How does my 1st gen Tundra compare to a 80 or 100 (or 4th gen 4R)? (1 Viewer)

[dschad]

Hi all,
I have recently become obsessed with LCs, and I have been schooling myself in them via this wonderful site. I'm looking for my forever rig. My main desire is for an off roader (so 80's series), but I also would love to use it as a DD (so 100s), and while I really love the project, I have to be honest and tell myself that I don't have the time! (so a 4th gen 4Runner). And I pretty much cycle through each of these vehicles every few hours, hovering the longest on the FJ80. So that is background, and somewhat irrelevant I guess.

Since I have never driven any of the above vehicles, I have no point or reference when people say "the 100 is more comfortable than the 80". So I to put thing into terms I can understand, can anyone compare an 80 or 100 or 4R to my current DD - an '06 Tundra. While super dependable, the truck isn't exactly interesting to drive. It's got decent power, rides smooth and has a pretty terrible turning radius. I've compared the specs (turning radius, width, wheelbase, etc) of the above to my truck, and basically only the width is close (but the Tundra track is larger). I also have a 2014 Rubicon 2DR (which I am going to get rid of).

So does for anyone with experience with these vehicles, does the Tundra feel like any of them? I kinda of envision the 80 as like the Jeep and the 100 as the Tundra, perhaps less mushy?

Any thoughts are welcome.

Thanks.

 

[TexasD90]

Well, I'll say this:

I've owned several land cruisers and loved each of them for different reasons. I built a 97 with 37s, 5.29 gears, fully locked and ready for anything. It was wound to tight on the hoghway with those gears, and I live 800 miles from my favorite adventure area. Sold it and built a 2003 (100 series) with 34s, 4.88s, fully locked and a well rounded off road travel vehicle. It had no fun factor to it, so I sold it and built another 80 series. This time I was more realistic about how I use the truck. I went with 36s, 4.88s, fully locked, armored, and ready for anything. This was a well built, extremely capable machine. My family of 4 out grew the truck, and we started pulling a Turtleback Trailer on our adventures. The 80 series is a slug. Slow in every sense of the word, but super fun vehicle. I just sold it and bought a 2006 Tundra with the V8 VVTI Motor. This thing runs way better power wise than any of my land cruisers ever dreamed of running. I've just started the build on it, so time will tell how I like it. I'll tell you this though, it pulls the trailer like it's not even there.

 

[dschad]

Well, I'll say this:

I've owned several land cruisers and loved each of them for different reasons. I built a 97 with 37s, 5.29 gears, fully locked and ready for anything. It was wound to tight on the hoghway with those gears, and I live 800 miles from my favorite adventure area. Sold it and built a 2003 (100 series) with 34s, 4.88s, fully locked and a well rounded off road travel vehicle. It had no fun factor to it, so I sold it and built another 80 series. This time I was more realistic about how I use the truck. I went with 36s, 4.88s, fully locked, armored, and ready for anything. This was a well built, extremely capable machine. My family of 4 out grew the truck, and we started pulling a Turtleback Trailer on our adventures. The 80 series is a slug. Slow in every sense of the word, but super fun vehicle. I just sold it and bought a 2006 Tundra with the V8 VVTI Motor. This thing runs way better power wise than any of my land cruisers ever dreamed of running. I've just started the build on it, so time will tell how I like it. I'll tell you this though, it pulls the trailer like it's not even there.

Thanks. I will likely go with something like a 2" lift and 33's or 34's tops, as it will be an OD (often-driver, since my Tundra will be my fuel-economy car!).

When you say "no fun factor" for the 100, what do you mean? No good off road, or too cushy?

Also, does your Tundra have a fun-factor? I would say that mine doesn't really in terms of handling/driving, but I didn't get it as a sports car. I have pulled some pretty good sized loads with mine and I was always happy with the ride, as long as the trailer is loaded correctly.

Thanks,
Don

 

[TexasD90]

Thanks. I will likely go with something like a 2" lift and 33's or 34's tops, as it will be an OD (often-driver, since my Tundra will be my fuel-economy car!).

When you say "no fun factor" for the 100, what do you mean? No good off road, or too cushy?

Also, does your Tundra have a fun-factor? I would say that mine doesn't really in terms of handling/driving, but I didn't get it as a sports car. I have pulled some pretty good sized loads with mine and I was always happy with the ride, as long as the trailer is loaded correctly.

Thanks,
Don

For me, the 100 is just a car. The 80 is more of a "truck." I can't answer about the Tundra yet, but so far I like it.

