Moving from a Tacoma to an SUV, I'd love to hear your thoughts!

COJoe

New member
Hello everyone, I've been lurking this forum for a while now and having been a part of automotive forums for about 15 years, I have to say I am extremely impressed by the welcoming, informative, and thorough posts I have found here. Bravo for having such a fantastic community!

I have been adventuring in my 2009 Tacoma (access cab, 6ft bed) for the last 6 years and 100k+ miles. It has been a great vehicle, but I think it is time to move on and get into an SUV. A truck used to be a necessity for me due to my line of work, though that is no longer the case. The ability to carry more people, having a good amount of space for gear, and being able to comfortably sleep in the vehicle if necessary, all while keeping the off-pavement capability of the Tacoma are currently my priorities with this next vehicle.

I do quite a bit of off-pavement adventuring, mostly mountainous Forest Service roads in Colorado and Montana, but also do quite a bit of desert exploration in Utah. That being said, I do not go beyond mild rock crawling and do not have a yearning to, either. My girlfriend and I currently sleep in the bed of the Tacoma with a hard shell topper and sleeping platform/drawer system, and would hopefully build a similar system in the SUV that can be folded up or broken down in order to use the second row to accommodate extra passengers.

Other than gear storage and the sleeping situation, I would like to be able to accomodate 33"s on the vehicle, and a 3"ish lift to fit those is definitely an option I am willing to explore. Bumpers front and rear (with winch and swingout), as well as sliders are something else I would like for peace of mind in the backcountry

My current vehicle considerations are:

80 or 100 series Toyota Land Cruiser (obviously) - Approximately $10-15k - This option ticks all the boxes, has huge aftermarket support, has a legendary reputation for off-road capability and reliability, and stock/unabused forms of both are relatively easy to come by. The price of these is my only issue, both the 80 and 100 series seem to be getting increasingly expensive.​
1st gen Toyota Sequoia - Approximately $5-7k - Another option that ticks the boxes, is extremely affordable compared to equivalent Land Cruisers, uses the same phenomenal 2UZ-FE, but the aftermarket options are definitely not as vast. It seems very possible to get suspension bits from other vehicles to build up a decent setup (Tundra coilovers, LC100 rear springs, LC80 rear shocks), but things like sliders and a rear bumper are tough to come by unless you go with custom builds. The Sequoia is also bigger than the LC's, but that isn't too much of a worry for me. Stock forms of these are very plentiful.​
XJ Jeep Cherokee - Approximately $3-5k - While this option is quite a bit smaller than the Toyotas, I think it still can accommodate my gear storage and sleeping situation well enough. The XJ is much much cheaper, and has an absolutely massive after market that has exceedingly cheaper options than the Toyotas. The Jeep also has a reputation for reliability (outside of cooling and steering issues that are easily taken care of). It is getting tougher to find examples of these that havent been modified or abused, but it can be done.​

These options all seem as though they would have similar fuel efficiency, similar reliability, and similar availability in my area of Montana.

I do have some questions though:
Since this vehicle will also be a daily driver, how much of a difference will suspension designs make in terms of comfort and driveability? Such as IFS vs. solid axle, coil sprung IFS vs. torsion bars, and coil sprung rear axle vs. leaf sprung.​
How big of a difference does the size of each of these vehicles make? The XJ is smallest by far, with the Sequoia being the biggest, what does this translate to in terms of storage, sleeping, and trailability? Does the Sequoia really feel that huge on the trail?​
Are there any considerations I am missing here?​
What would you buy if this was your money, either vehicles from my list, or others?​
Thanks so much for reading and I look forward to hearing your thoughts!

-COJoe
 

calicamper

Expedition Leader
How tall are you two? My J80 was not a bunk capable rig. The Sequoia was. First gen Sequoia was same width as the 100 and only a few inches longer externally. But had far superior interior space.
 

COJoe

New member
How tall are you two? My J80 was not a bunk capable rig. The Sequoia was. First gen Sequoia was same width as the 100 and only a few inches longer externally. But had far superior interior space.

