best model toyota to swap

[rallysmurf]

shopping for a toyota after retiring 2 tdi golfs.

want a truck tdi and am open to ideas on toyota model pro an cons for
swapping.

i have eyes on 92 sr5 3.0l and a t100 3.4 or should i stay in the 22r relm?

thanks alex in NM

 

[eddieleephd]

Imo the early Tacoma is my favorite and I wouldn't consider the newer body style it weighs more and should be called a T100.
So '96 - '04 unless you're looking for bigger then just but one that works because the original engine is better suited

Sent from my Armor_2 using Tapatalk

 

[PickleRick]

Do you want to wheel it? Lift it? Pre 1985(iirc) are best for that if you can find rust free trucks. Factory solid front axle. Those yota axles are arguably as strong as dana 44s and can be made even stronger with a few internal parts.

If you want on road comfort youll be fine with the later ifs. A sas is always a possibility but it is a lot of work.

 

[oilhammer]

I'd do a T100 or first gen Tundra, just make sure to start with one with a good frame.

The later T100's standard engine was a 2.7L 4 cyl, which was 150hp and 177tq. So even a mildly tuned ALH could move it along just fine, although those were just in 2WD versions here.

 

[eddieleephd]

I would agree that the most important part either way you go is the frame being rust free!
It's easier to find rust free in '96 and newer as the rust proofing was better.

Sent from my Armor_2 using Tapatalk

 

[oilhammer]

The later ones are the ones covered under the SPA program for frame rust. Even here. I have a friend with a 2003 Taco that got a brand new frame on Toyota's dime, and several customers with Tacos and Tundras in the ~2000s that got them OR a buyback.

And the campaign for the spare tire carriers rusting away specifically calls for 2001-2004 trucks.

I think the older ones were BETTER because they treated the frames better, and in a cost saving move some time around 2000 they started leaving a step off, causing the frames to rust much, much faster.

 

[eddieleephd]

Pre '96 Toyota pickup I've seen rust away in California, that's says a lot to me!
California, Texas, Arizona, New Mexico and Nevada are known for rust free vehicles.

Definitely some sort cuts in the 2003 and newer, but, not as bad as in the 1980's.

Really in the end it depends on what your intentions and desires are. If you want to go 4x4ing then a regular cab Tacoma or pickup as well as the less common land cruiser would be premium due to their shorter wheel base. Hauling weight and working the Tacoma for lighter loads preferably with upgraded suspension for heavier loads, T100, and early Tundra are better options.

Deaver built me a pair of leafs for around $500 to my door that improved my load capability substantially. I don't like to squat when loaded much.

 

[PickleRick]

So no love for the factory solid axle rigs? All of you are mall wheeling cruisers lol

I especially love the 1st gen 4 runners

Having owned both an fj60 and 40 i have a soft spot for the land cruisers but loathe the offset rear diff.

So many more options for a budget build when you have a more common centered rear diff.

 

[oilhammer]

Toyota's IFS setups seem pretty reliable and trouble free (I've rarely ever had to mess with anything on one), and they obviously provide a nicer ride.

For something that you need to live with and drive on the street, they work great.

 

[eddieleephd]

Toyota's IFS setups seem pretty reliable and trouble free (I've rarely ever had to mess with anything on one), and they obviously provide a nicer ride.



For something that you need to live with and drive on the street, they work great.

Exactly, the only thing a solid axle is good for is wheeling.
I used 4wd three times the entire time, 12 years, that I owned my 1999 ifs Tacoma. Once for the sand, once for the snow, and once for the mud. The mud was likely the only time I every needed it.

Mall runner? Sounds like you're mistaken and the only other swap I would consider for the 4x4 build would be into a 1980's VW Syncro van which is a hell of a rig and would be going all the same places a well built CJ 5 would go.
IFS is far more flexible when the sway bar is removed than any solid axle, and manual locking hubs are my preference. Combine that with a locking rear differential and I'll put in to wheel with any solid axle rig.
Just try to make it somewhere my rig couldn't, dare ya. It's possible, but only if your packing some winches I'm not.

 

[oilhammer]

My '89 4x4 pickup was pretty impressive off road, just as it left the factory. Even with pretty basic tires of stock size. And it didn't have the locking rear diff. Nothing drivetrain wise ever broke, either. I did take apart and clean and regrease the manual hubs though.

 

[PickleRick]

Ifs is more expensive to repair and less reliable (off road) than a proper solid axle. Solid axles are by far more simple and when comparing apples to apples more reliable than the ifs.

There is a reason guys put so much money into sas and there are so many off the shelf kits to install sas under poplar rigs from later Toyotas to xterras. Yes ifs can be built stout (see xterra titan swap) but they are limited in off road performance and limited in the ability to lift.

