Which Cruiser for Baja backroads?

[expeditionswest]

Mike Stevens
Baja Bound

Hi Mike,

Baja is a WONDERFUL place. I have driven tens of thousands of miles south of the border, and it is full of adventure and beautiful places to visit and explore.

I am going to assume that you will be traveling to Mexico unsupported, which is to say one or two vehicles without a guide or tour service.

Given that criteria, any Land Cruiser will be an excellent choice, BUT I would focus my attention on one of two factors: Serviceability or Reliability

An FJ60 is a very serviceable vehicle, as nearly every system could be repaired in the field. Preventative and predictive maintenance could be performed to limit the likelyhood of failure, and spare parts could by carried to allow remote service.

If you do not select an FJ60, then you should select a newer vehicle with the lowest mileage as that allows for the greatest likelihood of reliability. That is the approach I take. None of my expedition vehicles are driven past 80-90,000 miles. Even Toyota's have a limited service life when operated in harsh environments. So given the complexity of newer vehicles and the fact that many systems on the FJ/FZJ80 and UZJ100 cannot be serviced remotely, then purchase as babied and new as you can afford.

My recommendation would be to find one of the following:

1996-1997 FZJ80 with less than 120,000 miles
1998-2000 UZJ100 with less than 100,000 miles (an even more complex vehice)

The trail advantage of the FZJ80 is of little consequence on 99% of Mexico's roads, as the roads are driven by full size, US OEM trucks. Roads can be rough, but are typically wide. Beaches dont present a size issue either. I have traveled thousands of miles in Mexico with 80's and 100's and they both do fantastic.

Whatever you choose will make for a great Baja machine. All Land Cruisers are built for just what you are intending to do.

"Transport people and equipment in the harshest environments of the world with the greatest reliability and capability"

Hope this helps

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

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:


***What's interesting about my post? I don't get it. What I do get is that you present this stuff without any timeline so it misleads readers.

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

**< 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

***This was written LONG ago when the first signs of trouble with A-arms were JUST being discovered in Australia. Since NOBODY knew about these issues yet I inquired via forum first then my dealer second. Since we've learned my ball joints showed wear and therefore I got knew ones which also happened to included new A-arms as they're sold as a set. So far, no UZJ models have experienced cracks (that I've read about). Is it possible they too could fail? Sure. Anything's possible. So again, what's interesting now about my post?

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?"

***I got a free steering rack out of this. GREAT DEALER!

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

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.

***No pants down. You are either misinformed or have selective reading. Anybody who knows the timeline of these posts/events knows that my 100 has not experienced cracked A-arms. Furthermore, I'm not the one who provides the data. It's the postees in the forum. All cracks to date have been on TD models. What do I have to do with that data? Nothing my friend. My pants are strapped on well!

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

Dude, there's no 100-Series in your signature. Without butt-on and wheel-on experience you are not the "best" source for comparision experience. Sorry about that. If a 100 was in your stable you'd join the sides of the other converted ones. 80-owners who spoke like you then later bought a 100 and suddddup. Face it, admit it, and why it bothers you (and some others) I don't get it. The 100 is improved in almost EVERY aspect over the 80.
By the way, Becky and I looked at 2 80's today but passed on both. Still lookin' though.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

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.

Luv yer quotes Shark! One comment then a couple of questions for ya if I may?:

Comment: 80 and 100 front diffs both suck. In fact, I think they're the same and they take a same R&P set. I'm glad I have ARB.

Questions:
1. Where can you show me that I said the IFS/100 is better at rock crawling, etc.? You can't. So, we agree. (And I luv my 80 for that, just like I hate my 80 compared to the 100 90+ other percent of the time)
2. This thread began focused on Baja trips, not rock crawling. I'm certain you agree that the overall experience on roads like these would go to the 100. I think we agree here too?
3. Where can you show me that I ever said the IFS/100 was a superior system off-road (I'm assuming you meant difficult trails, etc.)?

If this thread began "Which vehicle would be best for me to buy, an 80 or 100, if I want to run very difficult trails in it"? My reply would have been an 80. Let's keep perspective with the thread? Baja runs are long, bumpy, require hauling gear though are not "difficult" or "rock crawliy" in nature.


A good friend wrote this about Baja roads in this thread:
"The trail advantage of the FZJ80 is of little consequence on 99% of Mexico's roads, as the roads are driven by full size, US OEM trucks. Roads can be rough, but are typically wide. Beaches dont present a size issue either. I have traveled thousands of miles in Mexico with 80's and 100's and they both do fantastic."