 

[Mogwai]

Well, I'll say this:

I've owned several land cruisers and loved each of them for different reasons. I built a 97 with 37s, 5.29 gears, fully locked and ready for anything. It was wound to tight on the hoghway with those gears, and I live 800 miles from my favorite adventure area. Sold it and built a 2003 (100 series) with 34s, 4.88s, fully locked and a well rounded off road travel vehicle. It had no fun factor to it, so I sold it and built another 80 series. This time I was more realistic about how I use the truck. I went with 36s, 4.88s, fully locked, armored, and ready for anything. This was a well built, extremely capable machine. My family of 4 out grew the truck, and we started pulling a Turtleback Trailer on our adventures. The 80 series is a slug. Slow in every sense of the word, but super fun vehicle. I just sold it and bought a 2006 Tundra with the V8 VVTI Motor. This thing runs way better power wise than any of my land cruisers ever dreamed of running. I've just started the build on it, so time will tell how I like it. I'll tell you this though, it pulls the trailer like it's not even there.

The compromise is clearly a 200 series! Power, comfort, and way capable.

 

[aviator31]

Or a 2nd Gen Tundra with 5.7 and a 80 with 35s 3x locked/armored and a turbo= lots of fun, but you can't drive them both at the same time.

 

[CreeperSleeper]

I agree with @TexasD90. I LOVED my 80-Series (37's, triple locked, 5.29's, etc.) but I was trying to hard core rock crawl it. I ended up with a rig that was not a great rock crawler or adventure rig. I moved to a 100-Series (33's, 4.88's, etc.) as an adventure rig / daily driver / tow rig for a built Toyota truck (37's, 5.29's, dual cases, locked, etc). The 100 is so good as an adventure rig and light duty wheeler that it was boring. However, to it's credit, that was the best vehicle I have ever owned and I have owned a lot of cars (40+).

I now have a built 2nd Gen 4Runner (37's, locked, etc.) and a stock 5th Gen 4Runner. I was going to build the 5th Gen as an adventure vehicle, but the wife likes it too much as a daily. I think I'm going to add a 1st Gen Tundra to my fleet as the adventure / tow rig as it seems to fit my needs the best. I have two big dogs, a kid, and we ride quads and wheel.

If I could only have one rig, I wouldn't hesitate to build another 80. To me that is the jack of all trades, but it would be well armored, 35's, 4.88's, and locked up with ARBs (I broke too many eLockers).

 

[dschad]

I kind of have settled on an 80, but it is hard to find them in decent condition in NH. Every so often I swing back to a 3rd gen 4Runner. I'm feeling a bit schizophrenic. When I really, really make up my mind I'll probably have to do some painful hoop-jumping for a southern truck.

I drove a 100 and that was very similar to my 1st gen Tundra. The view from the drivers seat is the same and it felt pretty similar, although definitely more solid.

 

[Tally FJ80]

I would build a 1st Gen Tundra. I've had 1st Gen 4runner, 91 FJ80, also now have a 2000 Tundra and 2011 4 runner. 1st Gen 4runner had no problems but also no power. 91 FJ 80 was awesome if ya don't mind turning wrenches.(alot. My experience)and go nowhere fast. Now my Tundra is kinda them all but plenty of power. It's a capable off road rig, got a bed for hauling and sounds, looks great! I'm in love with it! 2011 4runner awesome too just can't bring myself to off-road it yet. (Wife won't) clearly it's your choice. My experience with them is Tundra 1st. Good luck

 

[dschad]

I think the major drawback of the 1st gen Tundra is the turning radius. On paper it doesn't seem like much more than the others, but in practice is seems pretty large.

I like it as a DD, but it just seems a bit big for trail riding.

I'd be interested to hear how you think maneuvers compared to your 80?

Thanks,
Don

 

[Tally FJ80]

Turning radius of the Tundra is a little worse than the FJ80. Here in Florida it's not a problem on our trails. The difference between the two is not even noticable to me when trail riding. Loved my Cruiser just got tired of constantly working on it and the major lack of power. Good luck on whatever choice you make. If it's a Toyota it's kinda hard to go wrong!

 

[krice118]

if you already have a daily you like (the tundra) Go for the solid front axle!

 

[ExpoGeorgia]

This is my 2nd 80 series and by no means is it a rough rider. Yes the 100 series is more comfortable (newer, IFS and more power) but the 80 is the most rugged/capable on the trail. With minor upgrades (33's, small lift, etc) either one fits the bill but the 80 has that "cool" factor to it. Drive each and see what you think.

 

[AbsolutGT]

I've owned a 2nd gen Tundra DC (2011) and it was lifted with 35s and my next buy was a ARES shell for the back and build a slide out platform but life happens and first baby came, so that came to a halt and DCs weren't infant seat carrier friendly.

Got rid of it and bought a '12 4Runner, it felt really small to me. I'm 6ft and with how I had my seat adjusted, basically only a small teen to kid could sit behind me, not to mention it just felt weak with the V6.

Got back into the 2.5 Gen Tundra Crewmax (2014) and it's a great truck, huge interior and I bought a cover for it so everything stays dry out back. It's leveled with bil 5100's and rear shackles and has plenty of power to boot.

BUt, I wanted the less is more approach.

So I bought an FJ60 to make into a overland vehicle (lol, I'm dumb)

On paper, I love everything the FJ60 is, no nonsense 4x4 with absolutely 0 frills.

