Jeep vs. Land Rover vs. LandCruiser

[jd_1138]

My dad owned a few International Scouts back in the 70's. Back then you could buy them in great shape for just a few hundred.

Scouts like to go swimming.

[johnmrson]

Having been an avid 4wdriver and ffroader for about 30 years, to me it's a no brainer. The Landcruiser wins easily. My last vehicle was a 1993 80 Series Landcruiser. It had a 3" lift, 35 inch M/T tyres, front and rear diff locks etc etc. It went anywhere I wanted it to go and yet it was still fine as a daily driver. It was comfortable and reliable.

[buddydog]

I bought a 1973 Land cruiser new and drove it for 20 years.
I also had a 1977 owned it for 10 years.
I now own a 1982 Jeep CJ-5.The Jeep is fun but not even in the same ballpark as the Land Cruiser.

[natchez]

I run all over town and do my desert driving with a two-door 2008 Jeep Wrangler. It is fine for short jaunts, but noisy and uncomfortable on the freeway. Reliability has been okay- little stuff breaks on it. It is built nowhere close to as well as a Toyota Landcruiser and is not really even in the same league.

But, I just wanted something inexpensive and fun for when we go bird hunting, and the roof comes off on the Jeep which I do like. The biggest benefits to a Wrangler are the short wheelbase for tackling obstacles and a good take-off angle. To its credit I took the Jeep out after last spring's snow melt and it tackled all of the washed out roads with heavy run off really well. Other folks in our party had to go around what I could easily go right through. Also, for some reason even I cannot fathom, I do like the thing despite the poor on road ride, the rough off-road ride, the noise, and the rattles.

If you have only one vehicle, I would not recommend the Wrangler. If like me, it is an extra vehicle for you and you do not expect too much from it in town, then it might do.

[Tony Miller]

I've had a Land Rover for decades.

It ain't one of those new fangled fancy pants ones either

Turtle,

Great looking Rover. I owned and drove Rovers exclusively for about 15 years. Sold my last one about 5 years ago. They were my only vehicles. I have had a 1958 Ser.I 88", a 1963 Ser.II 88", a 1967 Ser.IIa 109", a 1980 something military lightweight and lastly a late 1970s Ser.IIa on a new coil sprung chassis with a Def. 90 engine.

Wonderful vehicles if you like to tinker. Whether going to Kmart or Katmandu you will have to stop and fix something but you WILL get there. And always remember, a Rover that does not leak fluids is out of something!

Tony

[turtle]

Turtle,

Great looking Rover. I owned and drove Rovers exclusively for about 15 years. Sold my last one about 5 years ago. They were my only vehicles. I have had a 1958 Ser.I 88", a 1963 Ser.II 88", a 1967 Ser.IIa 109", a 1980 something military lightweight and lastly a late 1970s Ser.IIa on a new coil sprung chassis with a Def. 90 engine.

Wonderful vehicles if you like to tinker. Whether going to Kmart or Katmandu you will have to stop and fix something but you WILL get there. And always remember, a Rover that does not leak fluids is out of something!

Tony

Thanks Tony. I've had this one since 1998. It was the last Rover brought into the US. In fact it had to be made for the owner through the Land Rover special vehicles section. The owner picked it up at the factory which is why it has UK plates and US plates on it but is a left hand drive. It was made to US specs several months after US market Rovers were no longer built.

You will get a kick out of this web page I did about the Rover when I bought it all those years ago

http://www.turtle-web.com/photos/myRover/

[galopede]

Personally I've never owned or driven any of them but I always remember an Australian saying: If you want to drive into the bush, get a Land Rover. If you want to drive back out as well, take a Toyota!

Gareth

[incucrash]

I think they are all wise decisions, an older land rover is a great choice.

I think Jeep wranglers fall outside of your every day chrysler junk, especially considering the aftermarket part community.

consider what is still being made, what you can still get parts for, cost.

[The Nid Hog]

I've owned Jeeps and a Mitsubishi Pajero (sold as a Dodge Raider in the US) but nothing compares to my much-loved 1982 Toyota FJ40. That was the best car that I've ever driven. It would go anywhere and was unbelievably durable. If I would wake up one morning and see it in my driveway again, I'd be the happiest guy in the world.

[blary54]

If I were buying a Jeep I would also go with a Rubicon. I have been looking for a wrecked one for a few years and they are highly sought after. I don't see how you can lump all Chrysler owned vehicles into a junk category. Didn't they just buy Mercedes a few years ago? I guess they are junk too?

Diamler did sell their stake in Chrysler in 2007 but the company really has turned around. The new CEO of Chrysler took the bailout money to upgrade the assembly lines to state of the art equipment. Newer Chrysler cars are very high quality now.

If your bored here is the video I saw about how Chrysler turned it around(13 minutes but good).

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7403188n

[turtle]

The thing I like about Land Rovers is that you can still get every part that goes on the vehicle.

Even the specialty parts like capture bolts/nuts, tool kits, jacks, etc.

