring gear, anyway. I think the smaller Tundras and/or the 4.7 V-8 version might use a 9.5" rear diff.

From your statement I'm imagining the entire axle housing being aluminum, which I find hard to believe. But maybe the rear 3rd member is aluminum.

Toyota lists the new Land Cruiser diff as model number SD22A and the rear diff as model number BD24A.

When I do a search for those model numbers, even trying to use Tundra keywords, I come up with nothing. But maybe the "A" at the end of those axle codes hint at what your saying.
 
Brian894X4 said:
Well, I don't mean to argue, but I'm not doubting that the magazine said that, but I'm questioning if they are correct.

I mean, its not like it's the first time a 4x4 magazine mis stated something about a Toyota.

Besides, I thought the Tundra axle was a 10.5" ring gear, anyway. I think the smaller Tundras and/or the 4.7 V-8 version might use a 9.5" rear diff.

From your statement I'm imagining the entire axle housing being aluminum, which I find hard to believe. But maybe the rear 3rd member is aluminum.

Toyota lists the new Land Cruiser diff as model number SD22A and the rear diff as model number BD24A.

When I do a search for those model numbers, even trying to use Tundra keywords, I come up with nothing. But maybe the "A" at the end of those axle codes hint at what your saying.
Click to expand...

The things are so new that Four Wheeler could in fact be wrong. Wouldn't be the first time. I'm ready to buy though I have to get past this negative. If the rear diff is weak I might re-think.
 
uzj100 said:
Ready to buy a 200? How much for your 100?
Click to expand...

I hate to say it.......my 100 will become my dedicated trail rig and it will get trashed ASAP. No more pinstripe protection. :D

The LX450 I just built so nicely will go instead and at a big loss to my wallet. :mad:
 
uzj100 said:
Get the 2 hunge, i am ready to see one built up and wheeling.
Click to expand...

I would have to think I could spacer lift it 2" ASAP. The day I buy the day I call Donohoe Racing for coilovers. I'll drive them my friggin' truck.

Finding out the rear is a Tundra axle is a bummer...no OME 100/80 springs. I guess I'll search for rear springs for Tundra's. I'm conerned about rates though as the Tundra is a pickup (duhhh!)
 
ShottsUZJ100 said:
I would have to think I could spacer lift it 2" ASAP. The day I buy the day I call Donohoe Racing for coilovers. I'll drive them my friggin' truck.

Finding out the rear is a Tundra axle is a bummer...no OME 100/80 springs. I guess I'll search for rear springs for Tundra's. I'm conerned about rates though as the Tundra is a pickup (duhhh!)
Click to expand...

I hate to point out the obvious, but It appears someone needs to;p. It does not have a Tundra rear suspension, as you seem to imply, the Tundra has leaf springs, like most pickup trucks do. A leaf spring is a long springy thing that is a spring and also holds the axle in place. The LC has a coil sprung rear. You don't have to worry about the spring rates of the Tundra on your 200 series, sheesh!:confused:

Did you think the 4runner and FJC were leaf sprung because they share the same rear as the Tacoma?

WOW

:);):cool:
 
firetruck41 said:
I hate to point out the obvious, but It appears someone needs to;p. It does not have a Tundra rear suspension, as you seem to imply, the Tundra has leaf springs, like most pickup trucks do. A leaf spring is a long springy thing that is a spring and also holds the axle in place. The LC has a coil sprung rear. You don't have to worry about the spring rates of the Tundra on your 200 series, sheesh!:confused:

Did you think the 4runner and FJC were leaf sprung because they share the same rear as the Tacoma?

WOW

:);):cool:
Click to expand...

Ooo, crap. Then on the 2008, there's no Tundra springs to steal (duh, I got it...wasn't thinking) and because it's a Tundra axle there mightnot be any swappable springs for a while. Hmmmm......gotta see one in person.
 
The only thing that would be related to the Tundra (if anything) would be the 3rd member. I'm sure the entire axle housing is different, not to mention Toyota very likely has different suppliers for the Tundra and Land Cruiser.
 
Brian894X4 said:
The only thing that would be related to the Tundra (if anything) would be the 3rd member. I'm sure the entire axle housing is different, not to mention Toyota very likely has different suppliers for the Tundra and Land Cruiser.
Click to expand...

FW says:

while in the rear a four-link/coil sprung/Panhard rod arrangment locates a 9.5" solid axle also sourced from the pickup (Tundra)
 
Brian894X4 said:
The only thing that would be related to the Tundra (if anything) would be the 3rd member. I'm sure the entire axle housing is different, not to mention Toyota very likely has different suppliers for the Tundra and Land Cruiser.
Click to expand...

