|
|
|
|
Q: Kenneth Zill wrote:I've just had my first look at a 88 Land Cruiser that I'm considering purchasing. Are there any particular things to look for in that model when evaluating it? A: Be aware that the FJ62 (introduced in 1980) differs from the FJ60 in a couple of significant areas. It has an automatic transmission, rather than the 4 speed manual that the earlier rigs had. For road use this is a matter of personal preference. For moderate trail use, it may even be an advantage for the less experienced driver. For strenuous trail use a manual is preferable. The FJ62 has a (3F) fuel injected power plant with slightly less stroke, and slightly less displacement than the carbureted (2F) engine in the earlier rigs. It has a slightly higher power band, which is a good thing on the highway, but a slight diasadvantage on the trail. It has a 4.10:1 gear ratio in the differentials which offsets both the advantages and the disadvantages of this to a large degree (the FJ60 used a 3.70:1 ratio). A properly maintained Cruiser of this vintage really has no problem areas that you need to be wary of. With the correct care, there is no reason that a rig like this can't travel over 300,000 miles and run as well as the day it left the showroom. Take a look at the underside for any signs of fluid leakage. Any leaks that you find are more likely to indicate a need for some sort of repairs, than they are to simply be faulty seals (with the possible exception of the rear main seal, and the front timing cover seal) Leaks from the valve cover or side cover are probably just from loose hold down bolts. Other than these items, there really isn't anything to look for that you wouldn't pay attention to in any rig. Q: Kenneth Zill wrote: I don't know much about these vehicles yet. Why should I have one of these instead of a Jeep, Ford Explorer, etc.? A: Well, I'm not going to make friends with any Jeep or Ford guys here... First off, if you are in the market for what an Explorer offers, then you don't want an FJ62, and vise versa. The Explorer is designed for the American market. This means that is is advertised in a way to make it seem to be a tough capable "truck" which can take you into the wilds, but still be as comfortable as you family car. In fact, it is a family car that can handle some mild trail use. It is designed for on road use, and it's components reflect that in terms of their stoutness, and anticipated longevity. When you say "Jeep", I assume that you are talking about the Cherokee and Wagoneer offerings, since the other rigs you ask about are 4 door "wagon" style vehicles. Much of the comments about the Explorer apply to these rigs as well. The FJ62 was designed for a world wide market, of which the US was only a small part. It is a continuation and refinement of the Cruiser wagon, which can trace it's beginnongsd all the way back to the FJ45 in the early 1960s. it is a heavy duty truck underneath the family wagon trappings. The axles are the equivilent of Dana 60s in almost every regard. 3/4 ton truck running gear in other words. The driveshafts and ujoints are comparable to one tone truck gear. The springs are again the kind of stuff found on full size trucks. The engine is a slightly updated version of the same one which came in the original Cruisers, and it was a close copy of the Chevy 235 six cylinder found in trucks during the '40s. It is a low reving, tried and true powerplant which is tremendously overbuilt. it weighs as much as a Chevy big block V8, and that translates in to heavy duty components, which last for an amzing amount of time. (I am not exaggerating when I say that you should expect at least 300,000 plus miles from a Cruiser of this vintage.). While the automatic tranny is arguable not as stout as the 4 speed of the previous Cruisers, both it and the transfer case are up to the same standards as the rest of the drivetrain. Take a look at the underside of a Cruiser, and then look at the Cherokee, and the explorer. There is no comparision. Thump a fist into the sheet metal of the Cruiser. Then very carefully do the same with the other two (walk away before the seller see's the dents that you put in them though). Compare the interior room (especially to the Cherokee), and the sight lines. Make it a point to look at vehicle of similar vintage and mileage, to see the difference in the way they hold up to wear. Listen to the difference in little rattles and whatnot as you drive them. The Cruiser will not win many fuel economy contests, and they are not the peppiest rig on the road. You may find vehicles with more gadgets and fancier amenities. You can find more modern styling than an FJ62. But if you want a rig that will last forever, be amazingly safe in an accident, and off road with the best of them, there is no comparision to these other two rigs. Q: Robert Granier wrote:I recently bought a 1983 FJ60, and I would like to lift it so I can fit larger tires. I am a college student so cost is a major concern, but I am determined to put 33X12.50's on my rig. I'd like to know what the cheapest way to lift my Toy. is? A: This is an easy one :) Since you are loking for the cheapest way to lift your rig, you will want to investigate extended shackles, and/or add-a-leafs. Either of these options will give you about 2 inches of lift over your current height. Used in conjunction for 3-4 inches of lift, you should find that 33s fit well. (This will however be a bit dependent on just how badly your rig may have sagged from stock ride levels.) Both of these methods of attaining lift are less than ideal for a rig that will see heavy and technical off road use. For moderate off road and on road use, they should suffice. Used for heavy hauling, add-a-leafs can over stress the main leafs if you use the short style extra leafs. They also stiffen the ride a bit. Extended shackles actually reduce the approach clearance at the leading end of the front springs, and the departure clearance at the trailing end of the rear springs. It is possible to hit obstructions with the shackjle due to this reduced clearance. I have actually broken a spring due to this (Found a boulder hidden in a mud bog...) This is not a routine event, or a expected result however. Send your questions to Mark at cruiser@rockcrawler.com |
|
All content including photos and text Copyright ©
1997, 1998 Guerilla Audio |
|