We are both 5'8"

Was that with the seats removed or folded in the back of the 80? I've seen one 80 in person with a sleeping setup in the back of it for a single person that was similar sized, but never for two people plus gear. We've also been considering a RTT, but are still leaning more towards an internal sleeping situation due to the prevalence of grizzly bears where we are.
 

alanymarce

Well-known member
My girlfriend and I currently sleep in the bed of the Tacoma with a hard shell topper and sleeping platform/drawer system, and would hopefully build a similar system in the SUV that can be folded up or broken down in order to use the second row to accommodate extra passengers.

We have set up both our LC80 (in Africa) and now our Montero with an internal bed, set up with a folding front. In the LC80 we did once need to carry a couple of passengers; in the Montero (on "big trips") we have not, and have settled on a set up which is not designed to carry anyone other than ourselves. If you're interested in a convenient set up this works well.

What would you buy if this was your money, either vehicles from my list, or others?

For this type of travel we've chosen to drive the above-mentioned vehicles:

1) the LC80 was excellent, it was one of the last to be built, and did a good job for us.
2) when we bought our current vehicle w narrowed the choice to:

- Nissan Patrol - which was not available at the time because Nissan had reached an import quota limit,
- Land Cruiser - capable and reliable,
- Jeep Rubicon - smaller, far less comfortable on the highway, reliability questionable (although I've owned 3 Jeeps and they have been completely trouble-free I have to say),
- Montero - as capable and reliable as the Land Cruiser, and HALF THE PRICE (at least where we live).

So, we bought the Montero and it's been perfect, for our travels.
 

COJoe

New member
We have set up both our LC80 (in Africa) and now our Montero with an internal bed, set up with a folding front. In the LC80 we did once need to carry a couple of passengers; in the Montero (on "big trips") we have not, and have settled on a set up which is not designed to carry anyone other than ourselves. If you're interested in a convenient set up this works well.



For this type of travel we've chosen to drive the above-mentioned vehicles:

1) the LC80 was excellent, it was one of the last to be built, and did a good job for us.
2) when we bought our current vehicle w narrowed the choice to:

- Nissan Patrol - which was not available at the time because Nissan had reached an import quota limit,
- Land Cruiser - capable and reliable,
- Jeep Rubicon - smaller, far less comfortable on the highway, reliability questionable (although I've owned 3 Jeeps and they have been completely trouble-free I have to say),
- Montero - as capable and reliable as the Land Cruiser, and HALF THE PRICE (at least where we live).

So, we bought the Montero and it's been perfect, for our travels.

Thanks for the reply! I haven't looked too much into the Montero, I'll have to do some research into that one. I have a feeling that the Montero's available in your area might be vastly different from the ones we have available here.

(EDIT: I looked into the Montero, and it actually looks like an extremely good option for us. The only issue looks like it might be availability, as there is only one for sale in my area, and it is the less sought-after third gen. I will definitely start keeping an eye out for something like a 98 or 99 though! Thanks for the heads up!)

As for the Rubicon, they are somewhat out of the question for us due to their minimal storage and sleeping space. Rubicons are also equally priced to Land Cruisers around here, so if I decide to spend that kind of money, it would be LC80 or 100 all the way.

How tall are you guys, and was the 80 big enough for the two of you plus gear?
 
Last edited:

85_Ranger4x4

Well-known member
FWIW I don't think you will be able to jump in any 20+ year old vehicle and expect it to be turn key and ready to go. You are going to have repairs no matter what badge is on the grille.

Why no 4Runner? Not long enough? I would think it would be at least comparable to the XJ.
 

COJoe

New member
FWIW I don't think you will be able to jump in any 20+ year old vehicle and expect it to be turn key and ready to go. You are going to have repairs no matter what badge is on the grille.

Why no 4Runner? Not long enough? I would think it would be at least comparable to the XJ.

Oh absolutely, there is no question in my mind about that. Branding definitely doesn't play any part in this decision, I chose these vehicles based on availability in my region, the fact that they all have a reputation for reliability, and that they all fit my needs well. After alanymarce's comment, I'm looking into Montero's now as well. Not too sure where you got the idea that I am associating brands with repairs, or that I was expecting anything to be turn key.

I have no 4runner in my list because having had friends with 2nd, 3rd, and 4th gens, the interior cargo capacity is a bit too small. The XJ is small too, but definitely a bit more spacious in the back compared to 4runners. They, like the XJ, are getting pretty tough to find in stock, unabused forms as well. Additionally, the 4runners in my area are a bit more expensive than the equivalent or even better specced Sequoias. Not saying they're bad vehicles, just that it does not fit my needs as well as some others.
 

85_Ranger4x4

Well-known member
You were just mentioning you wanted reliability and are shopping some somewhat “experienced” platforms.

At the age of some of those listed past owner care is almost going to have more to do with reliability than the original design.
 
Last edited:

COJoe

New member
You were just mentioning you wanted reliability and are shopping some somewhat “experienced” platforms.

At the age of some of those listed past owner care is going to have more to do with reliability than the original design.

I completely agree with you on that, hence looking for bone stock, unabused examples of any vehicle. Though I will say that some platforms take abuse and neglect better than others. That doesn't necessarily have to do with branding, but more the specific model and spec itself. Like the rear axles that come in XJ's, there can be a Chrysler axle, or a Dana 35 depending on what specific XJ you end up with. One definitely takes abuse better, is typically longer lasting, and is more easily serviceable. Same thing with the different transmissions that come in first gen Sequioas, or the different suspension systems that come in the Lexus and Toyota 80 and 100 series.
 

alanymarce

Well-known member
Thanks for the reply! I haven't looked too much into the Montero, I'll have to do some research into that one. I have a feeling that the Montero's available in your area might be vastly different from the ones we have available here.

(EDIT: I looked into the Montero, and it actually looks like an extremely good option for us. The only issue looks like it might be availability, as there is only one for sale in my area, and it is the less sought-after third gen. I will definitely start keeping an eye out for something like a 98 or 99 though! Thanks for the heads up!)

How tall are you guys, and was the 80 big enough for the two of you plus gear?
We're 174 cm and 170 cm tall. No problem in the LC80, nor in the Montero, and have space at our feet as well. I would guess that anyone over about 185 cm might be a tight fit, however I think one could move the front seats forward at least another 10 cm and end up with more space. We do incline the front seats forward about 10 cm when we go to bed.

In the Montero we have most gear underneath the bed - drawers on the RHS at the back, the refrigerator on the LHS, the camp table at the side of the refrigerator, more storage below the bed at the front (access through the side doors). No problems.

The LC was set up similarly - not as well arranged - the refrigerator was higher than we would have liked, and the rear storage was less efficient. We modified the set up, however with more time and money we'd have bought a lower refrigerator and installed drawers. The bed would have been better then - you can see that the refrigerator intrudes on the bed space somewhat.


Rear door open view.jpgLC 1 bed, fridge, etc.JPG
 

COJoe

New member
We're 174 cm and 170 cm tall. No problem in the LC80, nor in the Montero, and have space at our feet as well. I would guess that anyone over about 185 cm might be a tight fit, however I think one could move the front seats forward at least another 10 cm and end up with more space. We do incline the front seats forward about 10 cm when we go to bed.

In the Montero we have most gear underneath the bed - drawers on the RHS at the back, the refrigerator on the LHS, the camp table at the side of the refrigerator, more storage below the bed at the front (access through the side doors). No problems.

The LC was set up similarly - not as well arranged - the refrigerator was higher than we would have liked, and the rear storage was less efficient. We modified the set up, however with more time and money we'd have bought a lower refrigerator and installed drawers. The bed would have been better then - you can see that the refrigerator intrudes on the bed space somewhat.

Perfect, we are also between 170cm and 175cm. It seems like the LC80 is still a good option for us to sleep in, but I think this may be a point to the Sequoia based on interior space.

I haven't thought of putting the sleeping platform so high like you have, that's a good looking setup!
 

shmabs

Explorer
I have no 4runner in my list because having had friends with 2nd, 3rd, and 4th gens, the interior cargo capacity is a bit too small. The XJ is small too, but definitely a bit more spacious in the back compared to 4runners.

Having owned an few XJ's, 3rd and 4th gen 4runners, and an 80 series, I don't think I agree. This may be an unpopular opinion, but as much as I adore XJ's it would be the last on my list of recommendations for what you're talking about.

Using a 4th gen 4runner as an example, the rear hip room is 55 inches, and an XJ is 44. 11 inches more interior width is pretty noticeable, especially when sleeping in the back with the seats folded. I also owned an 80 series and spent a lot of time sleeping the back of that( (I'm 5'7") and found it pretty comfortable, and the floor was flat which is a huge advantage

My 4th gen floor was not flat, but i built a cargo platform that replaced part of the rear seat and it worked well for sleeping inside. A friend of mine who is about 6'3" slept back there and reported it be comfortable and roomy.

I think any of what you listed is going to be tight with two people and gear (depending on how much gear you carry), if you build a platform to sleep on stash the gear below that would help tremendously. I've slept in 3rd runner, 4th gen runner, and 80 series with myself and a smaller female (5'4") and we had to move all the gear to the front seats, and some of it to the roof rack on longer trips where we had more stuff, again, a platform that elevates you and allows gear below would be the ticket for trying to keep everything inside. If you have a medium sized cooler or fridge, that will be challenging. I've spent some time in the back of a first gen sequoia that would probably be my choice as the most spacious for sleeping, but as you pointed out, it has the least aftermarket support.

How big a vehicle feels on the trail is entirely subjective to the driver and the trail, what feels huge to some, may be fine for others. The same with ride quality, but for long jaunts on pavement, and dirt roads IFS wins, and the XJ loses. After spending a lot of time in my cruisers, runners, tacoma's I test drove an XJ for old time sake and it wouldn't be my choice for any sort of "comfort".

For running 33's reliably: again, the XJ loses here. You're looking at 3 plus inches of lift, crappy control arm angles (or long arms), gears (most likely), upgraded steering and brakes etc. The 80 series has a drive train that's rather large and overbuilt, and can easily handle 33's, but the mpg was never good to begin with, and won't get any better with larger tires, the 80 is also rather slow by modern standards. A 05/06 sequoia with the slightly higher HP and a750F trans (5 speed auto) will turn 33's easily, even on stock gears. The 4.7 is a fantastic motor, and the same rule applies to the 100 series LC. Again, having driven both I would take the later 100 series with the 5 speed, and it could easily handle 33's. The 100, 80, and sequoia all have a larger drivetrain, including brakes, that would facilitate "reliably" running 33's. Park an XJ next to an 80 series and compare the size of the axles, brakes, bearings etc. A 33 isn't huge, and if you're not running harder trails, but if you want reliable, a part that's less stressed running a given tire size has the advantage.

It sounds like your biggest factor is what you have access to in your region; choose your compromise wisely.
 

COJoe

New member
Having owned an few XJ's, 3rd and 4th gen 4runners, and an 80 series, I don't think I agree. This may be an unpopular opinion, but as much as I adore XJ's it would be the last on my list of recommendations for what you're talking about.

Using a 4th gen 4runner as an example, the rear hip room is 55 inches, and an XJ is 44. 11 inches more interior width is pretty noticeable, especially when sleeping in the back with the seats folded. I also owned an 80 series and spent a lot of time sleeping the back of that( (I'm 5'7") and found it pretty comfortable, and the floor was flat which is a huge advantage

My 4th gen floor was not flat, but i built a cargo platform that replaced part of the rear seat and it worked well for sleeping inside. A friend of mine who is about 6'3" slept back there and reported it be comfortable and roomy.

I think any of what you listed is going to be tight with two people and gear (depending on how much gear you carry), if you build a platform to sleep on stash the gear below that would help tremendously. I've slept in 3rd runner, 4th gen runner, and 80 series with myself and a smaller female (5'4") and we had to move all the gear to the front seats, and some of it to the roof rack on longer trips where we had more stuff, again, a platform that elevates you and allows gear below would be the ticket for trying to keep everything inside. If you have a medium sized cooler or fridge, that will be challenging. I've spent some time in the back of a first gen sequoia that would probably be my choice as the most spacious for sleeping, but as you pointed out, it has the least aftermarket support.

