moving up from an 80 to a 200

[JOFS]

I have driven both my 80 and 200 cross country. The 200 is superior for that. Smooth powerful quiet more comfortable.

Still love my 80 though. But as many mentioned there is nostalgia involved. It is a different feel and vibe but in reality the 200 really does everything I need it to and then some in a more comfortable and modern form. The safety features are also better in the 200. I also get better mileage. Good luck it is a good dilemma to have.

John



John

 

[Tex68w]

I never clicked with my 80, I liked to look at it and liked that it was triple locked with a straight axle but it just never had that “it factor” that I feel about a 60 Series.

 

[2014 LEX 570 GA]

Can’t speak to 80 series, but I find the 200, especially the LX, to be like dr. Jekyll and mr. hide. On the road it is a great day-to-day driver and long hauler with plush cabin and great handling/ride quality for what it is. Off-road it can handle a lot in relatively stock form.

You definitely do not need a lift to run 33s or even larger tires. Especially with AHC if you are going LX route. You have lift on demand when you need it, but still maintain stock driving dynamics and aero (e.g., truck lowers above 65mph). 33s give you 1” of actual lift off the bat. If you really want, you can do a sensor lift and raise the default height of each height setting (Low, Normal, High). It’s a 10 minute job you can do in your driveway.

 

[CharlieS]

I think most of us on this forum are 200 fans (with a small handful of exceptions). We wouldn't hang out here otherwise. For those of us that have owned an 80 (or multiple 80 series) it is a good question.

In my opinion, they're both great at some things and not so great at others. The 200 is big, powerful, comfortable, luxurious, well built, more modern and an amazing swiss army knife of a vehicle. It excels at long trips, towing, hauling large families, has great safety systems, and has good overall comfort. The 80 is small, narrow(er), light(er), has better articulation with the solid front axle, has fewer electronics (and most are analog), is less complex to maintain and repair, has a manual transfer case, and other similar attributes that make it a good trail rig and a decent street vehicle - it simply isn't the long distance/comfort traveler or tow vehicle that the 200 is. We towed a camper long distances with both of our 80s, but they worked hard to do it. It wasn't until I supercharged the last one that it towed with less effort.

I know if I had the means and opportunity that I would have one of each (my current 200 and ideally a '96/'97 fzj80).

Oh, and I have yet to find anything that my 3x locked 200 won't do. The limitation has always been me - I chicken out before the 200 has a chance to fail me.

Upon more reflection, part of my thinking is that I'd rather destroy a $5-20k vehicle than one whose value is worth multiples of that. I daily drive my 200, and would rather not have to repair trail damage.

 

[slowgreen]

This is dangerous I know, but I need some input from people who have made the switch.
I currently have a 96 80 series that I love, but I'm starting to see the limitations of the 80 series for the way I'm using it. I currently don't have the time or place for the wrenching the 80 needs at this age and I need something that can do long cross country trips easily and comfortably. while the 80 is close, the lack of power, small back seat and other things that come with an older vehicle have me thinking about taking the plunge into something newer. this got me started looking at lx570s (because they are cheaper) from around 2010.

so for those who have been in similar positions, did you like stepping up to the 200/570? what are things you miss about the 80/ older cruisers?

my ideal set up is roughly 2 inch lift (want to run 33s) arb bull bar, rear bumper/tire carrier, sliders and roof rack for canoe. I live In the midwest so there's nothing super fun close by so long trips are common. been thinking about trailers, but that's not a today problem.
im not a hard core off roader but I do want to do some trails out west, snow wheeling, and travel into northern Forrests.
and no, having both isn't in the cards currently.
thanks all

I've had an 80 since 2012 to use as a daily driver since the kids got out of car seats. Last April I went looking for more safety features, more mountain passing power and more cabin comfort for family road trips. I went with a 2010 lx570 because it was less expensive and has bluetooth audio. The 08-09 only had bluetooth phone, no music.

