Sorry to blow the dust off this thread — I just couldn’t leave the first sentence in the above quote alone without addressing/correcting it for future readers. Also, I realize this is probably a dead and bloody horse.
The F Series (think 40, 50, and 60 series Land Cruisers), NOT the 1FZ-FE (think 80 series, as well as 70 and 100 series (105 series)), has roots in a Chevy six. The 1FZ-FE is a clean-sheet Toyota design, one that I doubt was inexpensive to complete.
That said, having owned and read up on both, I think they’re something of an apples-to-oranges comparison.
On paper, they’re both good designs. Yes, the 2UZ-FE is related to the almighty 1UZ-FE, but it doesn’t have the six-bolt main bearing caps of the 1UZ-FE or the beefy(er) forged rods of the early 1UZ-FEs. The 2UZ-FE, however, does not seem to suffer in these areas. The 1FZ-FE is inherently strong with its seven-main-bearing bottom end that’s common to many straight sixes.
Despite the above differences, both engines seem to see a relatively low percentage of bottom end failures. Therefore, I would say the bottom ends of both engines are not a factor of longevity or durability.
At the end of the day, if I were asked to pick which engine sitting on a dyno stand at 4K rpm for 100k miles would yield the least leaks and repair needs, I would choose the 2UZ-FE.