How big a vehicle feels on the trail is entirely subjective to the driver and the trail, what feels huge to some, may be fine for others. The same with ride quality, but for long jaunts on pavement, and dirt roads IFS wins, and the XJ loses. After spending a lot of time in my cruisers, runners, tacoma's I test drove an XJ for old time sake and it wouldn't be my choice for any sort of "comfort".

For running 33's reliably: again, the XJ loses here. You're looking at 3 plus inches of lift, crappy control arm angles (or long arms), gears (most likely), upgraded steering and brakes etc. The 80 series has a drive train that's rather large and overbuilt, and can easily handle 33's, but the mpg was never good to begin with, and won't get any better with larger tires, the 80 is also rather slow by modern standards. A 05/06 sequoia with the slightly higher HP and a750F trans (5 speed auto) will turn 33's easily, even on stock gears. The 4.7 is a fantastic motor, and the same rule applies to the 100 series LC. Again, having driven both I would take the later 100 series with the 5 speed, and it could easily handle 33's. The 100, 80, and sequoia all have a larger drivetrain, including brakes, that would facilitate "reliably" running 33's. Park an XJ next to an 80 series and compare the size of the axles, brakes, bearings etc. A 33 isn't huge, and if you're not running harder trails, but if you want reliable, a part that's less stressed running a given tire size has the advantage.

It sounds like your biggest factor is what you have access to in your region; choose your compromise wisely.

shmabs, thanks so much for your in depth reply! That's interesting about the cargo space comparison with the XJ and 4runner, I felt like the interior of the XJ was a little bit taller and longer when the second row was down, as well as flat. But I've never measured anything up, so I very well could be mistaken.

I will definitely be building a platform with a drawer system for storage, and my cooler will be locked outside the vehicle for when we are sleeping. This is essentially the same system we have been using in the Tacoma for 5ish years, except the new platform will have to break down or fold to accommodate the second row when I need to haul passengers. That will probably cut down the usable space under the platform, but that will all be figured out once I'm set on a vehicle.

Very good points on what it takes to push 33"s on each of the vehicles. The ease at which you can put them on the LC's and Sequoia is a good point, especially considering how much better those vehicles would ride in that configuration than the Jeep.

One question I do have for you is about the differences in suspension design from the LC100 and Sequoia. The 100 uses torsion bars and the Sequoia uses coils. I've always thought that coils are supremely better in design, but I have never owned a torsion bar vehicle, so I cannot speak from experience. In terms of aftermarket suspension, there's plenty of options for both vehicles, so that's not much of an issue. Would you say that one design is superior to the other in ways big enough to matter in terms of on and off-road driveability or performance?
 

shmabs

Explorer
One question I do have for you is about the differences in suspension design from the LC100 and Sequoia. The 100 uses torsion bars and the Sequoia uses coils. I've always thought that coils are supremely better in design, but I have never owned a torsion bar vehicle, so I cannot speak from experience. In terms of aftermarket suspension, there's plenty of options for both vehicles, so that's not much of an issue. Would you say that one design is superior to the other in ways big enough to matter in terms of on and off-road driveability or performance?

Generally, I'm not a fan of torsion bar suspension, but the 100 series ride really nice. A lot of my experience with torsion bars comes from the GMT400 chassis, and that's not really a fair comparison. I personally like to have the option of an off the shelf, re-build able, re-valve able, replacement coil over. They are more complex in nature, but offer more tuning ability, so that plays into the performance side of the house. Setup with proper spring rates, and proper shocks, the average person probably wouldn't know the difference.
 

shmabs

Explorer
Generally, I'm not a fan of torsion bar suspension, but the 100 series ride really nice. A lot of my experience with torsion bars comes from the GMT400 chassis, and that's not really a fair comparison. I personally like to have the option of an off the shelf, re-build able, re-valve able, replacement coil over. They are more complex in nature, but offer more tuning ability, so that plays into the performance side of the house. Setup with proper spring rates, and proper shocks, the average person probably wouldn't know the difference.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
185,530
Messages
2,875,581
Members
224,922
Latest member
Randy Towles
Top