The 70 Series Toyota Land Cruiser is an automotive icon with a longer history than most. In production for 40 years with the same boxy good looks, it’s treasured as a stout, reliable off-roader that always gets the job done. And yet, this venerable steed has one odd flaw that Toyota hasn’t seen fit to correct for some time.
Now, I preface this by saying that this is not news to Aussie punters who have lived with the 70 Series for decades. But if you’ve never gotten up close and personal with the model, it’s an interesting tidbit that might surprise you about Toyota’s most storied off-roader.
It all goes back to 2007 when Toyota first introduced the 4.5-liter turbodiesel V8 to the 70 Series range. At that time, Toyota engineers widened the front track to fit the larger donk under the hood. However, they saw no justifiable reason to change things at the rear. Thus, the 70 Series ended up with a front track 3.74 inches (95 mm) wider than the rear. The change was rolled out across the range as it didn’t make sense to build two drastically different Land Cruiser front ends when one would do.
Problematic
This is sub-optimal in certain conditions. The problem is most apparent when driving in sand. Normally, the front wheels will create a path through the sand in which the rear wheels follow. However, for the 70 Series, a full 1.87 inches (47.5 mm) of each rear tire sticks out beyond the width of the front tire, towards the inside of the vehicle. This creates additional drag as the rear tires have to plow more sand out of the way, rather than simply riding in the ruts created by the front tires.
At worst, this can create instability at speed as each rear wheel tries to seek the center of the rut created by the wheel in front. Some drivers have reported fishtailing or oscillation at speed which can be difficult to control. The effect is similar on other loose surfaces such as gravel or soft dirt.
Furthermore, when driving on harder rutted tracks, the rear wheels can also try to climb the inside of a rut that the front tire is otherwise neatly tracking. That, or the inside edge of each rear tire punches through the edges of a dry crusty rut as the front tire neatly rolls through it. This again leads to unstable or frustrating handling.
The Fixes
Toyota doesn’t see the track difference as a problem. Many owners buy 70 Series Land Cruisers and drive them as stock without issue. However, some find the look or the handling intolerable, and seek out a solution.
One of the easiest fixes is to run different offset wheels front and rear. By running zero-offset wheels up front and -44 or -55 offset wheels on the rear, the actual track of the vehicle ends up much closer between the front and rear axles.
In the same vein, another easy mod is to simply install wheel spacers, at least in theory. However, we’re not talking about a slim 1/4-inch or 1/2-inch spacer here. You’d need a massive 1.87-inch spacer on each side if you want to get the track perfectly matched. Commercial options are readily available, with 1.5-inch or 2-inch spacers the most common. They don’t get the tracks perfectly matched, but they get it a lot closer than stock.
Both of these fixes come with a caveat, though. They move the tire outward from the hub, putting much greater loads on the wheel bearings and the hub in turn. Spacers in particular can also present issues of their own. If studs and wheel nuts aren’t correctly selected to suit, they may not have enough engagement and this can lead to failure. Furthermore, in Australia at least, there are limits on how much the track width of a vehicle can be changed with such modifications before it becomes illegal. Usually, that’s just 1 inch (25mm) in total, or 1/2 inch (12.5 mm) per wheel.
A proper” solution is available if you’ve got the money to spend, of course. A replacement rear differential setup can solve the problem without making compromises to safety or robustness. As you might expect, though, replacing the whole rear axle can cost thousands of dollars, and also involves replacing brake lines and modifying the hand brake cable to suit. It’s a major modification, to the point that it can require engineering approval and recertification in certain Australian states, at least.
What About The New One?
In 2023, Toyota started shipping newly upgraded versions of the 70 Series. The headline attraction of the refresh is the new four-cylinder turbodiesel engine, paired with a 6-speed automatic. You might think that the smaller engine would see Toyota narrow the front track back into line, but no. You might also think the refresh could justify widening the rear axle to match, right? Alas, Toyota didn’t do that either.
Speaking to CarExpert late last year, Toyota noted that the business case for widening the rear axle wasn’t there. “When you’ve got a wider axle, that puts extra stress on other parts of the chassis. There’s a lot of development required in that, and then the body needs to be widened to accommodate it,” said Ray Munday, senior manager for vehicle evaluation at Toyota Australia. “You’ve got a lot of change points from both chassis and axle, and body. We understand there are customers requesting that change but the level of investment is very high for that, and there’s a level of re-validation required.”
Ultimately, Toyota wanted to get the new engine into the 70 Series without a lot of fuss. Thus, the four-cylinder was dropped into the 70 Series as-is. The latest models, whether rocking the V8 or the new four-cylinder, still have a front track that’s wider than the rear. Toyota’s order books are full to bursting without fixing the problem, so you can see why it didn’t bother.
