Life_in_4Lo
Explorer
pskhaat said:
IFS continues to be used, just not torsion bar IFS. That was never done again by Toyota. The coilover setup is vastly superior and upgrades offer much more improvement than anything that can be done with t-bars.
It's like going from leaf to coils on sfa Land Cruisers. Toyota never went back to leaf spring front axles either.
If the 100 had coilovers, it would be so much more mod-able and make huge improvements, otherwise i really think it's great. Even as is, it's an amazing suv.
The sfa has kept going in Toyota production around the world where needed. In reality, it's just not palatable for the US market spending $60-80K on a luxury vehicle.
SFA, in Toyota's eyes, is just not marketable and makes too many sacrifices on road.
I can see their point I guess, but wish they revived the sfa on the FJCruiser. (But, they reused the 120 platform for it so I guess this is a cost issue. )
Is the I6 a better design? Both the I6 and Solid axle are better in a offroad-specific purpose suv maybe.
For the requirements of frequent road use, lighter offroad duty and passenger comfort & space (the requirements of the 100 and every toyota suv after) the IFS and V8 are better choices. Also, the V8 has more HP/TQ and is a smooth engine.
The I6 is easier to work on in the field but the V8 more compact. The 80 has a long nose and that takes up cabin space. The 100 is more accomidating because of this fundamental difference, not just the increase in dimensions.
Honestly, tho the I6 is a great truck engine, I prefer the V engine just for the extra space. Besides, Toyota's truck engine- the 1GR-FE, a vvti v6, is a wonderful chain driven truck engine though somehow, I think the I6 1FZ is far more robust and they don't do 300,000 mile designs on engines anymore (i dont think). I also think the V8 w/ 5spd is so nice, and the new 200's 5.7...well it's just awesome.
But the 80 is just fundamentally an offroad suv. No compromise- just made to be the best, most luxurious, offroad-focused suv.
Despite arguments, the SFA just rocks. It's just better offroad. Doesn't have to be rockcrawling or tough obstacles. If you're using it offroad day in, day out, year after year, "abuse it and put it away wet" than SFA is it.
Sure it's got tradeoffs- all of them on-road. That doesn't lighten the weaknesses of the 80 (compared to the 100).
mix the two- put a 4.7L/5spd in the 80 or SFA the 100... that takes a lot of the complaints out of both and creates the uber-LC! actually, I'm a big fan of all of Toyota's suv's. I think they are the best engineered.
). Anyway, I will say that I have no particular affinity towards the latter years. They do indeed have a noticable power punch later in the band (you can tell the breathing is better with the variable valving) that the earlier models do not, but genuinely it's on the fun pedal and I've never had the need in our 1999 off- or on-road. The transmission gears and ECU shift points are matched nicely with each small change in the 2UZ-FE over the years.