A properly linked solid axle will out perfom 90% all factory or even factory modded ifs set ups when comparing apples to apples. When off road its all about the FLEX!!!

The cj5 is a swb and will probably do more on 31 inch tires than say an fj60 lifted on 35s with lockers simply due to smaller size and better approach/departure angles. This again will depend fully on the terrain but a cj5 will simply fit into tighter places better similar to an atv!

There are some impressive ifs built vehicles but for the price you could have had 1 tons or even portal axels

The ifs is designed to give the consumer 4wd and comfort as more and more soccer moms are digging the off road vehicles and guys as well want comfort over function

Ifs is great for 90% of the buyers as most rarely use the 4wd for more than a fire road trail. It does however have it's limitations especially when you need a vehicle to sit more than 3 inches higher than stock.

Was a sad day when the land cruise went to ifs.

Look at any overland expo vehicle build, a sas is first on the list, the idea is cheap maintenance, reliability and easy repair if and when something breaks hours or days from civilization.

If you want something that's mostly daily driver then yes ifs is for you. If you want mild to wild wheeling you want solid axles.

The dessert runners do run ifs however they are jumping sand dunes and not crawling rocks. Like comparing drag racing suspension to circle track.


So yes, ifs is great but if you want to drive to the Mojave. Climb all week then drive back home(if you have not totaled your vehicle) you're probably not gonna be happy with an ifs.


I don't wheel often but when i do i don't like coming across a trail i cannot pass. So if i build a rig, i build a rig. It wont ride like a caddy but it will get me to the end of most trails (locally). Note: i don't wheel my 4wd 4 ton excursion. Lifted yes, maneuverable NO! Sinks in mud like an mushroom anchor.

 

[oilhammer]

Never got my truck stuck. *shrug* Must not have been trying hard enough.

Never broke anything either.

And it had over 1/4 million miles on it when I sold it.

22RE was rebuilt once, rear pinion seal once, that's pretty much it.

My T3 syncro had 4 wheel independent, never got it stuck either. High centered it a couple times, had to back up and try again, that's about it.

I don't "rock crawl" and I doubt the OP does either.

I think your assumption that EVERYONE who needs or wants a 4WD pickup does some crazy off road driving, and that is simply not the case. Never was, never will be, sorry. In fact the OP never even stated he needed or wanted a 4x4 truck, you just assumed.

My current truck is 2WD, and it gets me everywhere I need to go with a truck.

 

[eddieleephd]

@PickleRick
You're correct in your writing. The solid axle is chosen for those reasons. And the IFS is far more flexible than the solid axle. Which is why the cruiser went that way.

As Oilhammer said the yota wheels well stock, and as you say ifs is better for a DD.
Solid axles are cheaper to repair, however, I've never been stranded in my Tacoma on a trail like I have in a Dodge on the side of the paved road.

I'm particularly impressed with the yota's, and as said before, would pit an IFS against any American SAS. I would expect to pull them out with a winch too.

In my experience, the driver's ability is more important than the vehicles. I've taken 2wd cars places others couldn't take their 4wd pick-up. Like the saying goes, "it's not how big it is, it's how you use it."

Sent from my Armor_2 using Tapatalk

 

[oilhammer]

The whole thing about ease of repair and durability is sort of a non-issue anyway, if it really doesn't break under normal use.

I did a tour of duty at Lexus, and we sold the Land Cruiser Cygnus and Land Cruiser Prado... as the LX and GX, respectively, which were ALL graced with the biggest most powerful engine had at the time anywhere on the planet in those models, the 4.7L V8, and they NEVER broke ANYTHING in the front end. Ever. Not a dang thing. The only thing that I ever saw on those was exhaust manifolds' welds cracking and causing a small leak after cold start, and on higher mileage stuff the SAI system needing some attention. But the engine proper, the 5sp Aisin autobox, the drive shafts, transfer case, differentials, axles, etc. nothing at all, ever. Still don't.

 

[PickleRick]

Street use stock size tires will break far less items than large soft mud tires on rocks.


Being op is near desserts with amazing camping and off road trails i was tossing in my .02


Also i said flex...i meant to say articulation.

 

[eddieleephd]

Yeah, seems like people are just stuck on what used to be the best and aren't interested in really understanding what's up with modern vehicles and real improvements.
Kinda like HVAC contractors just do electric backup when gas is present because that's what they do rather than what's best for the client.


Sent from my Armor_2 using Tapatalk

 

[eddieleephd]

Street use stock size tires will break far less items than large soft mud tires on rocks.





Being op is near desserts with amazing camping and off road trails i was tossing in my .02





Also i said flex...i meant to say articulation.

Yeah, all options deserve their due respect, and you're not wrong.
There's just differences from days of old and what an American vehicle needs is different from the Japanese. So, really the OP needs to give more information on desires. He really just asked for open opinions so far.

Sent from my Armor_2 using Tapatalk

 

[PickleRick]

Yeah, all options deserve their due respect, and you're not wrong.
There's just differences from days of old and what an American vehicle needs is different from the Japanese. So, really the OP needs to give more information on desires. He really just asked for open opinions so far.

Sent from my Armor_2 using Tapatalk

No arguments here. I've been off roading and pulled stuck vehicles out of spots that i got through with ease in a much smaller (lift amd tires) than they had.

In the end the vehicle with the best articulation and ground clearance has the best chances of getting through a nasty traio section. The ifs does limit both of these. You dont need to "try" to get stuck. I've never set out to get stuck but someone has to cross first and that water hole has unknowns in it. Whos getting stuck first? With a group of rigs you tend to take chances youd not take alone

Being he's located in area that is coveted for its rust free vehicles he should have no issues finding good shape rigs of any year of his choosing.

 

[Rockwell]

Being in New Mexico, I would recommend a 2wd Tacoma/pre Tacoma if you don’t plan to Offroad. I know most would say 4wd, 2wd are kinda ugly, if you are looking for economy and some performance. There is some pretty good weight savings and those 26” vs 32”+ tires save a ton in rotational mass. I’m in New England and am heavy into off-road, and I still going with 2wd for those reasons. This truck will never see a trail or a snowy road, but it will never look as good as a 4wd

 

[turbobrick240]

I'd go for the '92. I had '90 and '92 4x4 'yotas that were tough as nails. They both spent a fair amount of time in the woods hauling out logs and firewood and never gave me any trouble. Rust has claimed most those trucks up here, but there should be some decent ones in your area.

 

[jimbote]

first gen tacoma, exhaust is on the correct side, rack and pinion solves clearance issues earlier truck steering box presents

 

[rallysmurf]

first gen tacoma, exhaust is on the correct side, rack and pinion solves clearance issues earlier truck steering box presents

would that include a '97 t100?

i plan on doing some offroad with a small camper tent topper.
not a lot of weight. baja month trip in a year or so.

 

[eddieleephd]

would that include a '97 t100?



i plan on doing some offroad with a small camper tent topper.

not a lot of weight. baja month trip in a year or so.

I think of all the choices the '97 T100 would be a good choice and a better choice than a newer Tacoma for weight and size.
Done correctly you'd have an awesome rig when you finish

 

[PickleRick]

The 97 is a fine truck. Just figure out what you want suspension wise , figure in gear calculations based on desired tire sizes first then go from there.

Regearing is seldom cheap, if on a budget your stuck choosing tire sizes based on your current gearing. Past the 80s mini trucks i do not know what gear ratios the yotas have. So long as you dont need more than 33 inch tires id say you're good to go with an off the shelf lift. Just know the limitations of your ifs/axles. Even the stronger land cruiser axles have a limit @ 33 inch tires locked and 35s unlocked in srock form. Playing around in a desert isnt the place to push already well established limits without a good plan B

I was always happy with 4:10s and 33s on low reving diesels. On the east coast we have more mud than rocks so crawl ratios isn't as important. Where you wheel that may need to be factored in more closely. My excursion has 35s on 3:73s but the slush box and huge motor more than make up for it. 37s would look "cooler" but she'd be a dog on take off.


i pefer a rig with a 1inch body lift to make for more differential clearance and a little more room to tweak power train to achieve the best possible drive shaft flange angles. 2 inches of body lift can look pretty unattractive without bumper modification. The engine sump is always something you need to plan ahead for. Ive seen more than a few rigs with engine swaps(usually v8) that were poorly planned and the front drive shaft couldn't be reinstalled.

When possible i try to center the transfer case on the rig so that front and rear drive shafts are identical length. It's really nice to have a spare drive shaft that will cover both axles or even in a pinch swap them to get home.

 

[eddieleephd]

Yotatech is the best yota forum I found when I had my Tacoma, second was customtacos forum and I rarely used it.

This is your resource for all things yota!
https://www.yotatech.com/forums/


Sent from my Armor_2 using Tapatalk

 

[PickleRick]

Ih8mud is also a great yota forum pirate4x4 is also good but usually more for the all out off road builds.

 

[jimbote]

t100 has a similar suspension setup to the pre-taco trucks (reciprocating ball steering box), it is wider so i'm unsure if there would clearance issues with the steering components