Outdoor Adventure USA

toms wrote:I saw a 92 Land Cruiser for sale today with 175K miles. I noticed it had a solid axle up front. Didn't they go to IFS at some point. The sign said $4500 obo. It was a bit rough but some of it goes with new bumpers, etc. Since you have been shopping is this a good year and a good deal or something to be avoided?

Factory F/R lockers started in 93, as well as FF axles and a more powerful motor. You may want to look for a 93-97 with lockers and rear disks. On a factory locked vehicle, you should see a Diff Lock dial to the left of the steering wheel and the "K294" number on the sticker on the edge of the front drivers door. If you look underneath, you should also be able to see the actuator motor sticking up next to the diff on the axles.

sdnative wrote:I am looking for a 97 as well, but a very specific 97. I want a very late 97 (9/97 or 10/97) bare-bones "poverty-pack" model with no roof rack, no running boards, no flares, cloth interior, no 3rd row sets. Lockers mandatory and low mileage (<130k). I know this will be very difficult to find, and I may have to compromise one or more of the "requirements". I have been scouring the country (yes the entire USA) for about a month now. Still looking.

You describe exactly my ideal and what I was looking for. In my 3 month search, all have leather, flares, rack, running boards, 3rd row and moonroof. I found very very few with lockers. I just went for the one in the best condition with lockers.

sdnative wrote:What type of use do you have planned for it? Primarily camping/ expedition? Any day trips? I am on the fence now, because I love to wheel, and if I had a rig that nice, I would always be afraid to scratch it or put a dent in it. Due to a newborn at home, I am not in a position to go on a multi-day camping trip, but would love to when he gets a little older.

I waited until my two kids were older. I started them camping when they were around 4-5 years old. Then in October '05 I went on one of Tom's 3 day Mojave trips (with my 8 year old daughter) and I was hooked.

My preference is 2-3 day trips with camping in a different location each night. The Land Cruiser is so much smoother on the trail with the additional suspension travel provided by the lift. I'll be able to get my wife to go (she has an old back injury). I'm also looking into a hot water heater for the LC just to make it more comfortable for my wife. Ultimately I want it to be fun a comfortable for the whole family.

sdnative wrote:Do you have Js on in those pics? Cant tell, but what size tires are those?

Yes, in the photos I have the Js. The tires are almost 35", Toyo MT 315/75/16. Aired down to 18psi, the traction and the ride are wonderful.

Hey Frank!

Good to see you. It looks like you trimmed down on the number of pointy antennas.

sdnative wrote:

unwiredadventures wrote:The 1995 through 1997 models had, better brakes, a more powerful engine and full floater rear diff (full floater started in 1993).

Guys,

the 93-97 all had the same 1FZ-FE motor, same brakes, and the same ABS full floater axles. As far as I know, all 93+ rear disk axles are FF/ABS. SF/Non-ABS I believe are all drum brakes. The 95-97 motors had better intake systems (MAF vs. MAP?), but the engines are the same. Another difference is OBDII starting fully in 96 (95 was a transition year). In 95, they changed to a different tranny as well. They added airbags in 95.

So, if you plan on buying one, I would highly recommend reading the "buying an 80" link posted above. They are great vehicles, but you need to go into it with eyes open.

'93-94 also had different emission systems, which resulted in a lower horsepower output (an integrated air pump system). I had a supercharged '93 and a supercharged '96, and the '96 walked over the '93, power/acceleration wise.

cruiserlarry wrote: '93-94 also had different emission systems, which resulted in a lower horsepower output (an integrated air pump system). I had a supercharged '93 and a supercharged '96, and the '96 walked over the '93, power/acceleration wise.

Factory spec for 93-97 was the same 212 HP / 275 pound-ft torque. I don't doubt, however, that actual/measured results may have varied.....

unwiredadventures wrote: It took so long because I could not find with with lockers and in the condition I wanted.

Welcome to the "80's". I had the same problem. Eventually I started looking towards northern CA and AZ. I ultimately found mine just out of Phoenix. Have fun with it!

Arkarch wrote:It looks like you trimmed down on the number of pointy antennas.

I'll be drilling holes soon for lots of antennas.

My my, was it really 2005 when you joined us up in Calico the first time! Wow, how time flies. Getting itchy tires to get the Jeep out on the trail, mayhap Cameron and I will go out on a night run tonight just to grease the seals a bit....Jeep's been parked in the garage for over a month now....Sitting on the trickle charger so the battery doesnt go flat.

Anyway, you get those antennas mounted yet? Or are you getting cold feet about drilling the holes now

I have a brand new Antennex (I think) NMO hole bit just waiting to chew into it's first sheet of virgin sheetmetal! Come on by!

Hey Frank,

How is that laptop taking the ride? Does it have problems with the bumps? Do you have something supporting the screen?

It looks like that is a ThinkPad. Do you shut it off when you are going over rough terrain to prevent disk problems?

I've been using the same laptop in my trucks since 2006. No problem with bumps. The Ram-Mount arms do a good job of absorbing the shock of bumps.

I'm also itching to get the truck dirty, it's been too many weeks!