Until I replaced the globes (210k) and flushed the ahc I absolutely hated the ride quality. It was like a toy boat in a bathtub. I also put LT tires and 17" wheels which may come off in favor of just 33's on the 20's. Either way it's fine. The stock tires though make for a really quick and fast ride. My 80 has the OME ~2.5" lift and LT tires and rides really well so until the LX was sorted out it sure didn't feel like an upgrade. Be prepared to spend an hour replacing your globes and flushing the AHC yourself or listening to dealers who say it's not recommended despite being on the 60kmile service checklist.

Make extra sure you don't buy a rusty vehicle. That's probably where all the AHC problems come from.

You will miss the 3 cupholders in the 80 with the option for a water bottle between the seat and console. LX cupholders are a joke. They may as well not exist.

I prefer the visibility from the 80. Windshield feels closer and there is a better view when looking out the back.

I prefer the manual radio/ac controls in the 80. It's one button you don't have to look for. On the LX it feels like 50 button presses.

I prefer the window and door controls and armrest in the 80. Maybe I'm used to it but the LX has an angled door panel and you have to reach for window buttons.

The 80 has more room for your knees around the console.

I prefer the road noise in the 80. The LX is so quiet that you hear little plastic squeaks and rattles from the console lid and the back seats which sound cheap.

I prefer that the 80 is old and I don't care about dirt and smelly things like wetsuits going in the back.

I prefer the LX for going to get coffee with my family.

I prefer the LX for parts availability.

If I was towing over a mountain I would prefer the LX but without a trailer I learned you just put the 80 in second and floor it to maintain 3kRPM.

MPG is about the same around town. That was a surprise.

There is no obligatory wave to/from other LC drivers when you drive a 570. Prepare to feel left out on occasion.

I'm glad I have the 570 for peace of mind related to safety with family, long term part availability, great stereo, great power and go almost anywhere, do almost anything comfort and capability, the new car smell from the charcoal filter I think and the new car look and feel. Also, look for the darker seat leather. Tan is less bueno. I would not get rid of my 570. It's a great vehicle. It's just not an 80 and I can live with that. I'm taking a 3 month trip for work and will probably leave the 570 and take the 80.

 

[ToothDr]

Both trucks have their inherent strengths and weaknesses as mentioned in previous posts. I elected to keep my 80 series after purchasing a new 200 series. I enjoy them both. You can always have someone keep the 80 mechanically sound if it makes financial sense.

 

[bloc]

Safety is something that hasn’t been talked about much so far. Do you have a family to haul around? If so, there is no comparison. An 80 is solid. A 200 is arguably more solid but also has much more modern safety equipment. VSC, PCS, way more airbags, seatbelt pretensioners, 20 years newer modeling and design..

 

[desmocruiser]

Both are great, but different!

Comes down to mindset and your goal for the particular drive with where you are going, what you might encounter en route or at location, and how quickly you want/ need to arrive!

Good luck, no bad choice!

 

[BadReligion]

It just looks like the dentist's wife's car.

What's wrong with that? My wife used to daily our G63, until we tried to put 2 kids in it. Now it's my daily, and the 200 is hers. A 200 is way better than a RR, Tahoe, XM5, Cayenne Turbo, etc in reliability, capability, and resale value, while being very kid friendly.

To the OP. Since you can't have both, get the 200, hands down. It is 90% as capable offroad, but 100% more comfortable and practical overall. Not to mention you can still find most OEM new parts for it. Safety is a huge factor too. You mentioned cross country road trips. The 200 just eats up miles and is far less fatiguing to drive long distances. It can tow almost anything in comfort. The fastest my 80 has ever gone from Reno to Moab was on a trailer behind our 200.

200s are also incredibly capable offroad. I've seen them tackle everything from Hell's Gate in Moab to the Rubicon (they are making regular appearances at Rubithon). I prefer to keep my body panels intact, so we stick to mild/moderate trails in our 200 and reserve the 80 for difficult trail duty, but in most situations the limiting factor is the driver, not the vehicle. You can always pick up another 80 in the future.

 

[Tex68w]

To the OP. Since you can't have both, get the 200, hands down. It is 90% as capable offroad, but 100% more comfortable and practical overall. Not to mention you can still find most OEM new parts for it.