In the same issue they say about the 2009 Sequoia:

Tundra-based Sequoia full-size SUV
 
I re-read the article......they did not dog the diff HOUSING, they said:

WHAT'S NOT:

aluminum rear diff CARRIER

What do you make of this?
 
ShottsUZJ100 said:
I would have to think I could spacer lift it 2" ASAP. The day I buy the day I call Donohoe Racing for coilovers. I'll drive them my friggin' truck.

Finding out the rear is a Tundra axle is a bummer...no OME 100/80 springs. I guess I'll search for rear springs for Tundra's. I'm conerned about rates though as the Tundra is a pickup (duhhh!)
Click to expand...

If you are very lucky the front coilover suspension will be very similar to the Tundra and their (DR) existing CO assembly for the new Tundra will fit and work on the new Cruiser. Then you will get Donahoe Racing (DR) to releasse COs for the Cruiser. They can just revalve it for the Cruiser and you will be good to go. I doubt DR will make a CO for the Cruiser if it requires a different CO assembly, the volumes will just be way too low to justify their R&D as well as production cost.

Just have custom coils made for the rear to your specifications, look in the Bilstein (7100s or better), SAW and Fox parts bin for shocks (have adapters made if needed). Then revalve to your needs and you will have a suspension that exceeds an OME setup by far.

The new Tundra has 9.5 and 10.5 rear diffs. I think the 10.5 is only for HD towing duty though, but the pumpkin will be fairly large and hurt ground clearance under the axle a bit. I wonder if the 3rd in the rear is aluminum or steel, Id on't think aluminum will be as good as a steel one. But they might have compensated for that with the design, engines are aluminum now.
 
ShottsUZJ100 said:
Yes...what about strength? Weaker? Isn't the carrier the inside diff (not the housing)?
Click to expand...

I'm sure they mean the 3rd member housing, which is what holds the carrier and gears, etc, and then bolts to the axle housing. Sometimes the entire 3rd member is referred too as a "carrier".

If you've ever tried to pull out even the 80 series rear 3rd member, it's extremely heavy. I'm sure the Toyota Tundra 10.5 and probably the new Land Cruiser 9.5 diff would also be even more heavy if were made out of the same materials.

If they did to go aluminum it's probably less about overall weight savings and more about less stress on the bolts that hold the 3rd onto the axle housing. It could also have to do with keeping the unsprung weight of the rear solid axle as low as possible.

Toyota has been using aluminum for some front IFS diffs for a while and haven't had too many problems that were directly related to that. I think a lot of sports cars also use aluminum diff carriers.

I think aluminum also has the advantage of radiating heat better, which is something useful for a rear 3rd member, especially with huge gears.

Of course, given Toyota's past experience with the FJ, Tundra and Tacoma break downs and design flaws, I would never buy the 1st production run of anything including this new Land Cruiser. Even their original 100 series had flawed design front diffs. So, whether or not aluminum is a good idea is hard to say. It all depends on the design, how thick, what type, etc.

Only time and experience will tell. I'd let someone else be the guinea pig.
 
Brian894X4 said:
I'm sure they mean the 3rd member housing, which is what holds the carrier and gears, etc, and then bolts to the axle housing. Sometimes the entire 3rd member is referred too as a "carrier".

If you've ever tried to pull out even the 80 series rear 3rd member, it's extremely heavy. I'm sure the Toyota Tundra 10.5 and probably the new Land Cruiser 9.5 diff would also be even more heavy if were made out of the same materials.

If they did to go aluminum it's probably less about overall weight savings and more about less stress on the bolts that hold the 3rd onto the axle housing. It could also have to do with keeping the unsprung weight of the rear solid axle as low as possible.

Toyota has been using aluminum for some front IFS diffs for a while and haven't had too many problems that were directly related to that. I think a lot of sports cars also use aluminum diff carriers.

I think aluminum also has the advantage of radiating heat better, which is something useful for a rear 3rd member, especially with huge gears.

Of course, given Toyota's past experience with the FJ, Tundra and Tacoma break downs and design flaws, I would never buy the 1st production run of anything including this new Land Cruiser. Even their original 100 series had flawed design front diffs. So, whether or not aluminum is a good idea is hard to say. It all depends on the design, how thick, what type, etc.

Only time and experience will tell. I'd let someone else be the guinea pig.
Click to expand...

Great info. Thanks. I am nervous about buying this new model.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom