The Toyota Land Cruiser J70 was introduced in 1984, it replaced the venerable J40. From 1984 to 1996 Toyota built a light-duty J70 along with the heavy-duty version.
A redesigned light-duty J70 arrived in 1990, and in 1996 it was superseded by the all-new J90. The heavy-duty 70-series kept marching on and is still being offered.
Body-on-frame, solid axles (the J90 got independent front suspension) and a two-speed transfer case. And, of course, with the spare wheel clinging to the rear door.
In my neck of the woods this kind of vehicles is bought for the towing capacity and durability rather than off-road capabilities. The registered towing capacity of this Land Cruiser is 2,500 kg (5,512 lbs).
The J73 is the two-door medium wheelbase version with the FRP Top. The one I caught got our van conversion treatment and, consequently, a registration as a commercial vehicle.
Back then the Land Cruiser had multiple Japanese competitors in my country: the Nissan Patrol, Mitsubishi Pajero, Isuzu Trooper (sold as Opel Monterey here) and the Daihatsu Rocky (that’s the Rugger, not the little toy-SUV).
Meanwhile things have changed drastically. The only offerings now from the Land of the Rising Sun in this segment are the Mitsubishi Pajero and Toyota Land Cruiser, currently the 150-series. The Land Cruiser has the upper hand though, by a wide margin.
Oh look, in the background! A car with a color! It’s a Volvo V40, by the way. Volvo’s highly popular C-segment representative.
This Land Cruiser is powered by Toyota’s 1KZ-T engine, hence the letters KZ in its model designation. That’s a 3.0 liter four-cylinder SOHC 8v turbo diesel engine with indirect injection, introduced in 1993. Its maximum power output is 125 DIN-hp. A perfect engine in this segment.
There was a bit of rust here and there, but I’m sure it will soldier on for many years to come. These are desirable off-roaders, all over the globe. Most likely it will eventually end up somewhere in the Middle East or Africa.
I was nearly completely unfamiliar with these Land Cruisers until a few months ago, when I saw one on the road here in Virginia — undoubtedly a private import to the US.
From afar, I thought it was an early Isuzu Trooper that had undergone some modifications, but then its different shape dawned on me, and I realized that I was looking at something completely different. Plus, upon getting closer, I saw that it had right-hand drive. This one — I believe — is from the early to mid-1990s.
I like these… it’s good to get a bit of background on this car. Hopefully one day I’ll be able to get a little closer to one.
Nice catch, that’s the heavy-duty 70-series.
Front view, heavy-duty 70-series with an FRP top.
Very interesting. Out of curiosity, what distinguishes a heavy-duty 70-series Land Cruiser from a light-duty model?
Bigger all around, heavier, leaf springs, more towing capacity. They were available here too, with a naturally aspirated 4.2 liter inline-6 diesel (the light-duty 70 never had a 6-cylinder).
An old-school (with real front fenders!) hardcore off-road “truck”, while the light-duty was more SUV-oriented (all relative, of course; after all, it’s still called a Land Cruiser).
Thanks, Johannes!
The light duty version is based on the Hilux like the Prado its not really a Landcruiser.
The 2 Door Version Of 80s Nissan Patrol that Used To Be Assembled Down Here Has The Same Fiberglass Half Roof Like This Toyota.I Don’t know what It Does?
Wow, this is completely foreign to me. Toyota never deigned to stoop into the small offroader market here in the US, leaving us with only the big expensive LCs. I often wonder why some models are brought here and some are not. I suppose that the competition of inexpensive Japanese competition from the likes of Isuzu and Suzuki as well as the hold that Jeep had/has on the US market probably made it not worth the legal certifications/modifications necessary to offer it here. Too bad, these look very interesting.
Toyota offered the 4Runner in this segment, and the RAV4 starting in ’96 for people who wanted something even smaller and more carlike.
Both started as two-door semi convertibles with detachable fiberglass tops before evolving into exclusively all-steel four-door wagons (it could be argued that today’s 4Runner is heavier-duty and more of an offroader than it would be if it werent for Toyota infilling new crossover segments with new models).
Toyota did dabble into the small offroad market with the girlish RAV4.