This is something most don’t mention, it’s getting very difficult to source OEM parts for 80’s now.

 

[Mjones]

I put an LS into my triple-locked 80, and it was bad ass. But the reality was I had to drive 900 miles to get where I’d actually use it. This means all those freeway miles matter for the overall enjoyment of the trip, and I was less likely to push super hard when I got there because of the logistical difficulties if I made a big mistake.

When I acknowledged that, the 200 had a clear advantage, and I’m glad I made the switch.

So I’d say it depends on your use case. From the sound of things you’ll get a lot more out of a 200.

@bloc please expound upon "bad ass." I have an 80 with trd s/c (that makes it a little better for power but still so so). At nearing 300k miles I feel it's getting nearer needing a rebuild or doing something the LS6.2. I'm debating between putting the cost doing the 80 LS swap or selling it as is and switch to lx570. I'm interested in how transformative the LS is for the 80 compared to 2008-2015 Lx (those are the only years I'd consider). I've read a lot but not driven a LS swapped 80 yet. I've test driven several lx570's and 200's and have a good feel for those. I can't do both LS swap and the 570 so debating which.

 

[CharlieS]

Anybody that's thinking of bailing on their well maintained 80, please drop me a line.

 

[bloc]

@bloc please expound upon "bad ass." I have an 80 with trd s/c (that makes it a little better for power but still so so). At nearing 300k miles I feel it's getting nearer needing a rebuild or doing something the LS6.2. I'm debating between putting the cost doing the 80 LS swap or selling it as is and switch to lx570. I'm interested in how transformative the LS is for the 80 compared to 2008-2015 Lx (those are the only years I'd consider). I've read a lot but not driven a LS swapped 80 yet. I've test driven several lx570's and 200's and have a good feel for those. I can't do both LS swap and the 570 so debating which.

I used a 400hp 2008 All-aluminum 6.2L Escalade L92 with no AFM plus 6L80 but did use the factory 80 air cleaner and a mechanical fan. I’d be surprised if it was actually making 400hp in my application. Never did put it on a dyno, but seat of the pants it was right about as quick as a stock 200. (Mine isn’t as quick now with the tires and a bit more weight)

As far as bad ass, it had all the great stuff of an 80, minus the anemic 1FZ, minus some weight, plus the power and sound of a cross plane v8. Significantly better mileage than stock, solid axles, flexy suspension, better trans ratios, lockers, 315 MTs, and the ability to do the Red Mountain side of Black Bear Pass in high range without breaking a sweat. So much torque.. All in the great lines of an 80. I was really partial to that body style, and always considered the 200, especially the facelift 13-15 like I have, somewhat cartoonish looking. Due to the history of that rig I even had nice cloth seats!

But? I’m 14 hours away from the mountains. The trips up there in that were loud and fatiguing. The engine swap and LS gearing needs meant I couldn’t put it back down at stock height on stock tires. And having had the power, trading it all out for a stock 80 just wasn’t going to work.

For the record I did the swap in my driveway. I’ve got fair experience with wiring and fabrication so rather than pay anyone I bought or borrowed the tools I didn’t have and put it all together. For me the exhaust was the hardest part. From my understanding the cost of a well sorted swap would come close to 200-series territory.. and at that cost, I’d definitely just buy a 200 unless money just isn’t really an issue.

Keeping in mind I haven’t really been paying attention to the 80 world since before turbos and what problems the turbo swaps are having, to do it all again I’d just go turbo on the 1FZ, even if it meant rebuilding the engine. Which I can also do, other than the machine work. Not to brag, just that that changes the calculus a bit.

For context, this was with 315s before final tuning and learning engine braking made a huge difference in launch

 

[SaturnAscends]

Like everyone prior has said, the 80 is far superior to the 200 off road due to the solid axle up front, lockers, and just being smaller.

I haven't driven a 200 so I can't say for sure, but I question if this is actually the case? On paper the 200 is only marginally larger than the 80: same wheelbase, several inches longer and wider. It's not like the 80 has ideal off-road architecture either. They're both big heavy station wagons.

