Which Cruiser for Baja backroads?

[CharlieS]

Shotts,

Dunno, maybe the 100 series is superior, but in my position, the price difference was too dramatic to even consider one. I couldn't touch a 100 (unless it was totalled) for the money I have into my cruiser including aftermarket additions (suspension, etc).

As I recall, you frequently mention the $70K you have into yours. Let's just say I probably have less into my whole vehicle than you do in aftermarket add-ons.

Our friend here could build a nice 80 for the baja trips without breaking the bank.

Just another perspective.

Charlie

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

Shotts,

Dunno, maybe the 100 series is superior, but in my position, the price difference was too dramatic to even consider one. I couldn't touch a 100 (unless it was totalled) for the money I have into my cruiser including aftermarket additions (suspension, etc).

As I recall, you frequently mention the $70K you have into yours. Let's just say I probably have less into my whole vehicle than you do in aftermarket add-ons.

Our friend here could build a nice 80 for the baja trips without breaking the bank.

Just another perspective.

Charlie

Oh, absolutely Charlie. And that person who'd buy the 80 and outfit it would be VERY satisfied (as my note above says).

And yes as to the investment. Very true. The 100's are newer and the cost is higher, especially for a 2000+.

IF the thread-starter has the funding though, the difference in the 80 and 100 in these applications is immense. So different that I dread taking our 80 on long trips because we have that 100 sitting there. I'm very lucky and spoiled with the 100 (though as you said it cost me dearly).

 

[semlin]

Most people tell the exact opposite, that the early 80s, the 91-93 are the ones to AVOID. What's the real deal?

there is absolutely no reason to avoid them. It is like the difference between a 3 carat and 4 carat diamond

The 93-97s have more power, better brakes and the possibility of the locker option, but the 91-92s are still better than just about any other vehicle you could buy for your application. I recommended them for mexico because the 3FE motor they use is an offshoot of the 2F and F motors used in all earlier cruisers and is a very simple straight six pushrod motor with a cast iron head that any mechanic can work on. The 1fz motor in the 93-97 is a 24 valve aluminum head beast with more to worry about. It also is prone to overheating and has a head gasket issue that you won't find in the 91-92. This also might be an issue in mexico. Finally, a 91-92 will be cheap, which will give you lots of money to prep it for mexico and will make you less sad if something happens to it down there.

To answer another comment you made, I think 91-92's are very near the bottom of their depreciation cycle now and may even start to come back up. You can get good ones for under $5,000 in many parts of the us. you can get a better 91-92 80 than a 60 for the same money right now. on the other hand, the 93-97s are still coming down in value.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

To answer another comment you made, I think 91-92's are very near the bottom of their depreciation cycle now and may even start to come back up. You can get good ones for under $5,000 in many parts of the us. you can get a better 91-92 80 than a 60 for the same money right now. on the other hand, the 93-97s are still coming down in value.

We're lucky to know just how sweet Cruisers are. It's amazing one can buy such an super vehicle in the US as an 80, and for $5-15K. Amazing. Glad the whole world doesn't how good these things are!

 

[NorCalDoug]

One thing Mr. Shotts hasn't mentioned is that there seems to be a problem with cracks forming on the IFS arms of the 100 series when subjected to long-term rough road scenarios.
Given that you're looking for a rig for Baja...which has many miles of rough corregated roads (like those encountered by the Aussies) perhaps the 100 series may not be the best choice.
Here's the thread regarding the IFS problems:
https://forum.ih8mud.com/showthread.php?t=32541&page=2&pp=50

Don't know why John didn't bring this up...it could be that his great love of the 100 series has clouded his judgement a bit and he refuses to acknowledge that there is a problem

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

One thing Mr. Shotts hasn't mentioned is that there seems to be a problem with cracks forming on the IFS arms of the 100 series when subjected to long-term rough road scenarios.
Given that you're looking for a rig for Baja...which has many miles of rough corregated roads (like those encountered by the Aussies) perhaps the 100 series may not be the best choice.
Here's the thread regarding the IFS problems:
https://forum.ih8mud.com/showthread.php?t=32541&page=2&pp=50

Don't know why John didn't bring this up...it could be that his great love of the 100 series has clouded his judgement a bit and he refuses to acknowledge that there is a problem

Problems have been with the much heavier TD models and only in Australia. No V8 models have been found to have the problem. Meanwhile, there is an inexpensive mod to reinforce this, and that mod works for any 100 (either V8 or TD or D). At least we're lucky to have Cruisers, so the aftermarket supports our rigs. An example would be aftermarket birfields to better replace the factory ones.

 

[landtank]

not to mention the stronger frame is needed to cope with the higher stresses of having a IFS unit mounted to it. And those pesky cv boots have been known to have problems.

I look at Baja as being similar to Australia, but they have 105s. A 100 series with a solid front axle and oh ya, a straight six 4.5l engine.

Shotts climb of that self built pedestile already.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

not to mention the stronger frame is needed to cope with the higher stresses of having a IFS unit mounted to it. And those pesky cv boots have been known to have problems.

**Yes, you are correct. The 100's frame was stiffened by 50% throughout compared to the 80 frame. 9 crossmembers vs only 5. Toyota continued this improvement on the new 4Runner and GX which both also have 9. This is why the 100 is so tight and well mannered over the bumps compared to older designs (like the 80).

I look at Baja as being similar to Australia, but they have 105s. A 100 series with a solid front axle and oh ya, a straight six 4.5l engine.

**Yes, more rugged for sure, though your ride quality just took a huge step backwards with the 105. If you're not running insanely difficult trails then why go backwards? Like everything, you have trade-offs.

Shotts climb of that self built pedestile already.

Wish I could take credit for the 100's improvements Rick. I can't though. I didn't design or build it. I just drive one (and you will too some day).

Please note other comments in the above quote.

 

[landtank]

I just drive one (and you will too some day).

I'll give you that, the 100 will be up next after my 80 dies, unfortunately I only expect to live another 40 years or so so time might not permit it.

 

[calamaridog]

Stevens,

It is really hard to recommend which one is better for you without knowing your exact needs. I'll stand by the comment to buy the newest, lowest mileage one you can afford.

It is real hard to say when they will stop depreciating as this is very subjective. Any year cruiser in excellent mechanical and physical condition is worth a ton of money and will continue to be worth its weight in gold as long as it remains in good condition.

I know you are looking at that 97 for $14000 and thinking "why so much?" Remember, someone paid $45,000+ for that vehicle new

Bottom line is these are all nice vehicles and can be modified relatively easily for better off highway performance. If you have mechanical abilities, that opens up more options for you regarding the condition of the vehicle you buy.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

I'll give you that, the 100 will be up next after my 80 dies, unfortunately I only expect to live another 40 years or so so time might not permit it.

Awesome!

You know, that's true. One negative about these stupid trucks is that they do seem to last forever. That's why even though I wheel the snot out of the 100 I try to keep it away from severe brush and/or body damage. After doing Golden Spike and without any difficulties or scars I think I'll protect the 100 even more. It's proved itself to me and with it's bling I think after it runs Upper Sycamore during the documentary filming it'll be semi-retired from difficult trails.
I miss the 80 and will put it to good and frequent usage. After all the 80 is friggin' amazing in the lines where I point it.
Might even get the Taco out there now that it's lifted.

Back to topic though........if a trip to Baja comes up? The 100 is the no-brainer vehicle of choice though. (In MY shed)

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

If you have mechanical abilities, that opens up more options for you regarding the condition of the vehicle you buy.

Me = no abilites. If I go to Baja I'll take along Robbie or Slee.

 

[semlin]

Most people tell the exact opposite, that the early 80s, the 91-93 are the ones to AVOID. What's the real deal?

I didn't notice the 91-93 split you were using. I have never seen anyone say avoid a 93

the interior options are basically identical on all years except that some 97s have a climate control system that some people hate. 91 and 92s are much more likely to have cloth interiors. Leather on all years wears badly. LX450 for 97 has lexus level trim and more soundproofing. very rare models lack 3rd row seats. Towing package with tranny cooler is standard for all years with or without an installed trailer hitch.

the model distinctions break down this way

91-92 central diff locker, 4.0l 3FE motor, cast iron head, front disc rear drum brakes, 440 tranny
-basically a tank that will run forever but not that fast. R12 a/c unless changed (colder but must be converted to 134a if recharged in us)

93-94 add 4.5l i-6 1fz motor, aluminum head, 4 wheel disc brakes (and front/rear lockers as a rare option), add 442 "bus" transmission - change to r134A in middle of 93 model year
-a faster tank that stops better and shifts better. motor is more complex and you have to watch coolant system closely or h.g problems arise btu otherwise pretty bulletproof

95 - same as 93-94 but add airbags - change trannies to 343 and change to aluminum rad- add partial OBD2 diagnostics - add better ecu and hot wire maf
-tranny is not as beefy but smoother and still reliable- gets better mileage. aluminum 2 core rad considered by many to be less efficient than 3-core brass in 93-94.

96-97 same as 95 but add full obd2 diagnostics and better ecu
-same as 95 but maybe slightly better computer. For some reason has more head gasket problems than earlier trucks. - ecu is better suited to adding turbo or supercharger

98 plus - completely different vehicle. V8 motor. may or may not be good but it is certain that owners will talk your ear off about its virtues trying to compensate for missing solid front axle. Go to the 100 series board and hang out if you want one of these.

 

[White Shark]

Most people tell the exact opposite, that the early 80s, the 91-93 are the ones to AVOID. What's the real deal?

I avoided the 93-97 when I bought my 92 almost 6 years ago. Much higher cost, more moving parts in the engine to break, phh issue (https://forum.ih8mud.com/showthread.php?t=6994&highlight=phh), A343 tranny 95/96 on, leather, more electrics, etc. The 93-97's are nice, but I needed a solid truck that was more utility, less luxury. The 92 cloth seats, narrower body, shorter roof, lower cost to acquire, reliable 3FE, and A440F tranny are pretty utilitarian. Upgrade the EFI relay wire and you've dealt with the main potentially serious issue.

I now have a 350 that outpowers the Toyota V-8 and ARB air lockers, so the truck is even better for my uses, which will include long distance Baja surf expeditions.

My recommendation would be to look for a 93-94 with diff locks if you can afford one. The 93-94 have more leg room than later models. The prices have come down, most guys have replaced the phh, guys are selling trucks that already have sliders/ARB bumpers/snorkels/sliders, etc. because they are buying 100 series trucks for the wife, etc. As a result, you should be able to find a well equipped truck for a reasonable price. The 93-97's also have about 57hp more kick, rear disc brakes, higher towing limit than the 91-92 and bit better gas mileage also.

If not, I'd look for a 92 or 91. The 92's have a nicer center console/armrest. You can find a nice 92 for around $3000-4000 with 200K miles. That should leave you with another 100K or so before any serious work would likely need to be done. They mainly need new birf seals and oxygen sensors every 80-100K or so.

You really can't go wrong with any of the 80 models, you just need to look at your budget and decide if you need lockers and whether you want to tow anything with it. If you need a reliable cheap surf rig, the 91/92 is a good way to go. If you are looking to rock crawl, get into the heavy muck, tow heavy trailers, you like leather seats, and you have cash to spend, go for the 93-97.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

talk your ear off about its virtues trying to compensate for missing solid front axle.

Hee Hee.

Compensate for what?
You couldn't SAS my 100 if you did it for free. Why ruin a good thing.
It's 2005 (well....98+ ). Thank god for improvements in vehicle design.

 

[CharlieS]

Sweet grand cherokee pictures...

 

[semlin]

white shark
-the tow limit is the same 91-97, 5,000lbs
-the 91-92s body shells are inpercepitbly narrower and shorter than the 93-97s. Standing them side by side you cannot tell.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

The 93-94 have more leg room than later models.

Is this really true? If so, where's the less room? Front seats or 2nd seats? We're looking for a 2nd 80 or 2nd 100 right now. I limited the 80 to 95+. Signed, concerned.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

Sweet grand cherokee pictures...

Liberty you moron.

Don't you know your trucks?

 

[landtank]

Nice front flex on that last shot Shotts, which side of the discussion is that one serving?