The problem isn’t going away any time soon. If you’re lucky enough to be purchasing a new 70 Series, I’d suggest driving it for a while and deciding for yourself whether the track difference bothers you. If it does, you’re now armed with the knowledge you need to tackle the problem.
Image credits: Toyota, Lewin Day, SnakeRacingComAu via YouTube Screenshot
Holy cow, man, another clicky-baity article and headline. What’s happening over here, kids?
What would you title it?
I’m glad you asked, and I do like your writing. I also don’t know how things get written and/or titled here.
But do people really hate it? I won’t pretend to view everything online…but I don’t see it being something even talked about, and as the replies showed, a) easy to address, and b) lots of other rigs have their own issue.
Similarly, speaking of, I had a 2006 Suburban eventually eaten by the tinworm. I had no idea that due to design, the steering wheel wasn’t centered…and wasn’t forever. Only the new redesign address this, but I have never seen anyone say that it was a problem. This article was essentially the same thing as trumpeting the GM800/etc. offset steering wheel like it’s just been discovered and is a huge deal. They sold 60k of them two separate months, and other months, too…and no torches were lit or pitchforks brandished.
Okay, let me compile a list of vehicles that also have this mismatch, from what others are saying.
Citroen DS
W123 Mercedes
1980-1996 f150s and Broncos
All Econolines 1992+
Every Chevy pickup and Bronco for a couple decades
And vehicles with other kinds of track mismatch:
My Jeep J10, which is significantly wider in the rear
Every single dually vehicle ever made, including all medium and heavy duty trucks
Any vehicle with a staggered tire size, apparently the Aventador has quite the track mismatch, and I think the c8 Corvette
Interesting. While I understand why some may prefer symmetrical track widths, I’ve had a couple 4x4s with wider front tracks vs rear and have had no issue whatsoever in soft terrain (mud, in my case). My daily ‘96 K1500 is about 1.5” wider up front, and I think my ‘99 K2500 is actually 2” wider.
All that to say, Toyota, for the love of all that’s holy, please bring the 70 Series to the US.
I think this warrants some real world testing. Like how does this affect performance in the Walmart parking lot, or in the drive through lane?
When buying my 79 Series (Dual Cab Pick Up) I test drove a few and I found the track issue reared its ugly head on soft sand, as you mentioned, and also at freeway speeds on poor roads that suffer from longitudinal rutting. Having a mechanically ancient heavy truck all of a sudden want to channel its Japanese heritage and give off Tokyo Drift vibes isn’t good for the blood pressure.
I ended up buying a second had 79 that had the aforementioned replacement axle conversion that now perfectly matches the front track, plus converting from leaf springs to coils has improved the ride quality no end.
While this wasn’t the cheapest way to go, I didn’t want the hassle of carrying 2 spare wheels with different offsets, or dealing with getting a defect (or insurance refusing a claim) for running spacers as they are illegal in Australia.
The 70 series vehicles are fantastic trucks, an incredible starting platform to modify into whatever suits you best, there is such a strong aftermarket for them here you are only limited by your imagination. I love mine, my family and I have travelled a lot all over the country making memories that will last a lifetime, just like a 70 series.
only 95 mm… that’s nothing 😉
(my ds pictured on the left has 200 mm, very capable in driving on the road and more than a little bit capable in driving off-road)
Lewin, you have successfully got me to stop wanting this unobtanium vehicle, but now I want more parts from Kaon AU to get my GX perfect.
Ha! It does seem like a hassle hey.
That’s it! I’m cancelling my order!
Body width ostensibly isn’t a problem, as you can just put wider flares on it, but if there are validation requirements for, say, clearance between tire and body at full upward travel, even that would present a lot of expense. .
All the later model Ford E Series vans have this problem also, very noticeable from behind when in traffic.
Oh wait seriously? I always thought it was just because they had bent frames and crab walked a bit. Now I know
I thought that also, or that the shackles got loose/axle shifted etc. Then one day I was assigned a like-new 2013 e250 that had the issue, I could even notice it from the driver’s rear view mirror so I googled it. For claimed to help narrow the turning or something iirc
Also it can be an issue in snow, though the Aussies wouldn’t really know that for the most part.
Shame on Toyota.
Would still buy one here. This is one of very few vehicle I would drop 80 grand on new (I drive a used 2013 CRV, let me dream)
Squarebody GM pickups had this issue too, though I don’t think it was as drastic. When I bought mine as a kid, the previous owner had put wider wheels will less offset on the rear to even it off. I replaced the wheels with 4 identical alloys and 35″ tires, it wasn’t terrible, but it DID irk me a bit. A better fix was swapping in the rear from a 3/4 ton GM van of the same vintage, they had a wider rear that matched the front.
Toyota is so annoying at times. How a company that has such high engineering standards can also have such a “meh, good enough” attitude is mystifying. The 3rd gen Taco drum brakes is a great example, as well as the 4Runner being in its FIFTEENTH model year of production virtually unchanged.