Also, most 80s don't have F/R lockers. I doubt an open-diff 80 would outwheel a 200 with ATRAC and crawl control. Even twin-locked 80s can struggle on slick surfaces where the ATRAC/crawl control might be more likely to "figure it out" in a newer vehicle. The vintage auto in the 80 also provides subpar engine compression for steep descents.

Finally, stock for stock, I'm not sure the solid axle on the 80 actually has more travel than the 200 series IFS. Furthermore, are the 80 series birfs really stronger than the 200 series CVs? In any case, the 200 series definitely has more power to hurt itself out on the trails if you don't use the throttle sparingly. (Just thinking out loud here; I'd be curious to hear the perspectives from those who've owned and wheeled both).

Don't get me wrong, I love the 80 series. It's a classic! But it can be hard to parse how much of the 80 series hype is actually based in fact vs. nostalgia.

 

[SaturnAscends]

Get a 200 but keep your 80. Why would you get rid of it? I've been driving my '94 for 22 years and I'm working into my 200. I switch back and forth. 200 is more luxury but the 80 is great!

View attachment 3257387

I'm guessing the OP may not have the budget for both. They aren't exactly giving away 200s these days, and FZJ80s are basically hobby cars/rolling restorations at this point. It adds up quick.

 

[bloc]

I haven't driven a 200 so I can't say for sure, but I question if this is actually the case? On paper the 200 is only marginally larger than the 80: same wheelbase, several inches longer and wider. It's not like the 80 has ideal off-road architecture either. They're both big heavy station wagons.

Also, most 80s don't have F/R lockers. I doubt an open-diff 80 would outwheel a 200 with ATRAC and crawl control. Even twin-locked 80s can struggle on slick surfaces where the ATRAC/crawl control might be more likely to "figure it out" in a newer vehicle. The vintage auto in the 80 also provides subpar engine compression for steep descents.

Finally, stock for stock, I'm not sure the solid axle on the 80 actually has more travel than the 200 series IFS. Furthermore, are the 80 series birfs really stronger than the 200 series CVs? In any case, the 200 series definitely has more power to hurt itself out on the trails if you don't use the throttle sparingly. )Just thinking out loud here; I'd be curious to hear the perspectives from those who've owned and wheeled both @Heckraiser @EvergreenOffroad @afgman786 @desmocruiser ).

Don't get me wrong, I love the 80 series. It's a classic! But it can be hard to parse how much of the 80 series hype is actually based in fact vs. nostalgia.

I’d say it depends on the type of terrain.

Even if the IFS hypothetically had more travel it will use that travel in different ways. With a solid axle one tire being pushed up during articulation helps push the other down, and on certain obstacles this can help a lot with stability and traction. The KDSS of a cruiser and AHC on a LX570 helps fill this gap compared to traditional IFS systems as shown by their RTI performance. Then again, Crawl/atrac can help a lot with traction while not hurting turning radius like lockers will, but can’t do anything for stability.

Basically it’s not very simple, and you are right to ask what’s hype vs reality.

What is objectively true is the 200 can do amazing things for its size and weight.. while having impressive road manners, safety, and power.

Also objectively true... an 80 is 1000-1300lb lighter stock for stock. Obvious advantages here.

 

[desmocruiser]

To the OP. Since you can't have both, get the 200, hands down. It is 90% as capable offroad, but 100% more comfortable and practical overall. Not to mention you can still find most OEM new parts for it. Safety is a huge factor too. You mentioned cross country road trips. The 200 just eats up miles and is far less fatiguing to drive long distances. It can tow almost anything in comfort. The fastest my 80 has ever gone from Reno to Moab was on a trailer behind our 200.

200s are also incredibly capable offroad. I've seen them tackle everything from Hell's Gate in Moab to the Rubicon (they are making regular appearances at Rubithon). I prefer to keep my body panels intact, so we stick to mild/moderate trails in our 200 and reserve the 80 for difficult trail duty, but in most situations the limiting factor is the driver, not the vehicle. You can always pick up another 80 in the future.

These are all very accurate points!

