Land cruiser straight 6 vs V8?

[DaveInDenver]

161 hp at a low rpm is not enough for highway speeds up grades in a set up 4 door. Your minimum numbers are 210hp/280tq. For the off-road stuff it's all about the gearing, not the engine.

LOL. I lived with something like 115 HP 22R-E (and probably struggled to get 100 HP at elevation) with a very heavy pickup for a decade and half and you deal with it. I've always said the kick in the nuts with the 22R-E was going so slow and getting poor mileage. I'd be plenty satisfied in 3rd gear, 50 MPH grinds over passes if I was getting 30 MPG. I like my 1GR now but 15 MPG is just stupid because it's not a race car to make up for it. I don't expect miracles, 160 or whatever HP wouldn't bother me if I got range as a trade-off.

 

[DaveInDenver]

The rest of the world? Who do you mean. Australia the same.

I think we here in the U.S. have Cruiser/Hilux envy without knowing the reality. I don't personally have much first hand understanding of the markets overseas. I will say one thing I notice with the Hilux in Australia, though, is the way they configure trucks makes more sense since you can mix and match engine, drivetrain, transmission, trim level and cab configuration.

Here in the U.S. to get a diesel Colorado you have to select a top trim, which seems backwards. I want to start with a 4wd diesel extended cab and then decide if I need SR, SR5 or TRD. That's way it used to be I think, at least it was when I bought my 1991 which I opted for DLX (bench seat, no A/C) instead of SR5 to save some money.

But it does appear that even down under they have gone primarily to double cabs for the top level (I'd say 'car'-like) trucks. So it's not just here.

http://www.toyota.com.au/hilux/~/media/toyota/vehicles/hilux-ng/files/hilux-ebrochure.pdf

 

[vintageracer]

If we are going to include V8 swaps in this I will throw the 5.3L Vortec/ 4L65E swap into the mix. I've done quite a few swaps in the 60 series and it's a game changer. You keep the old school cool of the 60/62 series with updated power to make it easier to drive in modern day traffic.

The HUGE reward in this swap is parts availability and overall knowledge of the platform in shops across this country and others. There are literally millions of Vortec motors out there in scrap yards sitting in wrecked GM and Chevy trucks. Both the OEM and aftermarket support of this platform is only out shined by the support for it's originator, the SBC. The Original iron block 5.3L Vortecs and their aluminum block off spring are considered to be fleet motors, capable of 300-500K miles on basic maintenance. I have an old friend that is a fleet mechanic, has been for 35 years. He tells me that hands down the 5.3L posts better numbers than any other gas motor they've dealt with.

I've swapped in the LS3 6.2L and lord knows it is cooler than he%%, but for the reliability factor and overall maintainability, the 5.3L is hard to beat.

Just one guy's opinion

My daughter drives a 2001 Chevrolet 1500HD 2WD Crew Cab with a 6.0 LS. Just rolled 345K miles! Have always run synthetic oil and change at 5K intervals. Did an oil change yesterday. STILL only used less than 3/4 of a quart of oil over 5K miles @ 345K miles on the truck. Still the original engine. Transmission has been rebuilt once.

The 5.3 and 6.0 LS engines are as good as any V8 engine ever produced by any manufacturer and they can be inexpensively swapped into just about anything!

 

[zimm]

Fully loaded 80s run 7500 pounds.

If the idea of a well designed expedition truck is one that safely navigates most terrain at travels the average rate of speed. 160 is a joke and a complete waist of money. Range can be had by a fuel tank, whereas you can't sudden merge into Chicago traffic with wheezing engine.

Spending the money a swap costs, to get a little more stock tank range, that doesn't cover the roi with fuel savings, and without any performance gains is a waste.

 

[hottahue]

Really? We're travelling with more than 7500 pounds and a 1HZ Engine in a Troopy and it's more than enough...
If you never leave North America a swap is a cool solution. More power, more efficiency. But if you want to leave North America, my advise would be - leave it stock as it is...even if you have not that much power. Travellers are mostly not in a hurry. But for a daily driver in the US, yes, a swap would be a nice option. My favorite would be the Lexus LS V8...

Gesendet von meinem Moto G (4) mit Tapatalk

 

[redthies]

Fully loaded 80s run 7500 pounds.

