Diesel 105 and (2) Hi-Lux TDs take on the Rubicon

[ShottsCruisers]

Killer!

 

[ShottsCruisers]

EEE-GADS! No rocker protection on either vehicle?

 

[Brian894x4]

I've been wanting to put together a photo slide show I'd call "The Toyotas of War." I've deployed to 4 war zones and Toyotas were well represented in all of them. In the last two (Afghanistan and Kuwait) I had a digital camera so I took lots of pictures.

I hadn't heard about problems with the Tacomas in Afghanistan - I saw more than a few there back in 2003. However, most of the trucks were Hiluxes, and often with RHD (from Australia or Japan, I presume.) I wonder if the main reason to go with Hiluxes has more to do with the fact that you can get them with a diesel engine. Since HMMWVS and every other tactical vehicle in the Army runs on diesel, having diesel vehicles makes for much easier logistics.

Over in Kuwait, where getting fuel wasn't an issue, all of our non-tactical vehicles ran on gasoline.

If you get some pics and want to send some my way and I'll post them on this page:

http://www.brian894x4.com/MILITARYTOYOTAS.html

I never could get a straight answer on what broke down on the Afghan Tacomas, but was hinted that it was the front suspensions that failed on them. I don't know if it was the rack and pinion steering or other parts of the suspension. They were completely bone stock as far as I can tell and pretty well overloaded as you can see from the pics.

Even if they did eventually break down, I think the fact that they survived for a while under those conditions is admirable. They no doubt keep a lot of our guys alive over there.

I was told a major reason they went with Tacomas was the gas V-6 engine, which was much quieter than any diesel and had enough power to get them out of an area at high speed and undetected. Something the Humvees and diesel Toyotas couldn't do as well.

I'm not sure if any are left over there. The last pictures I saw was a cluster of wrecked and shot up Tacomas sitting in a bone yard waiting for disposal, but those pictures were removed from where I saw them for security reasons.

Scott,

sorry I didn't mean imply that you would intentionally post these guy's pictures or didn't ask permission to take photos. I know better.

 

[preacherman]

I spent a lot of time in a 105 like that while I was in Africa this Jan. They are sooooooo sweet and have gobs of power to boot.

 

[locrwln]

Well, I will add my drool to growing pool for the 105. TD, manual, wagon, SA front and rear...why couldn't we get that here? I want one, pleeeaase.

Jack

 

[calamaridog]

The 105 diesel is not a turbo diesel. The good turbo diesel is only in the IFS model.

 

[Scott Brady]

Only downside was the early 90's era IFS" and to which I might add that it (with at most a rear locker if was factory) was doing the Rubicon behind a double locked HZJ105 fer goodness sakes, how much of a downside is that!

It was just meant that it was not solid axle. That variant of truck could have been sourced with the beam axle, which would have been an advantage IMHO. These guys were also quite throttle happy, something those little CV's were not built for (especially behind a diesel).

 

[DaveInDenver]

It was just meant that it was not solid axle. That variant of truck could have been sourced with the beam axle, which would have been an advantage IMHO. These guys were also quite throttle happy, something those little CV's were not built for (especially behind a diesel).

Yeah, just pushin' buttons, Scott. I do think people poo-poo the Hi-Trac IFS too much, it's plenty rugged for what it is. ;-)

 

[ShottsCruisers]

the Hi-Trac IFS too much, it's plenty rugged for what it is. ;-)

Until I see a failure on my 100 (ain't gonna happen) the IFS is my fav!

 

[durango_60]

Until I see a failure on my 100 (ain't gonna happen) the IFS is my fav!

You are one confident guy making a statement like that...

 

[ShottsCruisers]

You are one confident guy making a statement like that...

Didn't always feel that way. After 6-years of wheeling my 100 I have no worries. I am also a crawler and not a skinny pedal dude.

 

[Scott Brady]

Until I see a failure on my 100 (ain't gonna happen) the IFS is my fav!

What about the diff., knuckle, A-Arm and CV failures of the 100 IFS?

John, you know you are my bud, by IFS was only introduced as a solution for highway ride and handling. For trails like the Rubicon, there is no substitute for a solid axle (articulation, durability, clearance under compression, lift height, etc.).

I like the IFS on my truck, but I would give it up in a heartbeat for a beam axle (factory) option.

 

[ShottsCruisers]

What about the diff., knuckle, A-Arm and CV failures of the 100 IFS?

John, you know you are my bud, by IFS was only introduced as a solution for highway ride and handling. For trails like the Rubicon, there is no substitute for a solid axle (articulation, durability, clearance under compression, lift height, etc.).

I like the IFS on my truck, but I would give it up in a heartbeat for a beam axle (factory) option.

I'd prefer a Jeep with a SFA for the Rubicon as well as those other handfulls of extreme trails. For the rest....I'll stick with my IFS.

So far there's been no CV failures (Slee had one due to skinny pedal and he said the 80 axle probably would have snapped too), no A-arm failures, and no knuckle failures (that we've heard of). One must throw out the 98 and 99 2-pinion diff failures as it was a poor design (like the rear is on the new Titan...for '08 Nisan went to a 4-pinion rear). There's been only a few 4-pinion failures (me as one due to driver error). The diff failures are not an IFS issue and they are cured with a ARB front locker which anybody wanting to run wild stuff will upgrade too.

The 100-series V8 IFS has been trouble free. And between weight and road speeds I've put my 100 through hell far more than either of my 80's. It's like new.

Talk about SAS on your Taco? I did speak to Slee about buying his SAS 100 with 38's but he bent it up pretty good plus I am concerned I could service it down here.

 

[ShottsCruisers]

I'd prefer a Jeep with a SFA for the Rubicon as well as those other handfulls of extreme trails. For the rest....I'll stick with my IFS.

So far there's been no CV failures (Slee had one due to skinny pedal and he said the 80 axle probably would have snapped too), no A-arm failures, and no knuckle failures (that we've heard of). One must throw out the 98 and 99 2-pinion diff failures as it was a poor design (like the rear is on the new Titan...for '08 Nisan went to a 4-pinion rear). There's been only a few 4-pinion failures (me as one due to driver error). The diff failures are not an IFS issue and they are cured with a ARB front locker which anybody wanting to run wild stuff will upgrade too.

The 100-series V8 IFS has been trouble free. And between weight and road speeds I've put my 100 through hell far more than either of my 80's. It's like new.

Talk about SAS on your Taco? I did speak to Slee about buying his SAS 100 with 38's but he bent it up pretty good plus I am concerned I could service it down here.

My IFS didn't give out when I was bouncing on Pyeatte Draw. I bent my rear arm in two directions while hopping climbing lendges on 3 of the 4 wheels at one time. You were there.

 

[Pskhaat]

So far there's been no CV failures...The 100-series V8 IFS has been trouble free

Please ask Christo about my wife's truck that was in his shop recently. No failures--and despite the current ``era of the 100''--I wouldn't call it trouble-free.