I have taken 9 drives TN to Utah, Montana, CO, Idaho, Wyoming, or reverse, 4 in a 200 and 5 in an 80 In the past 3 years.

I love my 80 and those trips are mostly solo or with one passenger, I cruise at 72 and enjoy the ride. Scheel Manns, Supercharging, and an LRA tank make it work Well.

Being said, it would be difficult to do these trips with the whole family so the 200 is the go to family road trip machine for comfort, safety, and is especially helpful in the Mountain West where both increased highway speeds and terrain are a challenge for an 80.

 

[SaturnAscends]

I’d say it depends on the type of terrain.

Even if the IFS hypothetically had more travel it will use that travel in different ways. With a solid axle one tire being pushed up during articulation helps push the other down, and on certain obstacles this can help a lot with stability and traction. The KDSS of a cruiser and AHC on a LX570 helps fill this gap compared to traditional IFS systems as shown by their RTI performance. Then again, Crawl/atrac can help a lot with traction while not hurting turning radius like lockers will, but can’t do anything for stability.

Basically it’s not very simple, and you are right to ask what’s hype vs reality.

What is objectively true is the 200 can do amazing things for its size and weight.. while having impressive road manners, safety, and power.

Also objectively true... an 80 is 1000-1300lb lighter stock for stock. Obvious advantages here.

Yeah the weight can be a double edged sword. In some cases, it can push the axles down and provide more stability and traction, and also can provide more durability if the axles and other components are beefier. On the other hand, I've found it can work against you in the mud or very slick surfaces. I have a 96 Tacoma that performs very well in those latter situations, but I'd be nervous about beating it up on the rocks at Moab compared to a full-size Land Cruiser.

 

[CharlieS]

I haven't driven a 200 so I can't say for sure, but I question if this is actually the case? On paper the 200 is only marginally larger than the 80: same wheelbase, several inches longer and wider. It's not like the 80 has ideal off-road architecture either. They're both big heavy station wagons.

Also, most 80s don't have F/R lockers. I doubt an open-diff 80 would outwheel a 200 with ATRAC and crawl control. Even twin-locked 80s can struggle on slick surfaces where the ATRAC/crawl control might be more likely to "figure it out" in a newer vehicle. The vintage auto in the 80 also provides subpar engine compression for steep descents.

Finally, stock for stock, I'm not sure the solid axle on the 80 actually has more travel than the 200 series IFS. Furthermore, are the 80 series birfs really stronger than the 200 series CVs? In any case, the 200 series definitely has more power to hurt itself out on the trails if you don't use the throttle sparingly. (Just thinking out loud here; I'd be curious to hear the perspectives from those who've owned and wheeled both).

Don't get me wrong, I love the 80 series. It's a classic! But it can be hard to parse how much of the 80 series hype is actually based in fact vs. nostalgia.

Drive a 200 and report back. They drive on trail like a *much* larger vehicle. And the Tundra feels even more massive. Despite how they measure up on paper.

 

[JOFS]

Sit in a 200 with a passenger in the passenger seat as well as in the back seats.
Heck throw people in the third row.

Oh wait the center of the second row in the 80s still just has a lap belt.

Yup on paper the 80 is a similar size but the 200 is much larger not just on the trail. Sit people in both trucks and tell me who will be happier with a cross country trip.

The OP says he is not happy with the smaller seats in his 80. Also says he is not a hard core off-roader. Wants a truck to take long trips in with his family.

I am not hearing about someone worried about narrow trails. Also suspect that a 200 will tackle nearly everything that most folks that aren’t into hardcore off-road stuff can throw at it.

I have both and love both but for long trips with the family and dog the 200 does not compare to the 80. Previously I had 100s that were better for this than the 80.

If you want a rig that can handle narrow trails buy a 70 series.

If you want a very capable truck that you can take your family cross country in safety buy a 200. I am hearing many speak of the negatives of the size of the 200 but if you aren’t looking for very serious off road stuff and are looking for comfort moving a family the size is a benefit. Plus it isn’t a slouch off road in stock form.

Good luck
John