Now may 60 year old vehicles can you say that about (and they are stocked here in the US)?

http://www.roversnorth.com/c-10-land...i-iia-iii.aspx

http://www.roverparts.com/Parts_Cata...Parts_Catalog/

Need a door? No problem. Brake lines? Yep. How about a new driver's seat or rear jump seat? Yep still available. Want to put that cool optional hood mounted spare tire mount on? Still available. Need a plastic battery tray? Just order it. Need new metal floor pans? No problem-o. Hey you want a new frame. Still available.

The ONLY part NOT available new for the early series cars is the firewall. You need a firewall you are SOL.

[jd_1138]

Probably wouldn't be too hard to make a firewall from sheetmetal.

[turtle]

Probably wouldn't be too hard to make a firewall from sheetmetal.

It's a pretty complex piece. Everything attaches to it from the doors to the windshield to the instrument cluster

[eeney]

I know land rovers aren't renowned for their reliability (my last one had a new gearbox 15k kms from new), but with lookers like the Evoque I feel the Jeeps and Japanese just look dated.

[jwhite]

I know land rovers aren't renowned for their reliability (my last one had a new gearbox 15k kms from new), but with lookers like the Evoque I feel the Jeeps and Japanese just look dated.

Well that sure is pretty, but we're talking off road.

That won't go here*.


Probably not much luck here either.


* that's not me in my jeep.

[73mountaineer]

I know land rovers aren't renowned for their reliability (my last one had a new gearbox 15k kms from new), but with lookers like the Evoque I feel the Jeeps and Japanese just look dated.

Problem is, that's probably the "softest" Land Rover ever made. When it was first announced, it was widely discussed - and admitted by LR - that they were targeting the female demographic with the Evoque. With the change in ownership, and now that it is in production, that talk has been hushed. It really isn't even in the same category as an off-road vehicle, IMHO. It's much more a "soft-roader" than an off-roader, and is comparable in style to the others in that class.

To the OP, I think that you need to define whether you are looking at vintage vehicles or recent model years. You can already see that you have people talking about 20-30 year-old vehicles vs. current production, which isn't even remotely comparable. Folks complaining about the ride quality of Jeeps then others suggesting you find a vintage Rover or Land Cruiser...well, which one realistically has better on-road manners? For off-roading, all things being equal, a bone stock Wrangler Rubicon is going to get you places the other two couldn't even touch, or wouldn't dare unless you are fond of the idea of tearing up your $80k Land Cruiser or your $50k+ Land Rover. Also, calling Jeeps junk with Land Rover's horrid reputation for reliability is just silly. In comparison to Toyota? Yeah, I'll buy that, but Land Rover? No way.

The FJ Cruiser is comparable to a Wrangler & isn't without flaws either, mainly form over function issues, but still (justifiably) has its fans.

Point being, the current generation of these three vehicles don't really compare in any practical sense. Vintage vehicles are a whole 'nother ball game & I would grab a vintage Land Cruiser or Rover (especially Defender) in a heartbeat over a CJ, or any Wrangler up to the past 4-5 years. That's not to say that I don't like older Jeeps, just that those others would be my pick on sheer uniqueness coupled with off-roadability.

Wranglers have a huge (HUGE) aftermarket and you can literally build one any way that you want it. You can do much of the same with a vintage Land Cruiser or some Rovers, but I don't think that the aftermarket support for those even comes close to approaching Jeep.

[saf]

In the states a jeep is easier to come by, more importantly buying a spare jeep for parts is easy. All of them are completely capable of doing what you want.

[turtle]

I sold my Range Rover a few years ago. Sorry I did. 250k miles on it and little more than scheduled maintenance. Was the first year they imported them into the US (1988) so more of a "fancy truck" and less of a "luxury boat" like the new ones are.

Plenty of scratches and bottom smacks from going "trailing". I've had to use it to pull a few people out of places they should not have gone.

[jd_1138]

To the OP, I think that you need to define whether you are looking at vintage vehicles or recent model years. You can already see that you have people talking about 20-30 year-old vehicles vs. current production, which isn't even remotely comparable. Folks complaining about the ride quality of Jeeps then others suggesting you find a vintage Rover or Land Cruiser...well, which one realistically has better on-road manners? For off-roading, all things being equal, a bone stock Wrangler Rubicon is going to get you places the other two couldn't even touch, or wouldn't dare unless you are fond of the idea of tearing up your $80k Land Cruiser or your $50k+ Land Rover. Also, calling Jeeps junk with Land Rover's horrid reputation for reliability is just silly. In comparison to Toyota? Yeah, I'll buy that, but Land Rover? No way.

I'd want something newer, not vintage. I don't like the looks of the new Toyota FJ -- too fat and busy looking. The Landcruiser would be too big. I would get a Land Rover Discovery or Defender if I lived in the UK, but since I live in the USA, I think a Jeep would be easier to repair and get parts for. I want something to go camping in -- not too much serious off roading. Might get a plow for it for plowing the driveway at the house, neighbor's, and at work. I looked at an '04 Wrangler that has super low miles (30k) and it's in great shape and has some nice mods -- slight lift, bigger tires (but comes with the original rims and tires), hard and soft tops. He wants $13,000 for it.

[jd_1138]

That new white Range Rover above is for upper middle class soccer moms. It has way too much plastic and unnecessary bits to be a serious off roader.