The RAV4 is not a “small offroad.” It was designed off the Corolla platform as one of the earliest crossovers, with the full knowledge that most of its owners would never venture off paved road.
Was the Daihatsu Rocky (or Fourtrak in Europe) and Feroza (Sportrak) based on this model of Land Cruiser?
This is the Daihatsu Rocky as we knew it in Continental Europe, or Fourtrak in the UK. I only remember them with a 2.8 liter 4-cylinder turbo diesel.
As far as I know not based on a Land Cruiser.
Fair number of these here in Vancouver, BC—it’s easier to get a foreign-spec car into Canada than into the US, as any vehicle over 15 years old can come to Canada regardless of its (non)compliance with Canadian safety and emissions standards. Actually registering the vehicle can be awholenother ball of wax, because while cars > 15 years old are exempt from the federal standards, they’re not exempt from provincial safety and emissions regs. Not a big deal with these 70-series Land Cruisers, which use standard-size headlamps easily swapped for American sealed beams (or H4s, etc) for use on the right-hand side of the road.
Speaking of lights (I usually don’t, but I’ll make an exception just this once): the feature vehicle in this post has a bit of a twisted rear lighting system for the European and Australian markets. The original, design-intended taillamps—the vertical units at the left and right rear corners—are partly blacked over and there are kinda kludgy lookin’ horizontal stop-tail-turn lamps spliced into the rear bumper face. The reversing lamps in the vertical/corner lights are functional, and the left red section is functional as a rear fog lamp, but the left and right amber sections and the right red section are blanked off. This is because the spare wheel carrier hinders the inboard visibility angles of the right-side vertical/corner lights, running them afoul of UN (“European”) regs requiring 45° inboard and 80° outboard visibility.
Japanese and North American visibility regs are less stringent; the Japan-spec rear lamp setup looks like this:
I was about to say this about the lights. I’m not sure what the Aussie regs specify, but I know my brother-in-law’s Nissan Patrol had the same problem – spare tyre in the way – but there’s nothing to stop some creative wiring restoring the lenses to their intended function.
When you’re behind one in traffic (which often happens here), the low-mount indicators and brake lights mean they can’t be seen, and he solved the reversing light being only on one side (is the other a high-intensity rear fog-light for Europe?) by adding an extra one. That comes in handy on the farm.
The ADRs (Australian Design Rules) contain the same technical requirements as the UN (“European”) Regulations, minus the UN type-approval administration protocols, plus some room for other-than-UN technical requirements.
It would take more than creative wiring to restore the design-intended lights; it would take the Japan-spec taillamp units themselves.
Yes, low-mount lamps are problematic the way you describe. Also yes, rear frog lamp on driver side and reversing lamp on the other side is a common arrangement.
Johannes, thanks for the awesome article! I love Land Cruisers, although I will never have any reason to own one.
Daniel, thanks for shedding light (no pun intended!) on the funky rear light arrangements on those Euro spec offroaders. Now I finally know the reason and won’t stay awake at night wondering about them.
That’s me: a walking, talking sleeping pill ;^)
Haha… But I really appreciate your knowledge and insights into automotive lighting. I, for one, am quite particular about how cars should have mandatory amber rear turn signals along with side repeaters. Unfortunately my car has neither!
I can die happy when those two omissions from North American lighting regs are corrected; I expect to live a long and cranky life.
Off topic, but did anyone notice the black Chevy Suburban in the background of the last picture? I’d love to know what that’s doing in the Netherlands. Those things are huge by European standards.
It’s not unusual to see a sprinkle of giant American vehicles even in unlikely-seeming European cities. I watched a wrong-hand-drive mid-’80s Chev Caprice wagon do a 75-point left turn in the middle of London. I’ve seen Suburbans and Explorers and Escalades in Frankfurt and Amsterdam and Paris. And a whole lot more than a sprinkling them in Geneva, where they’re a rolling billboard that says, “Look, look at me; I’m so wealthy I can afford to feed this vehicle at USD $6.45/gallon”.
You’d be surprised how many US pickups are driving around here. All ages: old, recent and brand new.
Registered and used as commercial vehicles. Both diesel and gasoline. The gasoline engines run on LPG, by far the cheapest fuel per liter.
Dodge/Ram seems to be the most popular choice.