That application sets the 100 WAY ahead of an 80 IMO. I'll take the power, the added safety, the comfort, etc etc of the 100 and take my chances on breakage. (Soctt brings up an excellent point about serviceability) (Heck, I'd probably take our Taco to Baja before I'd take the 80)

 

[White Shark]

This subject has been hashed to death. Shotts, you are the Pope of the Church of IFS. If a Toyota suspension engineer said IFS was crap, you wouldn't believe him. You'd argue until he filed a restraining order. I know you have an 80 and a 100. So what. You are not the world authority on suspension systems. Every 4x4 magazine editor, most rock crawling experts, and many others prefer SFA. Sure, IFS has it's place, trophy trucks, Baja race trucks, etc. You'll also pay more to get that system in a Cruiser because you'll have to buy an expensive UZJ. You just enjoy preaching about the smooth IFS ride. The vast majority of us are quite happy with the "archaic" inept SFA and nonTRAC systems. Quit bagging on the SFA, 60's, and 80's. If your 80 is so incapable, please sell it to someone who'll appreciate it's abilities. Somehow we'll manage to survive. The UZJ100 is not the ultimate truck. It's nice, it serves a purpose, but so do other models.



I'd even look for a low mile 91-95. I see them quite often with less than 70K miles selling in the $5-12K range. Baja would be nice in a UZJ100 but the 80's and 60's are more serviceable. I have a 92 and it's built for long distance overland trips in Baja. I set it up to range reliably from Alaska south to Baja. The A440F tranny is bullet proof, the 350 is easily serviced and parts are readily available. It also has more power than an UZJ100. Now that you have a ton of opinions, go drive a few trucks offroad and try to get a sense of coils vs. leaf springs, etc. The UZJ100 with IFS is a nonissue as it's out of your price range. Both 60's and 80's will serve you well for your needs.


By the way Shotts, my 80 series has over 210K plus hard miles and has yet to fall apart under heavy wheeling conditions, especially the SOLID FRONT AXLE. By the way, this pic is Shotts UZJ100 in a Moab parking lot. Didn't it break the outer CV joint in the parking lot? Ouch. By the way, didn't you also recently replace a lower control arm and full assembly on one side too? Hmmm. No thanks, I'll keep my 80. Maybe you should have taken your 80 to Moab instead...

 

[alaskacruiser]

This subject has been hashed to death. Shotts, you are the Pope of the Church of IFS. If a Toyota suspension engineer said IFS was crap, you wouldn't believe him. You'd argue until he filed a restraining order. I know you have an 80 and a 100. So what. You are not the world authority on suspension systems.

White Shark- made my day. Hilarious and true.

 

[robbie]

To be fair to shotts, the wheel bearing were loose on both sides. Yes a CV was worn, and clicking. But it may be treaced to inproper serviceing of the CV. Do not know about the lower a arm, but he has stated he has had some stuff replaced under warranty.
personally after owning both a FJ 62 and 2 80 series, I would take a coil suspension over leafs any day. Servicability of 80's (91-97) from my stand point is about the same. Sure the engine on the 93-97 can be harder to work on, but if brought up to snuff before a long trip or on a maintance schudule should be no different then the 91-92. All years can be a B*tch if you do not know your truck and depend on others. It may even be easier to work on a 95-97 engine becasue you can interface easily with a computer and it will tell you or give you better information than eariler EFI system. As for the 100 series you can acess more information with a computer that can help you figure out what needs fixing even better. The 100 series can get better fuel ecomany and require less service than a 80 series. I personally do not like the IFS much, but it servies the needs of north america market better than the SFA. While the minority of users want SFA, the IFS stuff can work for all but a few of us.
After reading this thread, My suggestion to you find the best cruiser you can afford and then get it serviced and figure out the weakness of the vechicle and know how to work on it your self. Carry the spare parts that you may need, do not depend on others to bail you out.
You may even want to look at a quad cab Taco with TRD package and set it up with a topper. Better ecomany, and they wheel great for all the stuff you may do and be cheaper in the long run.
good luck robbie

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

White Shark- made my day. Hilarious and true.

I agree! Hilarious! And true! (Well, most of it. )

In fact, I must comment on the thread.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

This subject has been hashed to death. Shotts, you are the Pope of the Church of IFS. If a Toyota suspension engineer said IFS was crap, you wouldn't believe him. You'd argue until he filed a restraining order. I know you have an 80 and a 100. So what. You are not the world authority on suspension systems.

***What subject? Which Cruiser is the better experience for Baja-type trails? I don't ever recall ever seeing this debate? Some (like you) read my post regarding the long Baja driving experience on those Baja-type of trails. DRIVING both an 80 and a 100 on those trails and evaluating the experience will gain the 100 as "the driving" choice for the vast majority of the drivers. It's simply a better ride. YOU brought up SFA, IFS, blah blah. Who cares what's underneath? BOTH are ultra-reliable. It's the driving experience that makes a difference on long trips like that. That's what I wrote about and was again twisted by others.

