IMO, the 200 is *the best* to date.
My Comparo: Old Taco vs. LC vs. 4Runner
- Thread starter bnapier
- Start date
IMO, the 200 is *the best* to date.
RMP&O
Expedition Leader
Upland80
Adventurer
I think that the Taco and 4runner are totally comparable as a domestic adventurer! There is absolutely no doubt in my mind the LC is a tougher vehicle....I will regret selling mine during the zombie apocalypse.
I agree that the Mighty Land Cruiser is far superior if.....
you are in Africa.....
carrying a ton of stuff.....
going 35mph.....
with the turbodiesel....
Also: Hmmmm, invading Poland, had to go there didn't ya......I'm Polish BTW, does that increase or decrease my rep as a reviewer??
LOL! Being Polish totally increases your rep!
calicamper
Expedition Leader
I like the GX but you do know the GX is a dressed up 4runner right?
MarcFJ60
Adventurer
89s rule
Adventurer
It's all personal preference. IMHO the OP got it right.
I personally think the 3rd gen 4runner is more comfortable as a dd than an 80. Most of this is from ifs vs sa. 200-250 miles to a tank is nuts on anyone who road trips should agree. I keep saying I'm going to do the ford has tank swap in the rear of our 4runner but it just hasn't happened.
I haven't wheeled anything that I felt comfortable doing in the 4runner either.
Again to each his own but I feel for the $ that a 3rd gen runner is hard to beat.
I personally think the 3rd gen 4runner is more comfortable as a dd than an 80. Most of this is from ifs vs sa. 200-250 miles to a tank is nuts on anyone who road trips should agree. I keep saying I'm going to do the ford has tank swap in the rear of our 4runner but it just hasn't happened.
I haven't wheeled anything that I felt comfortable doing in the 4runner either.
Again to each his own but I feel for the $ that a 3rd gen runner is hard to beat.
NCFJ
Adventurer
Good break down. I have had an 03 Taco built up a lot. S/C, 7th injector, ect ect ect. I drove it 25,000 miles through Latin America on two trips.
Right now I drive a 91 Cruiser that is built up a lot.
I liked the Taco, it was pretty darn reliable. But way to small and way to low of a GVW. I was at 5-6,000lbs in my Taco for the trips south and it was just to much for a truck that light duty. I kept going through brake pads, fast, even with the Tundra front brake upgrade. The trans also felt way to light duty for this much weight. I didn't find it all the impressive off-road, did ok for being long and only having a rear locker. But articulation wasn't very good. The main issue I had with the Taco was it was small and uncomfortable. The uncomfortable was made me get rid of it. Thin seats that by 125,000 miles were compressed. Low seating position that hurt my legs and butt. After my last drive home from Panama in 9 days, I decided I had enough of the Taco.
I went to an 84 FJ60 Cruiser with a sweet v8 but that was short lived.
Then a year ago I got my now current 91 Cruiser with a v8 in it. It also has a Chevy 4L60e trans and the FJ60 split case. In addition it has the FZJ locked axles. I absolutely love it! Plenty of room, way comfy (new $500 seats helps!), done everything I have asked it off road, fairly easy to work on and has plenty of power. I have room to store my gear and sleep inside it. The seating position is perfect and comfortable on long hauls. The v8 pulls the over 5,000lbs up mnt passes easily. The FJ60 split case work flawless and shifts in and out of 4wd quick and easy at all speeds. It gets kind of crappy mpg but I can deal with it. And heck I am only 1-3mpg less than I got in my taco. My Taco got awful mileage due to the engine mods and weight of the truck. In the future though I can easily upgrade to a better v8, right now my Cruiser has a 5.7L vortec from a 97 Chevy. With a 5.3L I could see 5+mpg better.
Having had two v8 Cruisers now, that is it for me. I am sold for life. These trucks should have come with a v8. Once you go v8 you never go back!
Cheers
Agreed, a 5.3 or 6.0L Vortec in a 60 or 80 series is a game changer. If you get the chance, drive one and you will be convinced.
kletzenklueffer
Adventurer
I have a lifted/built FZJ80 and a stock 97 4Runner. I'd rather drive the Land Cruiser any day. Fuel range is the same, just under 300 miles before fill ups. The TLC costs about 20% more. The 4Runner needs at least 89 octane, or there are performance and operation issues, but can run on 87. The TLC is great on 87.
A couple weeks ago I was in NC at Uwharrie in my 80. We went wheeling in the morning until 5 pm, and then I drove home 6 hours. I was behind the wheel for 15 hours. I could have kept going
A couple weeks ago I was in NC at Uwharrie in my 80. We went wheeling in the morning until 5 pm, and then I drove home 6 hours. I was behind the wheel for 15 hours. I could have kept going
I wish my LC80 was only 20% more expensive. You state that both vehicles get just under 300 miles before fill-up, but the LC80 gas tank is 25.1 gallons (IIRC) and the 4runner about 18.4. That alone is over 25%. My experience was that gas was about 30% more expensive overall (sometimes much worse in the mountains) while driving at a slower speed. That doesn't even include that everything else was more expensive (and usually by more than 20%): higher purchase price, armor, accessories, maintenance, etc.
Lastly, you only need 89 octane or above with the supercharger in the 4runner. I think it's pretty well established that the Toyota 3.4L engine runs perfectly fine on 87 octane in Tacos and 4runners.
I found the 80 to be uncomfortable to drive long distances because I had to drive very strategically on the mountain highways due to the lack of power. It was hard to relax when I had to actually plan when to go around big rigs or have friends purposely wait for me in the right lane. I agree the interior is better in the LC.
The LC80 is an amazing rig. It's just slow and relatively expensive for an 18-year-old vehicle. Many people feel that the tank like structure, solid axles, and (deserved) cult following are worth the extra travel time, stress, and dollars. It wasn't for me, but might be perfect for you.
Lastly, I don't want to spend 15 straight hours in any vehicle, even a Bentley.
Last edited:
What kind of MPG do you see with a 5.3 or 6.0 and a manual trans with part-time case on the freeway?
I'm currently in a 95 Taco with a 3.4, 255/85s and a RTT. Yeah, the MPGs and seats suck, but I'd keep it forever if the kids still fit in the back.
F
Last edited:
NCFJ
Adventurer
MPG reported by owners of swapped trucks varies a great deal. The 5.3L/NV4500/splitcase can net you 16-18MPG on the highway. Obviously this depends on tire size, gearing etc. Your MPG will be lower in the beginning due to the fact that you simply can not keep your foot out of it.
No matter if you are running stock, diesel or V8 swap, if you are looking to a 80 series for good fuel mileage you are looking the wrong way. MPG is not the strong point of this vehicle.
No matter if you are running stock, diesel or V8 swap, if you are looking to a 80 series for good fuel mileage you are looking the wrong way. MPG is not the strong point of this vehicle.
toylandcruiser
Expedition Leader
RMP&O
Expedition Leader
Generally true but compared to what? 15mpg compared to low 20's of a small diesel? Everybody likes to say they get good mpg in their Taco but man mine was horrible. Granted it was modified and heavy but that is kind of what we do here with our trucks. I guess I agree with your statement but just not sure what you may be comparing to that would get great mpg and still be in the same ballpark as the trucks mentioned.
Any ways, me, don't hate the stock 80 motor but will never own one for long. Like I say v8 is the only way to go. And I think 12-18mpg is pretty standard for any 4wd truck I would use for overlanding. Low 20s would be nice but only for the pocket book. Range wise, 40gals (an 80 with aux tank) @ 15mpg = 600 mile range. That is roughly what I got in my taco with 38gals of fuel and it was super sweet.
Cheers