If the idea of a well designed expedition truck is one that safely navigates most terrain at travels the average rate of speed. 160 is a joke and a complete waist of money. Range can be had by a fuel tank, whereas you can't sudden merge into Chicago traffic with wheezing engine.

Spending the money a swap costs, to get a little more stock tank range, that doesn't cover the roi with fuel savings, and without any performance gains is a waste.

Zimm, I get your point completely, but it's exactly this mentality that has got us stuck with high trim gas engined car-trucks. If more people in NA thought longevity and capability outranked speed/acceleration and number of cup holders we might have had a chance at diesel 70 series etc. I'd be driving a 70 series instead of my 3500 if they were available here.

And I have driven them overseas. They are not as luxurious as a full load domestic, but I buy the mostly stripped down version of the domestic truck anyway.

 

[upcruiser]

If your Cruiser is weighing in at 7,500lbs to go out on an adventure you bought the wrong vehicle first, and second are bringing waaay too much crap.

To the OP's original question if you are thinking mileage and Land Cruiser, you will be sad no matter what. All gas NA trucks are pretty terrible. That said, the 4.7 hundred will eek out a bit more carrying a load than a 4.5. You pretty much can't go wrong with a 100. They have a great reputation for a reason. They can handle modern traffic speeds and cruise well on freeways not being rolling chicanes like 80's can be. I personally love more old school vehicles and really love 60's, despite their 135hp I have never regretted the 2 I had. They sucked on freeways but for traveling and putting around in the back country they were great. In that context I love 80'sband specifically my FJ80 that I have now owned for 16 years. It is in my eyes the perfect bridge of Land Cruisers of old and new, the last F engine, pretty much a tractor but with modern fuel injection. The coil springs make a great ride and have great flex and the 3FE trucks were the last holdout before the interiors went crazy with luxury. Even with unlocked diffs, my FJ80 could go anywhere my FJC with ATrac and all the aids could go on the same size tires, despite its shorter wheelbase (FJC). Locked the 80's are amazing, but even unlocked they are surprisingly good. IFS vs solid axle to me comes down to slow speed ride in rough terrain. I hate how much side to side rocking you get with IFS as the front end drops into and climbs over holes and rocks. A solid axle levels out the ride more and to me is much less fatiguing when spend many hours behind the wheel. I only mention this because I see it mentioned so rarely but is the most noticeable thing to me. So in rough stuff I still prefer solid axles even if it isn't overly technical. But if you are daily driving the rig, or have to drive freeways much the 100 any day of the week is worth its weight in gold and it can realistically go anywhere an 80 can go when limited to 35's for each. For vehicle based travel though outright capability isn't all as important as payload, durability and to some degree comfort. So yeah a 100 is a better rig in my eyes but lacks character and just feels bland to me. That falls into the whole subjective category of bs I know. Ha! I would rather drive an old 60 that tops out at 70mph than a hundy for a dedicatedly adventure vehicle, that's just me though so take that with a grain of salt. I don't like being removed as much as more engaged with the event. When you go full luxury it's a bit too much removing from the experience in my view.

This also comes from the context of me not being in a hurry when I am traveling this the reason that I don't need a ton of power. I don't get the whole you need a ton of power thing. If you are bringing so much stuff you need 300+hp you need a heavy duty truck likely. You want a 2500lb payload capacity SUV? Get a GMT800 Suburban 2500. I did for towing and it ends up being a great travel rig for getting into the backcountry because no matter how much people or gear you bring, it's going to be really hard to exceed the payload. That's another whole discussion though on how I think Suburbans are the best travel rig platforms for North America. One more point, I used to think I needed every gadget and contingency in my Cruisers for "overlanding" and I eventually realized it completely ruined the vehicle and what I loved most about it. I have since revamped my camping gear and shedded stuff like the roof basket, RTT, etc and still bring what I need but enjoy driving it a lot more again. My last 60 I kept simple too and it was like falling in love all over again.