What I have come to know, no matter how good of upkeep a 60 is, it's still a 30+ year old vehicle and things will happen with even simple maintenance tasks. I have roughly $2400 worth of new parts that I still need to install before I start tackling modding into a overland vehicle.

If I were to do it all again, I would have just gone with a 100, 2.5 lift, 34's, rooftop tent and be done with it.

But I'm stuck with my 60, and all the stares and thumbs up I get while driving it around

I daily my Tundra, because you don't know slow until you drive a 2f motor with 4speed and the motor winds out after 2500rpms

 

[70 FJ40]

I have both an '02 Tundra 4x4 TRD access cab with a small lift and an '01 Land Cruiser with a small lift and 33s. The Tundra is nice. Plenty of power. Very reliable. I've not had it in the shop for anything but routine maintenance and it's got nearly 140,000 on it now. Good for towing moderate loads.(Better then the Land Cruiser by a little.) I've thought about buying a newer truck a couple times but when I look at what else is out there I don't see anything that fits my needs better or that I'd rather have. All that said. There are a few draw backs. Its got more interior rattles I have to either live with or chase down then I would expect from a Toyota. Compared to all other 4x4s I've had, it is the worst in poor traction or off road. The limited slip in the back axle is a joke. Never helpful when I need it but always breaks the back end loose even in barely slippery conditions. Been pretty disappointed with it in that regard. Not a big deal anymore because I have the the FJ40 and the 100 for when I plan to off road. Poor off road ability could be pretty easily improved with some selectable lockers I suppose. The 100 is awesome. I understand it doesn't have as much of a cool factor as the 80 but the advantages are definitely there. With the right mods they can look pretty sweet. The comfort is great. The v8 is not super powerful but still pretty good. A little more sluggish then the Tundra. (I'm assuming because of the nearly 1000 lbs extra of the Land Cruiser.) Incredibly reliable as well. For that matter the whole truck is reliable. For wheeling, there's no comparison. The Land Cruiser is WAY better. The atrac is much better then I thought it would be and comfort is pretty awesome off road as well. We(family of 4) drove the 100 from Oregon to Colorado last summer. Went to a family get together then wheeled the San Juan mountains for a few days and drove home. I kept thinking. What other vehicle would be this roomy, comfortable, and capable on and off road for a trip like that? OK maybe a 200. But I don't have that kind of money.
IMO: get a 100. It will serve you well as a DD and a wheeler. Get a utility trailer for the times you need to hall something. If you are like me and need the pickup for work every day then get both.

Wow. That got long.

 

[weejub]

DC Tundra is LONG, but I love it on the road.

 

[White Stripe]

A 80 is about as comfortable as your tundra, and about as capable as your Jeep. A 100 series is a step up in comfort from your tundra and a little more capable offroad than your tundra. I have been daily driving my 80 on 37s with 5.29s. It's not too bad on the road, fairly comfortable, decent power unless I'm going up a mountain pass.

 

[shoresoccer13]

I have a 100 series which is a nice ride and it did a few trails in the Ozarks without any difficulty, definitely rides smoother than a tundra which I owned a 2002 and a 2005. Personally think the 02 had a more solid feeling to it than the 05 but it may have just been the two trucks I had. I prefer though to drive my 80 despite the slowness in getting anywhere. The seats aren't that uncomfortable, I have driven out to colorado several times with the old leather and been fine, put in the cloth seats and they do seem to be better feeling for riding around. At this point though aren't all 80s and 100s going to need a good bit of work to maintain since they are all at least 10 years old and getting older...

 

[littlegreenmonster]

i have a 1993 FZJ80 and it is my favorite vehicle i have ever owned.....period. I also have a 1975 FJ40 , 2009 Honda Odyssey, a 2006 LS2 GTO, and a 2014 Chevy Z71 right now. 9 times out of 10, i drive the fzj80. I have a triple locker truck and there isn't much that compares to it. Yes it rides a little rough, but it is a truck! The thing is bullet proof reliable and unstoppable off road. If you get a FZJ80, just plan on spending a few weeks catching up on all of the maintenance as most people neglect them due to their reliability. I would definately recommend getting a 93 or 94 with the 442 tranny. much more robust than the later 343's.

i have 250K trouble free miles on mine for the record. I am the second owner.

 

[LINUS]

Or a 2nd Gen Tundra with 5.7 and a 80 with 35s 3x locked/armored and a turbo= lots of fun, but you can't drive them both at the same time.

No turbo but that's what I did.

I love my 80 - 4" lift/315's & armor, blah blah blah.

I also have the Tundra as towing ~4500# isn't really awesome in WA where we have the Cascades to negotiate & I live right up tight to the foothills.

The Tundra drives about like any similar wheelbased truck - the 80 is shorter enough that it negotiates tighter spots far easier.

The one red flag I see for you is your time.

If you think you don't have enough time to go out & run trails, what are you going to do for time when the 80 needs work? They are all a minimum of 2 decades old now, and you're up in the area where they drop seasoning salt on the roads - another issue an 80/Toyotas in general -doesn't excell at.