Something to ponder ... (1 Viewer)

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

Joined
Oct 13, 2003
Threads
44
Messages
534
Location
Pattaya, Thailand
Here the specs:

LC 80 LC 100

Overall Height 73.6 73.2
Overall Width 76.0 76.4
Overall Length 189.8 192.5
Wheelbase 112.2 112.2

Ground clearance 10.8 9.8

Approach angle 33 31
Departure angle 22 24



So, the LC100 is just a bit longer but the LC80 is higher. Why is then the departure angle more worse for the 80 if the wheelbase is the same but the 100 is longer. Actually the 80 should have a better departure angle than the 100. The approach angle is okay because of the higher ground clearance of the 80.

Any ideas???

Mike
 
Based on your data the 80 have better approach but worse departure. I think those are because the front and rear overhang are different. 80 series have less front overhang/hihger bumper but more rear overhang or the spare tire/bumper hang lower.
100 series have longer front overhang or lower front bumper but less rear overhang or higher spare tire/rear bumper.
 
[quote author=Augie link=board=2;threadid=9497;start=msg83116#msg83116 date=1072986030]
Based on your data the 80 have better approach but worse departure. I think those are because the front and rear overhang are different. 80 series have less front overhang/hihger bumper but more rear overhang or the spare tire/bumper hang lower.
100 series have longer front overhang or lower front bumper but less rear overhang or higher spare tire/rear bumper.
[/quote]

If that is the case. then all the additional length of a LC100 goes in the front ??? No better legroom, even more worse in the 3rd row seats and then no longer rear ??? I wonder about this.

So the 100 only increased in the front to place the new engine ???

Mike
 
Well not necessarily.

I know for sure 3rd row leg room are a bit longer than 80 series. Like I mention earlier it might be jus the bumper placement.
100 series front overhang does not need to be longer to accomodate V8 since they are shorter. But bumper regulation also change from time to time so the data you got might be just from different bumper height.

100 series might also rake a bit more due to front IFS and account to all those approach and departure differences.
 
[quote author=Augie link=board=2;threadid=9497;start=msg83128#msg83128 date=1072987142]
Well not necessarily.

I know for sure 3rd row leg room are a bit longer than 80 series. Like I mention earlier it might be jus the bumper placement.
100 series front overhang does not need to be longer to accomodate V8 since they are shorter. But bumper regulation also change from time to time so the data you got might be just from different bumper height.



100 series might also rake a bit more due to front IFS and account to all those approach and departure differences.

[/quote]

That is the funny thing. The 3rd row leg room is only 27.3 in. for a 100 and 28.5 in. for a 80 according to Toyota USA website for the 100 and B's website for the 97 LC 80. So that is shorter.

Still the problem remains ???

Mike
 
So more digging done:

Okay the extra 3.7 in. in length i thought would go in the cabin room but then I looked at the figures again and:

80 100

Leg room Front 42.2 -0.1 42.3 :(
Leg room Middle 33.6 -0.7 34.3 ;)
Leg room Rear 28.5 +1.2 27.3 :eek:

Advantage for 80: + 0.4 in. ::)

The 100 has the only advantage in the shoulder room because of a 110 mm wider cabin but then what happened to the hip room?? Got again smaller maybe due to a bigger center console. Due to a higher seating position the headroom gives again no increases.

So, where is the additional inches in length going ??? I learned not in the front and not in the cabin, then it must be the rear. But then why is the departure angle more worse in a 80 ???

Mike
 
Depature angle would be effected by the legnth of the bumper sticking past the rear wheels and the height of the bottom of the bumper...maybe the 80 hangs lower in the back than the 100. Also is there any "real" difference between 22 and 24? Plus if you really cared I'm guessing you would upgrade (go bigger) tires which even w/o a lift will raise the departure angle.

Also your leg room measurments seem so close that "real" differences wouldn't be noticied. Plus we are in drivers seats, screw the passengers :flipoff2:

-Matt
 
[quote author=80and100cruisers link=board=2;threadid=9497;start=msg83184#msg83184 date=1072996267]
Depature angle would be effected by the legnth of the bumper sticking past the rear wheels and the height of the bottom of the bumper...maybe the 80 hangs lower in the back than the 100. Also is there any "real" difference between 22 and 24? Plus if you really cared I'm guessing you would upgrade (go bigger) tires which even w/o a lift will raise the departure angle.

Also your leg room measurments seem so close that "real" differences wouldn't be noticied. Plus we are in drivers seats, screw the passengers :flipoff2:

-Matt
[/quote]

That is exactly the point. TOY brings a bigger rig but nothing for the driver except shoulder width. For myself I have bigger tire and a rear tire carrier. So a better departure angle already. I was just wondering how small the difference between the 80 and 100 is. :doh:

Mike
 
Asiarider, I was able to test drive the LC100 back in '98 and I can tell you it has more legroom than the LC80 in the front and in the middle. It seems to me that the front seats were able to adjust back further. :)
 
[quote author=FJ809496TLC link=board=2;threadid=9497;start=msg83223#msg83223 date=1073004539]
Asiarider, I was able to test drive the LC100 back in '98 and I can tell you it has more legroom than the LC80 in the front and in the middle. It seems to me that the front seats were able to adjust back further. :)
[/quote]

Yes, I agree with all of you that it has some more legroom. If I trust another source then 3 cm (or 1.18 in.) in the front due to better back adjustment of the seats and 7cm?? (or 2.75 in.) in the middle. But then a lot of this space will be stroke of by the better space in the 3rd row seats of a 80. Another source tells me that the front of a 100 is shorter than the front of a 80. And no better cargo area either.

So were are the inches of length going. It can only be the rear. But that would mean a longer overhang and a worse departure angle. Don't forget the much lower ground clearance of the 100. Maybe the bumper is much smaller and higher. But still there is a spare tire under the rig. So who has the answer???

Mike
 
Let us assume that the bumper heights are the same, what probably they did is move the cabin forward to give more legrooms. Since they put a V8, the front is now shorter. The overhang will determine the approach/departure angle base on the same tire diameter. :)
 
[quote author=FJ809496TLC link=board=2;threadid=9497;start=msg83484#msg83484 date=1073062400]
Let us assume that the bumper heights are the same, what probably they did is move the cabin forward to give more legrooms. Since they put a V8, the front is now shorter. The overhang will determine the approach/departure angle base on the same tire diameter. :)
[/quote]

I think so too. Thank you all for the information. It's enough now. :beer: :beer: :beer:

Mike
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom