Which Cruiser for Baja backroads?

[ShottsUZJ100]

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

Neither. 80 got mo flex whatever trail ya on.

 

[MH_Stevens]

Once again, a BIG thank-you to all you super guys who have given me interesting and informative posts. Some of you have noted that I seem to not know what I want. You are right. All of these Cruisers have so much to recommend them its a tough call. I'm homeing in though. I'm semi-retired and disabled from work so I am looking for value - not a low price - but good value, and the fact that the 60/62's and the early 80's have bottomed out in cost is a big plus, even though I am still tempted by the luxuary and lower miles of the later 80's. Moderate comfort and room to lay down in the back is a big requirement and so is reliability and the ability to fix on the trail. This all is drawing me to the 91-92's.

I'm still having the price problem. Above it was said "you can get a nice '92 with 200k miles for $3-4K" Look at AutoTrader.com for my ZIP of 92536 and you will see them listed for $9000! Where do you guys live for *****'s sake!

Mike Stevens

 

[landtank]

9000 has gotten people a whole lot more than a 92.

here you go:


http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.j...nced=&isp=y&start_year=1991&cardist=45#vdptop

 

[White Shark]

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.

91-92 tow limit 3500 lbs.
93-97 tow limit 5000 lbs.


91-92 FJ 80
width 72"
height 70.3"
length 188.2"
cargo 97.3 cu. ft.
towing 3500 lbs.

93-97 FZJ 80
width 76"
height 73.6"
length 189.8"
cargo 90.9 cu. ft.
towing 5000 lbs.

98-current UZJ 100
width 76.4"
height 73.2"
length 192.5"
cargo 90.8 cu. ft.
towing 6500 lbs.

I can tell the difference. 4 inches more width makes a difference on tight trails. 3.3 inches taller is not as much of a factor. I run a Kaymar rack on top though, so 3.3 inches lower when factored in with a lift and tall tires helps reduce overall height. The tow rating is largely based on the fact that the rear discs cool quicker and thus are rated for greater towing capacity on the 93+ models. The tow rating is also less dependant on the power, rather the ability to handle the load. The 91-92 also sports more internal cargo space 7.6 cu.ft.

 

[semlin]

Mike, do a search for maximum price of $5000 across north america for a 91-92. There are 8 right now. I would also check cars.com.

if you want cruiser model you want in good condition at price you want quickly you must travel. if you find one you like, post here and someone onb the board may be able to check it out for you. I would offer but they are damn expensive where i live.

You can try ebay.

 

[White Shark]

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....41&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.

Riiiight.......

And exactly how many U.S. trucks other than yours and Podvin's spend anytime off road or out of mall parking lots? The fact that Australia receives ~70% of Cruisers produced, Africa ~20%, with the rest of the world ~10% U.S. included! We receive probably 5% of world production compared to Australia's 70%. That and the fact that we have some of the best paved highways in the world compared to the crap that Australia claims to be drivable roads. It's no wonder we don't see the IFS cracking in the U.S.
Baja has roads very similar to Australia. Spend some time down there and it's not only likely, but rather probable that this failure will occur as it has frequently under similar conditions in Australia. '
By the way, IFS sucks. Go buy an Escalade if you're old and need a Cadillac ride. That or stay on the road.
NorCalDoug is correct. Point goes to Doug.

 

[semlin]

white shark i am saying you are wrong on towing capacity. i am sure an fj80 fsm towing rating is 5000lbs. pause. it looks like c-dan agrees with me
https://forum.ih8mud.com/showthread.php?t=7523&highlight=tow+capacity

i also suspect those measurements of your include the skinnier fender flares on width and the different stock tires on height. actual body shell is much closer imho.

 

[OZCAL]

Once again, a BIG thank-you to all you super guys who have given me interesting and informative posts......

...Where do you guys live for *****'s sake!

Mike Stevens

I hope you weren't just looking for a comparison of sunroofs and cupholders . Oh yeah, I'm in the 4551. That's Queensland...

David

 

[calamaridog]

Mike,

92536 is Riverside CA I believe?

I have an acquaintance who told me today he is going to sell his 1987 FJ60. The truck is very nice with 208,000 mi. and 4spd. manual. Not positive what he is asking but he is emailing me a description, pics, etc. in a few days.

If you'd like to drive a UZJ100, I have my 2000 here in San Diego area. Depending on how quickly you are looking, I could meet up with you if you aren't in a hurry.

I did a search within 300 mi. of me and there are 40 Cruisers between the years 1987-1994 and many of them are under $10,000. I say set a budget and start searching for the nicest vehicle you can find.

And test drive each model so you can compare.

 

[White Shark]

white shark i am saying you are wrong on towing capacity. i am sure an fj80 fsm towing rating is 5000lbs. pause. it looks like c-dan agrees with me
https://forum.ih8mud.com/showthread.php?t=7523&highlight=tow+capacity

i also suspect those measurements of your include the skinnier fender flares on width and the different stock tires on height. actual body shell is much closer imho.

5000lbs. towing with 500lbs. tongue weight, with the tow package, which did not come standard. This is the frame mounted receiver setup that came as an option. Toyota also states that any trailer over 2000lbs. is required to have a sway control device with sufficient capacity.
The stock spec is for 3500 lbs. off the rear frame rail with 350lbs. max tongue weight. That is why you will continue to see 3500lbs. as the stock spec, because that is the Toyota spec from the factory without dealer options i.e., the receiver hitch.

Most guys mount pintles on the frame rail for offroad use and will likely never come close half the 3500lbs. rating. I doubt that most guys running heavy trails use the factory receiver because of rear clearance issues. I got rid of mine for better clearance when I got a F-250 as a tow rig. The pintle is a better option than a ball hitch when offroad and can be combined with a combo unit that has a standard ball on the base radius of the pintle for standard trailer hitches.

Toyota also states that trailer brakes are required if the trailer weighs over 1000lbs. You don't usually see trailer brakes until trailers get up to 5000-6000lbs. load ratings. That tells me that 5000lbs. may be the limit with trailer brakes, but you're really on the top end and likely to get squirrely at that load capacity.
Anything that has a brake recommendation at 1000lbs. is stating that the tow rig has brakes that are not designed for heavy towing. That and a requirement for a sway control device for loads over 2000lbs. tells me that you would be getting pretty close to crazy to tow 5000lbs. off the optional receiver without the sway control device. I've never seen anyone use a sway control device short of towing enormous travel trailers, much less on a load just over 2000 lbs. I see guys towing 4000lbs+ boats without sway control devices and trailer brakes all the time. Can it be done? Yes. Is it smart? You decide.

I can easily outpull the 98-current Toyota UZJ100 V-8's with my 350 as it has higher hp and torque figures, but the stock brakes won't handle the load. Nor will the general design. Words to the wise. Be safe.


The 93-97 flares are wider. The wheels are also 1" taller with ~31" stock tires , but the tire/wheel combo can't account for 3.3 inches. Maybe 1.5 inches as they both spec out ~, but that leaves almost 2" to be accounted for elsewhere. The body is different. Look at the two different trucks side by side and you'll see the difference. There isn't a lot, but it's there.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

Riiiight.......

And exactly how many U.S. trucks other than yours and Podvin's spend anytime off road or out of mall parking lots? The fact that Australia receives ~70% of Cruisers produced, Africa ~20%, with the rest of the world ~10% U.S. included! We receive probably 5% of world production compared to Australia's 70%. That and the fact that we have some of the best paved highways in the world compared to the crap that Australia claims to be drivable roads. It's no wonder we don't see the IFS cracking in the U.S.
Baja has roads very similar to Australia. Spend some time down there and it's not only likely, but rather probable that this failure will occur as it has frequently under similar conditions in Australia. '
By the way, IFS sucks. Go buy an Escalade if you're old and need a Cadillac ride. That or stay on the road.
NorCalDoug is correct. Point goes to Doug.

No UZJ models in AUSTRALIA have experience cracking.

An Excalade can't run the trails I can. There's no 4-Low.

I'm glad I can run the trails an 80 can though. An man, am I comfy. And on the way to the trail too.

I like your writing Shark. Yer one of the funniest.

 

[semlin]

white shark, very interesting. just looked at the original dealer invoice for a 91 I happen to have:

the tranny cooler is listed as standard
the 5,000lb tow rating is listed together with the fender flares, alloy wheels and 31" tire as an option package.
the tow hitch is a separate option

the stock tire size is 235/75/15 or 28.9"
stock tires on the 93-97 were either 265/75/16 or 275/70/16 or 31.5"

Conclusions
1. if you have fender flares you have 5,000lb tow capacity. the poverty pack models without the flares are incredibly rare.
2. apparently the rating change depends on wheels/tires or else toyota was full of it when they said the stock vehicle had only 3500lbs towing.
3. 2.6" of the height difference is stock tires
4. It is possible the width stat you have is for a stock 91 with no flares, while the 93-97 stat includes the flares. I will measure my friend's 91 tomorrow and see.

 

[MH_Stevens]

Calamaridog:

I live in Aguanga which is just over the county line out Warner Springs. Thatnks for the info on the 87 but I'm leaning towards an 80 now. I'm always tempted to up but don't want to be in a vehicle that is depreciationg rapidly. KBB private party for a 2000 in excelent condition and 75000 miles is #25670 and out of my price range.

 

[calamaridog]

Mike,

Good luck with your search then! You won't be disappointed with the 80 series vehicles and there is tons of good 411 on this forum.

I was actually shopping for an 80 but the wife liked the idea of having a newer vehicle so we started looking at the 100's.

If you haven't done so already, read the 80 series guide information at www.sleeoffroad.com.

 

[alaskacruiser]

more info on the 100 series torsion bar cracks here:

http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cach...cruiser+"100+series"+torsion+bar+cracks&hl=en

including a *VERY* interesting post by our own Mr. Shotts, which I have pasted below for your amusement:

"To: <100scool@yahoogroups.com>
Cc: "Scott Brady"
From: "Shotts Family"
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 18:24:44 -0700
Subject: RE: [100scool] Re: Help Re suspension
Reply-To: 100scool@yahoogroups.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Jordan Huang [mailto:golfrules@hotmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 15, 2004 5:44 PM

Greg,

Have you heard of anyone had the failure with the standard suspension?
With the cases you know about, did Toyota cover it under warranty? or was it
void due to suspension upgrade.

Cheers

Jordan
------------------------------

**< SHOTTS' POST FOLLOWS >**:

Guys: Here's an interesting bit of info that might apply to this subject:

My 2001 has been a perfect Cruiser since new. No warranty issues/claims
whatsoever. I've had general maintenance done mostly at my dealer (because
I have and extended warranty with them). The only thing I wrecked on the
truck was my front diff (trying to get up a huge hill we first slid all the
way down) and that was fixed under ext warr (now I have ARB lockers though I
doubt I'd get up that hill?).

Last month I took the truck in for an alignment (only it's 2nd one in 80K
miles...what a truck!!...and it gets trashed off road) to my Toyota dealer.
When I picked it up my service advisor said "Oh, we ordered some parts for
you under your extended warranty. When they come in we'll throw them on for
you". When I asked what they want to "fix", he said that they're replacing
my CV boots because they were leaky and they're going to replace my lower
ball joints too.

I was in shock because the beast is 3-inch lifted, has 35's and is
off-roaded to the max, which Toyota knows. My CV's have been a tad leaky
forever because of the increased angle. Why they did this work I don't
know. Reading this recent issue of breakage however makes me wonder is they
seen "cracks" in my lower control arm (A-arm whatever). You see, to replace
the ball joint or the lower A-arm on a UZJ in America they're only sold as a
"set" so I had all new lower parts put on. WOW! So......I know the dealer
has been slow during the summer. Were they simply making some extra bread?
Or, did I have some signs of this trouble?

Signed, Curious

PS: One thing I did notice which I've never heard before....in Colorado
when off-road a week after they did the above work.....with the windows up
we heard occasional though often-enough mild thumping noises when going over
rocks, etc. After much research we discovered the sound was caused by rocks
shifting the "play or slack in the steering" from one side to the other. We
could also simulate this by driving slowly and rocking the steering wheel
side to side quickly. It would make the same thump noise and you could feel
some steering slack or play. Never noticed it before, can't hear it with
the windows down, runs perfect on the highway. Ideas? Did they put
something together wrong? Loose? Another problem?"

----------------------

Interesting how the possibility of the A-arm cracks in *Shotts' own UZJ100* is brought up in another forum, yet in this forum he states quite confidently that it only happens in the TD models. Looks like Mr. Shotts has been caught with his pants down. Eagerly awaiting your response, Shotts.

PS: Nothing personal, Shotts. It's just that your 100-series superiority complex and arrogance regarding the issue is so extreme that I couldn't help but have a little fun with this juicy tidbit.


alaskacruiser

 

[White Shark]

white shark, very interesting. just looked at the original dealer invoice for a 91 I happen to have:

the tranny cooler is listed as standard
the 5,000lb tow rating is listed together with the fender flares, alloy wheels and 31" tire as an option package.
the tow hitch is a separate option

the stock tire size is 235/75/15 or 28.9"
stock tires on the 93-97 were either 265/75/16 or 275/70/16 or 31.5"

Conclusions
1. if you have fender flares you have 5,000lb tow capacity. the poverty pack models without the flares are incredibly rare.
2. apparently the rating change depends on wheels/tires or else toyota was full of it when they said the stock vehicle had only 3500lbs towing.
3. 2.6" of the height difference is stock tires
4. It is possible the width stat you have is for a stock 91 with no flares, while the 93-97 stat includes the flares. I will measure my friend's 91 tomorrow and see.

Tranny Coolers were standard with the A440F on all 91-92 model FJ80's sold in the U.S.
To meet the 5000lbs. rating, even if listed with the fender flares, alloys, etc., you are still required to purchase the optional frame mounted receiver hitch. THe rear 4 hole pintle mount is not rated to 5000lbs. The truck tires, wheels, etc. may be part of that rating, but the rear rail alone is not.

Publication No. OM60528U
Part No. 01999-60528
Toyota 1992 Owner's Manual
Land Cruiser
Pages 105-110

Page 106
"Use only a weight carrying hitch designed for the total trailer weight. Toyota does not recommend using a weight distribution (load equalizing) hitch." [Axle mounted]

"The hitch must be bolted securely to the vehicle frame and installed according to the hitch manufacturer's instructions." i.e. the optional factory receiver.

"The hitch ball and king pin [receiver] should have a light coat of grease.
Toyota recommends removing the hitch when not towing to prevent injury and/or damage due to the hitch on event of a rear end collision. After removal of the hitch, seal the installation area [receiver] to prevent entry of exhaust fumes and mud." [Mud and exhaust fumes will foul the grease in the receiver opening]

As such, the 3500lbs limit stands without the optional frame mounted receiver. The 5000lbs limit may be listed on the sticker with the wheels, fender flares and accessories, but the factory owner's manual lists 3500lbs. without the towing package, of which the optional receiver is an integral part.

Toyota also states on page 109 that when towing, you are not to exceed 45 mph or the posted speed limit, whichever is lower, as exceeding this will likely lead to swaying, instability, and loss of control.

As for the width, it's not all in the flares. Look at the two trucks side by side. The body lines in the steel bulge out wider on the 93-97 models.

 

[semlin]

white shark are you sure? So far as I know the pintle hitch was never rated for towing in north america and toyota never sold a hitch mount for it. Is there any discussion of using the pintle holes to mount a hitch in the owner's manual?

The "factory" tow hitch is just a class 3 hitch from valley industries and you can slap on a class 3 tow hitch from anybody if you want. If you can tow 5,000lbs with a truck just by slapping on a class 3 hitch, then to my mind it has a 5,000lb towing rating. It seems though from the 91 build sheet that with the 91 you also needed to have the alloy wheels. I suspect the 235s or the little rims weren't weight rated for the 3rd row package and a 500lb trailer tongue.

 

[White Shark]

more info on the 100 series torsion bar cracks here:

http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cach...cruiser+"100+series"+torsion+bar+cracks&hl=en

including a *VERY* interesting post by our own Mr. Shotts, which I have pasted below for your amusement:

"To: <100scool@yahoogroups.com>
Cc: "Scott Brady"
From: "Shotts Family"
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2004 18:24:44 -0700
Subject: RE: [100scool] Re: Help Re suspension
Reply-To: 100scool@yahoogroups.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Jordan Huang [mailto:golfrules@hotmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 15, 2004 5:44 PM

Greg,

Have you heard of anyone had the failure with the standard suspension?
With the cases you know about, did Toyota cover it under warranty? or was it
void due to suspension upgrade.

Cheers

Jordan
------------------------------

**< SHOTTS' POST FOLLOWS >**:

Guys: Here's an interesting bit of info that might apply to this subject:

My 2001 has been a perfect Cruiser since new. No warranty issues/claims
whatsoever. I've had general maintenance done mostly at my dealer (because
I have and extended warranty with them). The only thing I wrecked on the
truck was my front diff (trying to get up a huge hill we first slid all the
way down) and that was fixed under ext warr (now I have ARB lockers though I
doubt I'd get up that hill?).

Last month I took the truck in for an alignment (only it's 2nd one in 80K
miles...what a truck!!...and it gets trashed off road) to my Toyota dealer.
When I picked it up my service advisor said "Oh, we ordered some parts for
you under your extended warranty. When they come in we'll throw them on for
you". When I asked what they want to "fix", he said that they're replacing
my CV boots because they were leaky and they're going to replace my lower
ball joints too.

I was in shock because the beast is 3-inch lifted, has 35's and is
off-roaded to the max, which Toyota knows. My CV's have been a tad leaky
forever because of the increased angle. Why they did this work I don't
know. Reading this recent issue of breakage however makes me wonder is they
seen "cracks" in my lower control arm (A-arm whatever). You see, to replace
the ball joint or the lower A-arm on a UZJ in America they're only sold as a
"set" so I had all new lower parts put on. WOW! So......I know the dealer
has been slow during the summer. Were they simply making some extra bread?
Or, did I have some signs of this trouble?

Signed, Curious

PS: One thing I did notice which I've never heard before....in Colorado
when off-road a week after they did the above work.....with the windows up
we heard occasional though often-enough mild thumping noises when going over
rocks, etc. After much research we discovered the sound was caused by rocks
shifting the "play or slack in the steering" from one side to the other. We
could also simulate this by driving slowly and rocking the steering wheel
side to side quickly. It would make the same thump noise and you could feel
some steering slack or play. Never noticed it before, can't hear it with
the windows down, runs perfect on the highway. Ideas? Did they put
something together wrong? Loose? Another problem?"

----------------------

Interesting how the possibility of the A-arm cracks in *Shotts' own UZJ100* is brought up in another forum, yet in this forum he states quite confidently that it only happens in the TD models. Looks like Mr. Shotts has been caught with his pants down. Eagerly awaiting your response, Shotts.

PS: Nothing personal, Shotts. It's just that your 100-series superiority complex and arrogance regarding the issue is so extreme that I couldn't help but have a little fun with this juicy tidbit.


alaskacruiser

IFS is road capable and smooth, yet will never supplant SFA in the 4x4 community due to weak front diffs, cv's and undersized control arms. Can these systems be built heavier? Sure they can, but you'll never see them on anything less than a 6x6 OshKosh Military Truck, MegaCruiser, or a job specific specialty vehicle, much less on a stock, publicly available LandCruiser. It's easy to swap in a Dana 60 or 70, Mog 404 axles, or the like, but IFS systems are not easy to beef up and are complex, cost prohibitive beasts to deal with. Continue to enjoy your IFS shotts. Arguing won't convince those of us who know. No matter how much you polish a turd, it's still just a turd. Don't try to rock crawl with a turd. It shines on rough roads and slick rock trails. Use it there. The IFS was designed with those types of conditions in mind. Stop the dissemination of IFS propaganda. If Toyota truly thought that the IFS was a superior system offroad, they wouldn't have produced the 105 with SFA. Nuf said.

 

[White Shark]

white shark are you sure? So far as I know the pintle hitch was never rated for towing in north america and toyota never sold a hitch mount for it. Is there any discussion of using the pintle holes to mount a hitch in the owner's manual?

The "factory" tow hitch is just a class 3 hitch from valley industries and you can slap on a class 3 tow hitch from anybody if you want. If you can tow 5,000lbs with a truck just by slapping on a class 3 hitch, then to my mind it has a 5,000lb towing rating. It seems though from the 91 build sheet that with the 91 you also needed to have the alloy wheels. I suspect the 235s or the little rims weren't weight rated for the 3rd row package and a 500lb trailer tongue.

I'm pretty sure that you are correct on the rating with the LTX tires and alloy rims. I'm not disputing that. The original 80's Cool went over this subject plenty of times 5-6 years ago before it became the 80's North American site and then the NorCal 80's broke off later becoming the NorCal Wagons. A lot of the Aussie guys were pitching the difference around because most Americans had no idea what the 4 holes were for much less the intention to use them when they did find out. The common inderstanding was 3500 on the pintle/frame cross member, 5000 on the 2" sliding frame mounted receiver. The frame mounter unit uses 6 thicker diameter 8.8 bolts spread over the two frame rails. The pintle mounts using 4 narrower 8.8 bolts on the rear crossmember.
The truck is still technically capable of 5000lbs towing (barely) when equipped as you have stated, but to attain that overall rating, the frame mounted receiver is needed,

You would think that heavier springs would be needed, but that doesn't appear to be the case with the way Toyota speced the truck. The only variables were steelies vs. alloys, and the rear receiver option. Nothing else really affected the rating as all trucks came factory with the Michelin LTX 31"x10.5"x15" tires. I'm not sure about the steel rims, but I've never come across an 80 with factory steel rims although I've heard rumors that a few may have been imported.

Regardless, the 91-92 or 93-97 would be perfect for Baja expeditions.

 

[blupaddler]

So how does the FJ80 have more cargo than the FZJ80? If it is essentially smaller? Were the seats moved farther back? Or does the FJ80 not come with the third row seats (which I thoughtthey did)?
The extra 9 feet of cargo space could be useful.

But not useful enough for me to sell my 94