Dave, regarding the Colorado diesel, we bought one last winter and got it for 10k off the sticker brand new. They are really easy to get for sub 40k. I agree 40k+ is expensive for anything, but we got ours for 32k and 0% for 5 years. We really worked it hard and lucked out but for even say 37k the Colorado Duramax is a ton of truck. I have seen as high as 35mpg on the highway and normally see 30-32. We can tow our 23' camper and sailboat with it too with zero issues yet unloaded it gets better mpg's than our old Outback that we replaced with this. Can't say enough good things about that truck. We looked at Tacoma's too but it was no contest for us.

 

[calicamper]

Lol I read that 7500lb loaded comment and said oh yea Ok sure. My J80 was great but hell no!! It was sweating our 1800lb boat and gear for 3. We were no where near 7500lbs, not to mention having to air up the rears to near max because its short wheel base wasnt exactly thrilled with the load. Keep in mind I dragged the same exact boat around for 6 yrs behind my Legacy!

The LC is a great rig though any vehicle starts to suffer and drive like complete crap when you start approaching about 3/4 its rated load.

 

[Clutch]

I'm out of the Cruiser game and back into a Toyota pickup, but my 100 series was the best wagon I've ever owned. I looked at 2nd gen 4runners, 80s and 100s when shopping, but the 100 for me was the best of all worlds unless you really need a solid axle or want the styling of the older body for personal aesthetic reasons or smaller body of a Runner for size/mpg reasons. Tip: If you're choosing between Cruisers just forget MPG and choose the model you like best and go from there. If I'd truly taken that to heart before buying my 100, I'd most likely have just bought a 60. (Otherwise, maybe consider looking at a GX470, I think they pull a few more MPG.)

I like what FlexDream in Japan is doing with the 100's. Nice mix of retro styling, without having to reinvent the wheel.

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ja&u=http://www.flexdream.jp/&prev=search



http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ja&u=http://www.flexdream.jp/&prev=search

 

[upcruiser]

They do a version of the 80 too that looks pretty cool, probably a little more natural than the 100. The purist side of me cringes but at the same time my inner geek likes them.

 

[Clutch]

They do a version of the 80 too that looks pretty cool, probably a little more natural than the 100. The purist side of me cringes but at the same time my inner geek likes them.

It is all Toyota, and that is what counts.

The 80 is pretty cool too.

I like the 100, no expensive engine swaps or whatnot, fairly simple styling tweaks, and call it good. Nice thing about the 100's is....most are driven by slow old farts, can still be found in fairly clean condition...unlike the 80's.

 

[Clutch]

That's kind of a bummer, I would have quite liked that amount of power and getting I'm sure better than 30 MPG.

You can do it!

 

[upcruiser]

I like the 100, no expensive engine swaps or whatnot, fairly simple styling tweaks, and call it good. Nice thing about the 100's is....most are driven by slow old farts, can still be found in fairly clean condition...unlike the 80's.

Oh, no doubt about it.

 

[zimm]

lol. armor, oversize tires, winch, liquids, some spares, roofrack, dog.

hit the scales next 2 week offroad trip you take. i bet yinz guyz are a bit heavier than you think.

a dry 100 is 5300, and dry 60 is 4200. it was one reason i went back to a 60. that and the toybox.... and the view... and the look... and the stick. lotsa reasons. .... but weight was a big one.

 

[zimm]

Zimm, I get your point completely, but it's exactly this mentality that has got us stuck with high trim gas engined car-trucks. If more people in NA thought longevity and capability outranked speed/acceleration and number of cup holders we might have had a chance at diesel 70 series etc. I'd be driving a 70 series instead of my 3500 if they were available here.

And I have driven them overseas. They are not as luxurious as a full load domestic, but I buy the mostly stripped down version of the domestic truck anyway.

longevity? LSx motors outlast, have better economy, and are easier to work on than the UZ engine, in addition 45hp more and a broader tq band in its weakest iteration.

the V8 in the 100 may be better than the 6 in the 80, but its by no means a hotrod at 230hp, and low end tq is fit for a sedan. the quirky power curve is what made the 5 speed auto such an improvement over the 4 speed. its what i would refer to the engine as adequate. if i had a choice between keeping the 60 all toyota, with the 4.7, or using the chevy 4.8, i'd still use the 4.8/5.3. i'd skip the ls6.0 as i think with my gearing i'd be tempting driveline fate.