After liberal snipping...
Brian894x4 said:
I can only think of 4 reasons not to go with a UZJ100.
a) Cost. b) Fuel mileage. c) Size and weight. d) Too expensive and pretty to get dirty, scratch up and wheel hard.
These are pretty much the exact reasons there even are 4Runners, RAV4s, Tacos and the like. I had a FJ40, which isn't the most complex or even expensive of Cruisers to own and everything costs more to repair on Cruisers. Obviously the FJ40 is different from the 100 in that you are paying more due to obsolescence as much as anything. But none-the-less, my experience with my Hilux(es) is that keeping them on the road is
a lot cheaper. Parts are cheaper, mileage is better.
The size and weight are really only an issue for touring with respect to mileage. I think the bulk and dimensions are more of a setback in a rock crawling setting, otherwise it's mostly just the hit on mileage.
Reasons for the UZJ100.
a) A superior and more durable b) A superior and more durable chassis
c) Japanese quality. Toyotas that were engineered and built in Japan. d) More room and comfort inside e) Possibly safer.
I don't think a Taco is necessarily any less durable, all of the 'real' Toyota trucks are overbuilt for their size. Just because the Hilux has an 8" diff vs. the 9.25" Cruiser doesn't mean it's any less strong, since the Hilux gives up around the 1/2 of a ton love handles to its big brother. So the 3/4 ton Cruiser has 1 ton axles and the 1/2 ton Hilux has 3/4 axles, both are pretty dang strong. In stock trim, both are pretty unlikely to have major failures. I think that's the key, Toyota trucks in stock configuration are really durable trucks. But being a bigger, heavier duty truck the Cruiser will tolerate overloading better and I think that's the key to durability. But there are 20+ year old Hiluxes that have been bouncing around in 4WD their whole lives all over the world.
I do admit that the behind the wheels frame issue with the Taco bothers me, but that I think is because Toyota went too far to giving the truck better crash safety, which goes to your (e) point. Physics says that the bigger vehicle will win in a collision, but that does not always equal less passenger injury. A Cruiser will inflict more damage on most anything it hits short of a F350 or dump truck or semi. It's my guess that the Taco (and 4Runner I'd think) will blow apart more than the Cruiser. It's stuff like crumple zones, collapsible frame members and breaking parts (like an engine that drops out or driveshaft that bends) that keeps all that energy from making it to the passenger zone. The Cruiser, even the 100 series, is still built the old way more or less, which means that MY ASSUMPTION is that it's built without nearly the safety tweaking that more modern designs have. I also have absolutely no evidence, but my intuition tells me that a Double Cab Taco and a 100 are probably pretty much equal in overall safety, with each having certain types of crashes where each would accel or be deficient.
The Japanese thing. I understand your mind set there. My Hilux is a Japanese built one and all Cruisers (and 4Runners for that matter) are still Japanese built. But I don't think that's really an issue anymore. The US built Toyotas are fine. Besides, key parts are still made in Japan. Even on new Tacos the tranny and transfer are made in Japan. The engines are made here now and the rear axles have been made here for almost 15 years. I dunno, I still haven't reached a conclusion in my mind and so I'd stick with the Japanese assembled truck if there's a choice. But I'm also not sure that if I was looking for a Taco that being US assembled would keep me from buying it. The window stickers still say something like 50% foreign content on a Tacoma. Since we know they make the body panels, frames, engine and axles here, that leaves an awful lot of important parts still sourced I presume from the mother ship.
They're both good rigs. I've driven both, but not owned either one, so I'm not an expert.
I'm like you, Brian, just a Toyota guy. Well, except that I've never actually spent any significant time in a 100 series Cruiser.
I think that if everyone could afford them, most everyone (at least within our circles) would own a Cruiser. But between the cost to buy and the cost to upkeep, they are quite expensive. Then there's the wagon vs. pickup question. If you want a pickup (at least in North America), then the choice is really moot. The Double Cab is sort of in the gray area, so it's not quite as clear (IMO it's more of a wagon than pickup, but that is really personal interpretation). But I'm not sure I would ever consider a 100 series and a Taco as equals overall. My decision to stick with the Hilux is mostly (1) 'cause of the 'Nest and (b) money. If you eliminate the economics and base the decision solely on merit, then it's hard to argue that the 100 (or any Cruiser wagon) is top dog. But when you figure in the initial entry price, the ongoing maintenance cost and the 5 or more MPG hit, the Cruiser in my budget costs more to keep in the stable. Not having kids, the extra row or two of seats is not a benefit to me and a real pickup bed (even if it's only 6' long) is important. But it's all about configurations and what your requirements might be. My budget goes beyond the truck itself and includes significant investment in toys to put in or on top of the truck. If we didn't have a quiver of bikes, skis, boats and climbing junk, then we might consider a Cruiser as an option. But we spend plenty on that stuff, so if a trip costs us an additional $100 in gas, that can't be ignored.