1980-1996 f150s, e150s, and Broncos also have a noticeably wider front track. My j10 has a noticeably wider rear track. Track mismatch used to be very common.
Until people stop buying them, why would Toyota invest a dime in new tech? As someone who grew up camping and wheeling in my dad’s 85 4Runner, I love Toyotas of the past but the current day fanaticsm is baffling.
It really is true. Toyota is selling more 4R’s now than ever before. In the early years of the 5TH gen there were even rumors of it being killed off, the numbers were pretty low. Apparently the 2014 “angry catfish” update was well received, numbers went way up.
I have one, a 2013 I bought in 2019 with 80K miles. It’s “ok” but I don’t think they’re that special. It was a good value when I bought it used, but no way would I pay what they’re asking for a new one.
Crazy thing is that 5 years and 90K miles, it’s still worth just 5K less than what I paid for it. It IS nice knowing that no matter how beat down this thing gets, it will probably never be worth less than 10 grand.
I think a big reason 4Runners are and will continue to be seen as more durable over time than Wranglers and the new Bronco is how easily the American SUVs allow you to fit large tires and modify in general. This puts a lot more stress on, well, everything.
I think stock for stock, a JK Wrangler and a 5G T4R are equally durable and reliable but because very few Toyotas will ever wear a 35+ inch tire, we will see many more Toyotas with stratospheric mileages over time.
Yep, the squarebodies started it, and it continued through the GMT-400 and GMT-800 model lines (depending upon options).
Drum brakes are kinda par for the course for mid-size trucks all over the world. Rear discs are the exception not the rule. Pay loads for most mid-size trucks hover around 1000kgs, so they all have leaf springs and drums (there are some exceptions of course). I’d say its just one way to keep costs down maybe? I don’t really get it. I wish the Hilux and Ranger had better rides and stopping power though.
I don’t know about the track on my 1994 Sonoma, but the rear brakes are definitely sub-optimal verging on unacceptable if carrying any kind of payload.
My f150 has a front track at least 2″ wider than the rear track. This is extremely common on older vehicles, particularly pickups and 4x4s. Prerunner guys intentionally make their front track way wider than the rear track.
For most kinds of driving, it’s a total non issue, and for certain things, like prerunner stuff, it’s a significant benefit to stability and allows greater travel.
For driving on soft stuff, the rear wheels should follow the ruts of the front wheels for minimum drag. However, driving in your own ruts also maximizes sinking in soft stuff. Guys with four wheel steering sometimes crab walk specifically so that their rear wheels are not driving in their front wheels’ ruts, which maximizes flotation and traction.
Having never driven a 70 series specifically, this sounds like it’s really really not a big deal.
Huh. I never thought of having different track widths front and rear on a desert truck to be advantageous, rather, it being a consequence of a long-travel IFS setup. Makes sense though.
The problem isn’t that they did it, its that they continue to do it. Toyota already makes all kinds of axle widths with the 9.5, and they did during the early 70 series production. This axle is now used exclusively in the 70, but Toyota has a new 9.5 that could be made to work here. It’s inexcusable to NOT change the width at this point. I guess the logic is that the 70 series is not going to be around forever…but then they put a new engine and front end and certify it with new safety systems? Cmon Toyota, step it up.
This is a company that had a serious recall regarding… *checks notes* lugnuts. In 2023.
This is the exact line of… reasoning? Toyota has employed that has turned me off the brand for the last decade plus. Same sort of deal as the Tacoma having drums in the rear “because trucks perform better with drums in the rear” (or some such nonsense) while the show car is parked between a Tundra and a 4Runner (both with discs in the rear). GM cheaps out to pinch pennies; it’s at least understandable (I’m no GM fanboi either). Toyota cheaps out because there are enough people who don’t know better to fill out the order books. Screw the people that actually car about the product or the brand. It will come back to bite them.
Or using the extra flexibility inherent in a c-channel frame to add to “suspension travel.”
What utter nonsense from Toyota. Extending the axle tube an inch and a half each side would take about 5 minutes. Adding some truss to the tube would cost them a few dollars. So would widening the cheap plastic fender flares.
Didn’t Ford Econolines have a similar thing where the rear track was narrower?
Also, I spent many years driving the 70 series pickups in Mali and Papua New Guinea. Indestructible but man oh man were the rides rough. Clearly designed to have a lot of weight in the back. The enclosed version was a lot more comfortable to drive. One thing I found different was the rear differential wasn’t centered it was off to one side. Driving them made me wish they were available in Canada. Well, besides the mines that have them for underground use.
Lots of older cars have it. Citroen DS has a 59″ front track and a 51″ rear track. Mercedes W123 has a front of 58.6″ and a rear of 56.9″.
And wait until you hear what the Isetta had!
I can’t unsee that now