4Runner (3rd Gen) or Land Cruiser (Series 80)

[Destructo]

4Runner (3rd Gen) or Land Cruiser (Series 80)?

I'm selling my 4X4 van to get a vehicle with a roof top tent. I've read quite a bit on the Cruiser; it seems to be bullet proof, runs forever, but gets bad gas mileage and always has cracked leather seats. The 4Runner gets better gas mileage, and is offered in a manual tranny, but that seems to be the only advantage. Any other downfalls of the 4Runner? Any advice??

Thanks!!!!!!!

 

[Utah KJ]

You meet the nicest people driving 3rd gen 4runners.

 

[luv2xplor]

I own a 3rd gen 4runner. always wanted an 80 series. gas mileage kept me from it still want one.........

 

[Destructo]

What kind of mileage are you boys seeing in you 4runners?

 

[4runnerteq]

myy 97 runner with 285/75s is consistent at 16 mpg on hwy. need to check it with the gps for sure though. Used to do 19-20 pretty easy.Cruiser has more room than runner, pretty big cool factor as well. But I'm not sure Id trade my runner for one. 3.4 engine is a great engine. decent power. not as bulky. In my area parts are easier to come by. Might also look at 4th gen runners or even 100 series cruisers. I think id rather have a 100 over 80.

 

[AxleIke]

I went through this a year ago. I went with the 4 runner for the mileage, but to be honest, it isn't that much different. Several friends are getting 13-14 with 35" tires, 4" lift, RTT's and bumpers/sliders. I get 17-18 with 32" tires, a manual tranny, and a 2" lift, no bumpers/sliders.

To be honest, I wish I'd gotten the LC. The 4runner is nice inside and fun to drive, but the LC is bigger, and has more potential, IMO, than the 4runner. That said, it costs more. Around here, its about 10k to get a low mileage, good condition LC, and similar for the 4runner. However, mods are cheaper on the 4Runner. That, and the runner is still IFS.

I've spent a lot of time with IFS, and never had a solid axle rig. My old IFS set up was as built as you can get (well, didn't end up getting the RCV axles, but that was only because I got rid of it before they were really available). I find IFS to be frustrating and difficult to modify reliably. My new truck (99 4Runner), I decided to modify only slightly to give it maximum reliability, so I stuck with a 2" lift. While the alignment shop claims it is in perfect spec, it is not.

I'm sure you'll be happy with either choice. Personally, I'd get the LC. But, that is just my experience.

 

[Martinjmpr]

I got about 23 mpg fully loaded coming back from Utah last week on my 3rd gen/automatic. If you can keep your speed below 65 the 3.4 will give really good MPG.

I've never found the IFS to be a limiting factor, as any trail tough enough to require a SAS would not be of interest to me anyway. Currently running 32's (265/75/16, technically about 31.6") and stock suspension on my '99 "Tall Coil" model. The E-locker is a great feature.

I'm not crazy about the slushbox on the 4runner but I have to grudgingly admit that it makes for a nice, easy off-road experience. On steep downhills I do have to get on the brakes a bit and the brakes on the 3rd gen are not great (they're not terrible, but the discs are small and it has drums on the rear.)

I'd say the LC is an "enthusiast's vehicle." IOW, if you really need/want a LC, then only an LC will do (and presumably you will be OK with getting 10-12 MPG.) If you are "on the fence" or need an all-around vehicle (DD as well as off-road) then the 4runner is probably a better choice.

Having said all that, IMO the 3rd gens are somewhat overvalued on the used market, as are all Toyotas. Sooner or later this will correct itself but in the meantime I do a bit when I see someone selling a 3rd gen with 150k miles for $10,000.

 

[Elbee]

Both are great vehicles, you can't do wrong choosing between the two.
I own a 3rd Gen 4runner with a 3.4.
The 4runner gets 17 in town and highway 21ish and traveling empty on the highway I have seen 24ish several times.
I am running I think 31.6s

The 4runner is great trail and overland rig. It is just as capable and even more capable than many rigs out there. I think its probably the best choice for an all around (DD & overland) rig. I think it is still roomy and can store a lot of gear and a lot of people all at once.

Pros:
Good MPG for a SUV
Parts are really easy to find in the US and abroad and are usually fairly cheap
You can get a newer 4runner with less miles for the money than an 80series (usually)
Good stock ride height, especially for '99 and '00
The skinnier body style can fit in on trails and streets where an 80 would have more difficulties
Rear window rolls down
Its part-time 4wd. (helps with MPG and doing donuts lol)
You can get a 4runner with a manual transmission
Quieter

The 80 series great but IMO a little pricey for their age.
In general they may require more maintenance (age is biggest factor) and possibly more money spent on them after initial purchase due to old suspension etc..
If you have a bit of extra cash then i may go for the 80 series or possibly a 100 series (Or import a diesel LC that is from 1987 or before)

Check the LC section and i'm sure they can convince you of the sheer awesomeness of the 80series, also take a look at ih8mud.com

 

[AxleIke]

I got about 23 mpg fully loaded coming back from Utah last week on my 3rd gen/automatic. If you can keep your speed below 65 the 3.4 will give really good MPG.