Every 4x4 magazine editor, most rock crawling experts, and many others prefer SFA. Sure, IFS has it's place, trophy trucks, Baja race trucks, etc. You'll also pay more to get that system in a Cruiser because you'll have to buy an expensive UZJ. You just enjoy preaching about the smooth IFS ride. The vast majority of us are quite happy with the "archaic" inept SFA and nonTRAC systems. Quit bagging on the SFA, 60's, and 80's. If your 80 is so incapable, please sell it to someone who'll appreciate it's abilities. Somehow we'll manage to survive. The UZJ100 is not the ultimate truck. It's nice, it serves a purpose, but so do other models.

***Do you NOT read all my words within a post? I'll say it again just for you!
Rock crawling (your favorite words)...severe off roading...the extreme most difficult trails...I PREFER MY 80 AND YES IT HAS A SOLID AXLE UNDER THE FRONT. (Thank god somebody told me about that. )
Now, to address your selective reading:
1. When did I ever say my 80 was incapable?
2. Did I not say in the last post we're looking for another 80?

No, the 100 is not the ultimate truck. It has been dramatically improved in so many areas over the 80 that one should be objective enough to admit it. If I gave you mine I don't think you'd call it a "turd" any more.



I'd even look for a low mile 91-95. I see them quite often with less than 70K miles selling in the $5-12K range. Baja would be nice in a UZJ100 but the 80's and 60's are more serviceable. I have a 92 and it's built for long distance overland trips in Baja. I set it up to range reliably from Alaska south to Baja. The A440F tranny is bullet proof, the 350 is easily serviced and parts are readily available. It also has more power than an UZJ100. Now that you have a ton of opinions, go drive a few trucks offroad and try to get a sense of coils vs. leaf springs, etc. The UZJ100 with IFS is a nonissue as it's out of your price range. Both 60's and 80's will serve you well for your needs.

***I never adressed this in my original post. Why I get asked about it I don't know? All I spoke of was how much nicer a ride a 100 would be on a long trip and on those trail types. Both are very reliable. Both would make for a great Baja trip vehicle. (Did you catch that last sentence?) But my suggestion of the 100 over the 80 stands for a trip like that.


By the way Shotts, my 80 series has over 210K plus hard miles and has yet to fall apart under heavy wheeling conditions, especially the SOLID FRONT AXLE. By the way, this pic is Shotts UZJ100 in a Moab parking lot. Didn't it break the outer CV joint in the parking lot? Ouch. By the way, didn't you also recently replace a lower control arm and full assembly on one side too? Hmmm. No thanks, I'll keep my 80. Maybe you should have taken your 80 to Moab instead...

Luv that paragraph...AND the picture.

So in 210K miles you've never replaced parts in or rebuilt your SFA? WOW! THAT'S AMAZING! Shark, you need to read your paragraph again. It's hilarious!
It's actually amazing it didn't break after running Golden Spike. We took every hard line except Double Whammy, had zero struggles and it rode like a limo. I'd a luvvvved you to be there.
Didn't you read your OWN posts about ME? I got FREE lower ball joints from my dealer. When you order lower ball joints for the UZJ you get new A-arms too. Now note the plural. I got BOTH sides re-done. Great dealer.
I missed the 80 until I hit the trail. Glad the 100 went. 80 goes from here on though to Moab. It's better suited for those other trails I want to run there. OOOO, DID YOU CATCH THAT LAST SENTENCE!

Shark! I see ya out there I'll getcha a tall one of your choice. Hey, let's start a new debate. What's the best beer? My choice...Guiness Stout (not draft....unless it's Stout on draft). Yours?

 

[NorCalDoug]

So how does the FJ80 have more cargo than the FZJ80? If it is essentially smaller?

Could be the 3rd row seats in the FZJ80 that eat up the 9 cu.ft..

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

While we're comparing 80 years, I have a question:

We looked at 2 80's this weekend though we passed on both.
One was a 95 that was thrashed. The other was a 97 but without lockers. We drove the 95 (leather and loaded) and it sure seemed quieter and tighter than our 93 (cloth interior).

QUESTION: Were the 95+ models quieter than earlier models due to upgrades? Or, is it possible my "cloth seated-no slider rear window" is lacking the insulation that "leather and loaded" models have?

The answer may help me to decide what to limit my 80 search to. THANKS! John

 

[White Shark]

I agree with Robbie in the fact that the market drives production, and that direction is towards the IFS. That system is superior to SFA for the mass market as it allows stability, especially for those unused to large vehicles. The IFS system has it's place. Others of us, with much IFS experience, will continue to enjoy the benefits of the SFA as we find benefits with this system. Good maintenance and personal invovlement are key to a reliable vehicle.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

I agree with Robbie in the fact that the market drives production, and that direction is towards the IFS. That system is superior to SFA for the mass market as it allows stability, especially for those unused to large vehicles. The IFS system has it's place. Others of us, with much IFS experience, will continue to enjoy the benefits of the SFA as we find benefits with this system. Good maintenance and personal invovlement are key to a reliable vehicle.

