skierd Dork
2/20/09 8:59 a.m.

I've been haphazardly browsing CL and other sites looking for a new motorcycle, and I ran across a package deal that intrigued me. The CRF450R isn't what I'm so much concerned with as I have a pretty good idea about that beastie, its the '92 Land Cruiser. I've been wanting to replace my Taco with something 4wd and kinda want an SUV with the dog and like having a truck for truck stuff. Whats good, whats bad, and whats interesting about these things?

From the ad 1992 Toyota Land Cruiser The Good: 152,000 miles Center Locking Diff Tow Package AC Alarm Moon roof CD/Tape Cruise Control 3 row of seats Smells pretty -It's a great rig, burns no oil, tows great, everything works fine. I'd take it anywhere.

The Normal: Has a few pinstripes from mother nature, nothing noticeable just want you to know they are there, I'm sure they would come out with some buffing compound and elbow grease. Has a brush guard that is pretty useless. Needs a muffler support bracket at some point, I'd guess around 50 bucks at the local auto parts store. Has a few small dings here and there.

The Not so great: Gets 10-12 mpg. (city)

JFX001 HalfDork
2/20/09 9:30 a.m.

I have a '91. Great rig for my needs, but the mpg does suck. It has the 3FE (3FE powa!).I bought it from a mechanic friend of mine a couple of years ago for 2 grand. No rust, great in snow. The '93 + LC's are more desireable due to the newer engines. I'm fine with mine.

Minor concerns with mine: window switches, PS lines rusted, and I had to replace the alternator.It is highly recommended that you replace any and all maintenance items with OE ones.

Check out:

everything you need to know is there.(btw, it's an 80 series on the board)

Good Luck,


wetpossum New Reader
2/20/09 9:57 a.m.

That's probably the best Land Cruiser model ever made. They are good as soccer mom transports but they absolutely rock off road. Only minus is that they were only available with an automatic in the U.S. Of course, that's better for rock crawling.

I'm FJ55mike on IH8Mud.

GameboyRMH GRM+ Memberand SuperDork
2/20/09 10:02 a.m.

More of you guys need to post your vehicles in Reader's Rides.

belteshazzar Dork
2/20/09 10:10 a.m.

Great truck. Super slow and thirsty, but sounds like you know that. How much? did I miss that part?

skierd Dork
2/20/09 11:10 a.m.

Its $4000 for the truck and the bike. Thanks for the link JFX!

Nashco SuperDork
2/20/09 12:26 p.m.

Very reliable rigs if you take care of them, but after paying for fuel you're hard pressed to afford maintenance. Those things are horrible gas pigs. Like, unbelievably so...I don't understand how a vehicle that size with a relatively modern fuel system can still get such horrible fuel economy. I didn't believe my buddy when he told me the kind of mileage he got, but confirmed it after that through many places. He had 300k miles on the truck and we calculated the number of gallons that thing had gone through, pretty scary stuff. Seriously, OLD EPA ratings say 12/14 mpg (11/13 by the new numbers). 13 mpg on the highway...seriously. A gas powered 4x4 Suburban from the same era (bigger truck, bigger engine, etc.) is 2 mpg better. I honestly don't know how Toyota managed to accomplish that.

Great vehicles otherwise.


belteshazzar Dork
2/20/09 12:31 p.m.

lol. and for reference my wagoneer does a little better than that too.

minimac Dork
2/20/09 1:02 p.m.

I would stack my old Montero ('91) against either one! It had great equipment for highway running and was as good in the snow as my Grand Wagoneers were. Going offroad was a blast and it was unstoppable. I averaged 16 mpg city and 18-20 on the highway. My Wagoneers all gave 15-18, and it didn't matter if it was in the city or on the road Granted, it doesn't have the "wow" factor of a Land Cruiser, but I didn't have to throw my bike in with it to get a good buck out of it.

dculberson Reader
2/20/09 2:48 p.m.

Slow and thirsty, as mentioned, but otherwise absolutely excellent for what they do.

audifan New Reader
2/22/09 7:48 p.m.

my DD is a 97 LC w 138k on the clock These things are link tanks well maybe they are tanks LOL They are incredibly over built the rear axle ring is bigger that a DANA 60. If you are interested in a toy truck look elsewhere but if your mission is to get any where @ any time under any conditions because your life depends on it then get the landcruiser. Interesting point in to the overbuilt 'ness of the cruiser almost all of the fasteners of the landcruiser are grade 8 or above even for the stuff that it should not be. the 1fz-fe engine 93 and newer is a tough motor and was originally designed to go through three rebores before being ready for boat anchor duty. I do an 11 mile commute each way about 50/50 highway/town split and my truck is running 33" tires and a 2.5 " suspension lift (stock tire is 31) I have towed audi S4 (1995) car for 250 mile on a an open steel trailer NO problems. Sure she's slow but like I said If your like or you families depends on it no absolutely NO substitue on there was a member that fell asleep @ the wheel Ibelieve and ran into a parked construction crane @ highway speeds and lived try that in a HEEP sorry i meant jeep, or a chevy or anything else for that matter. Any way if you have any questions feel free to contact me.

thatsnowinnebago GRM+ Memberand HalfDork
2/23/09 12:09 a.m.

You really can't go wrong with a land cruiser, as long as you are willing to deal with the poor mileage. You could also check out expedition portal for some really nice examples.

Our Preferred Partners