I've never found the IFS to be a limiting factor, as any trail tough enough to require a SAS would not be of interest to me anyway. Currently running 32's (265/75/16, technically about 31.6") and stock suspension on my '99 "Tall Coil" model. The E-locker is a great feature.

I'm not crazy about the slushbox on the 4runner but I have to grudgingly admit that it makes for a nice, easy off-road experience. On steep downhills I do have to get on the brakes a bit and the brakes on the 3rd gen are not great (they're not terrible, but the discs are small and it has drums on the rear.)

I'd say the LC is an "enthusiast's vehicle." IOW, if you really need/want a LC, then only an LC will do (and presumably you will be OK with getting 10-12 MPG.) If you are "on the fence" or need an all-around vehicle (DD as well as off-road) then the 4runner is probably a better choice.

Having said all that, IMO the 3rd gens are somewhat overvalued on the used market, as are all Toyotas. Sooner or later this will correct itself but in the meantime I do a bit when I see someone selling a 3rd gen with 150k miles for $10,000.

10-12 is what I thought the LC's got, but many are getting 12-15 regularly. Not great, but, IMO, not much worse than the 4runner.

You make a good point though, if you remain at stock height, especially on the 99's, the IFS is a good enough system. Handles really well.

I've never seen 23-24 on a 3.4L, but it could be the mileage/driving style. I will have to see what happens if I granny a tank or two.

 

[tacollie]

What size of tires do you want to run? It is a fair amount of work to go larger than 33s on a 4runner. In the end size and weight were my factors in choosing a 4runner over an 80. I went to moab with a buddy with a similar built 80 to my 4runner. 33s, 2" lift, winch and bumper, and roof rack. I cruised 75 while he was doing 60 up I70. We both went about 250 miles between fill ups but he was buying another 6 to 7 gallons of gas each time. A 80 would probably do better than a 4runner with a RTT.

 

[Rallyroo]

I went through this a year ago. I went with the 4 runner for the mileage, but to be honest, it isn't that much different. Several friends are getting 13-14 with 35" tires, 4" lift, RTT's and bumpers/sliders. I get 17-18 with 32" tires, a manual tranny, and a 2" lift, no bumpers/sliders.

To be honest, I wish I'd gotten the LC. The 4runner is nice inside and fun to drive, but the LC is bigger, and has more potential, IMO, than the 4runner. That said, it costs more. Around here, its about 10k to get a low mileage, good condition LC, and similar for the 4runner. However, mods are cheaper on the 4Runner. That, and the runner is still IFS.

When I was looking couple years ago, it was cheaper to buy an 80 when I was cross shopping between the 80 and 3rd gen 4Runner. The 80's also had lower miles on the odo than the 4Runners. I think the high gas prices scared away a lot of potential 80 buyers.

I'm running 33" tires on my 80 and I get 14-17 mpg. Which isn't too bad.

The only thing I'm missing is the manual transmission. The 80 is the first automatic in my entire driving career. I actually had to "learn" how to drive automatic as I kept instinctively wanting to step on the non-existing clutch.

 

[Rallyroo]

Having said all that, IMO the 3rd gens are somewhat overvalued on the used market, as are all Toyotas. Sooner or later this will correct itself but in the meantime I do a bit when I see someone selling a 3rd gen with 150k miles for $10,000.

Martinjmpr noticed the same thing about used 3rd gen 4Runners. That's how I ended up with an 80 instead. The 80 was cheaper and also had way lower miles than that on the clock.

 

[Duder]

When I was looking couple years ago, it was cheaper to buy an 80 when I was cross shopping between the 80 and 3rd gen 4Runner. The 80's also had lower miles on the odo than the 4Runners. I think the high gas prices scared away a lot of potential 80 buyers.

I'm running 33" tires on my 80 and I get 14-17 mpg. Which isn't too bad.

The only thing I'm missing is the manual transmission. The 80 is the first automatic in my entire driving career. I actually had to "learn" how to drive automatic as I kept instinctively wanting to step on the non-existing clutch.

I have found the same to be true in the LA area - the 3rd-gen 4Runners seem to be priced pretty equivalently (if not higher than) FZJ80 Cruisers. I can see the arguments for and against either vehicle, and was considering both of them as the OP is. I went with the Land Cruiser because a) I found a good deal on one with factory lockers, b) roomier than a 4Runner, c) solid front axle, d) I think they are cooler.

My buddy with a 3rd-gen 4Runner limited gets very similar mileage to what I've been getting in the 80. Both trucks are lifted on larger-than-stock tires, and not re-geared. He paid more for his rig about a year ago than I paid for mine last month, for simlar mileage. His 4Runner is in better condition cosmetically though.

Also - the 80 is my only automatic vehicle as well, and I find myself stomping on the floor where the clutch pedal should be about once per week when I go to start it up!

 

[AxleIke]

I think the auto is easier off road as well. I've never had one, but driving a few has me convinced. My old rig was a manual but with 4 gearing options out of the transfercase, with 10.7:1 at the lowest, it was easy. Now, with my 99, I find myself riding the clutch all over the place. An auto would be much easier.