I wouldn't want IFS under my 80 for anything.

 

[White Shark]

Could be the 3rd row seats in the FZJ80 that eat up the 9 cu.ft..

The FJ80's also came with the 3rd row seats. It's a possibility that they may have excluded those from the measurements though.

 

[White Shark]

While we're comparing 80 years, I have a question:

We looked at 2 80's this weekend though we passed on both.
One was a 95 that was thrashed. The other was a 97 but without lockers. We drove the 95 (leather and loaded) and it sure seemed quieter and tighter than our 93 (cloth interior).

QUESTION: Were the 95+ models quieter than earlier models due to upgrades? Or, is it possible my "cloth seated-no slider rear window" is lacking the insulation that "leather and loaded" models have?

The answer may help me to decide what to limit my 80 search to. THANKS! John

I have the cloth in my 92 with sliding rear windows. I wonder why your cloth equipped 93 truck came with fixed read windows. They must have changed to optional window/leather packages in 93 when leather was first offered. I've never seen any 91 or 92's with leather. It may not have been available until 93.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

I have the cloth in my 92 with sliding rear windows. I wonder why your cloth equipped 93 truck came with fixed read windows. They must have changed to optional window/leather packages in 93 when leather was first offered. I've never seen any 91 or 92's with leather. It may not have been available until 93.

Mine never had 3rd row seats either. All I know is the '95 I drove was MUCH quieter. MUCH quieter. I want that in my next 80. If the leather and loaded 93 and 94's are as silent as the 95+ then I'll consider them. If not, it's 95+ only.

 

[Tools R Us]

The '96 & '97's we looked at seemed quieter and more solid than the earlier ones, the later ones have more sound deadening. My '96 LX is quieter than my brothers '96 Cruiser, maybe just a mileage thing, 47K vs 115K? Or the LX may have more sound deadening?

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

The '96 & '97's we looked at seemed quieter and more solid than the earlier ones, the later ones have more sound deadening. My '96 LX is quieter than my brothers '96 Cruiser, maybe just a mileage thing, 47K vs 115K? Or the LX may have more sound deadening?

Ya, I've read enough already Kevin. I'm sticking to a 95+ and hopefully an LX. This will be a daily driver so the 100 can be a dedicated trip-mobile. I'll want as quiet and nice as I can get so I actually leave the 100 parked.

Too bad the friggin' 100's cost so much. I'd a daily drove a used (98-99) one, then 80-ized it...cut the frames and done all kinds of aggressive crap. Maybe even SAS-it? No funding though due to the existing "100 turd". (There's a joke for ya White Shark! )

 

[spartan]

Depends on how big you are - no really - I'm serious. I owned two FJ40's back in the 70's and early 80's. Then I played with a great built up FJ60 for 13 years. Found out that '97 was the last year for solid axles and bought one - still have it, but my wife drives it all the time cause it's too small for me. If you fit in an 80 series go that route, if not, get an FJ60 - more room for everything.

 

[NorCalDoug]

Funny about the size thing. We have 2 LX 450s. Mine seems to have more leg room than the wifes. Both are 97s. Odd. 80s w/o power seats will have more leg room than those with power seats...but y'all already know that.

From what I've heard, solid rear windows (i.e. no sliders at all, both sides) came on 80s that did not come with rear seats from the factory. No passengers in the cargo area...no need for sliding rear windows -- apparently that was the logic used. This info came from CDan...I have no further need to verify I also saw one in person (the rig owned by Big Moose).

I've read in various places that the LX 450 has more sound deadening material the the Land Cruisers of the same model years, but still have no good proof (as in someone doing a side-by-side comparison), so as far as I'm concerned, the jury's still out on this. I've also read that sometime on or after 95, the 80 series got more sound proofing...but again, I don't know of anyone doing a side-by-side comparison, so...dunno.

My tires are noisy. Sound proofing doesn't matter to me. If I don't like what I'm hearing...I turn up the volume on the stereo

 

[landtank]

Depends on how big you are - no really - I'm serious. I owned two FJ40's back in the 70's and early 80's. Then I played with a great built up FJ60 for 13 years. Found out that '97 was the last year for solid axles and bought one - still have it, but my wife drives it all the time cause it's too small for me. If you fit in an 80 series go that route, if not, get an FJ60 - more room for everything.

I heard there was a kit out there to give you 2" more leg room in the electric seat 80s