Are US Rover lovers mad like Toyota lovers?

[pskhaat]

I'm curious if Land/Range Rover lovers are upset at the current product offerings of the company in the US market? I am, yes, an old Toyota fan and dismayed at the products that are coming out of Toyota today.

The dumming-down of our rigs to the US market has been happening for a while now, but quite honestly there are few if any legal manufacturers whocater to my vehicle needs. I'm mad at Toyota for their recent designs, their recent engine choices, their transmission options, leather, nav screens, bling, suspension choice, etc. Are Rover lovers in the same/similar boat?

[BKCowGod]

I've not been a fan of Land Rover since the Disco Series 2... And it has nothing to do with Ford. Quite frankly, I have a lot of respect for the Premier Auto Group. I just wish someone would build something to compete with the Wrangler.

I also want someone to build a pickup truck with the suspension and wheelbase of the Land Rover Discovery 1, the cab and bed of the Nissan King Cab, and a smallish (3.0-4.0 or so) turbodiesel mated to a 5 speed... Is that too much to ask?

[gcec]

Blame the Government and domestic manufacturers. They have spent decades creating barriers to the foreign manufacturers; restrictive trade policies, alleged "safety" requirements, and colluding to block import vehicles.

Importation of 2 door 4x4s was made illegal during the '80s to protect AMC/Jeep. Then came 5 mph bumpers, air bags, etc.

Does anyone actually believe that a Defender or Toyota FJ is less safe than a Wrangler or Ford Exploder? I mean really, they're good enough for Europe, Africa, Asia, South America, and Oz - but not North America? Or maybe North Americans are just too molly-coddled.

I mean really if the issue is safety then why allow un-modified 15 or 25 year old vehicles. Why can't "failings" be remediated.

Or another example; I tried to import Smart cars into Canada in '98 - no dice, as they didn't meet "standards". Strange how once Chrysler merged into Daimler-Chrysler the vehicles suddenly start to show up on the roads. Anyone know what they changed on the vehicles? A couple of safety warning labels and Owner's Manuals.

Rant over - but this whole subject really p's me off :mad:

[60seriesguy]

It's not just the government and the auto makers, it our fellow Americans. We've become a nation of couch potatoes, long-range commuters, soft suburbanites. You think the people on this forum represent the mainstream? We're like museum-level ananchronisms, people who want to be self-reliant, survive in the wilderness, explore the unknown without creature comforts...

Auto-makers don't just make the market, they also respond to it. They're not just offering leather and navigation and twenty cupholders, they're also responding to the demand for such features. Look at the legions of poseur vehicles like the H3. People want to *look* tough, but they don't want the ride quality and lack of ammenities that come with most tough trucks.

I love seeing threads on all of the Land Cruiser boards of people complaining that Toyota doesn't sell the HZJ79 troop carrier in the US...like people would buy it? Sure, you'd get a handful of diehard Cruiserheads or people truly craving a Third World-spec vehicle forking up upwards of $40K for one, but MOST Americans (and that's what the automakers, Toyota and Land Rover included, are after), the ones that buy a new car every three years, wouldn't even come close to a metal coffin with a diesel engine, the ride of a Conestoga wagon, with vynil seats and nary a cupholder in sight. Toyota doesn't want people buying a car and keeping it for ten years while doing all maintenance and repairs themselves, they want the legions of couch potatoes that buy a new car every 3-4 years and have it serviced and repaired at the dealership. That's the sad truth.

[cruiser guy]

I also want someone to build a pickup truck with the suspension and wheelbase of the Land Rover Discovery 1, the cab and bed of the Nissan King Cab, and a smallish (3.0-4.0 or so) turbodiesel mated to a 5 speed... Is that too much to ask?

I know where a LandRover that meets the above description might be for sale with U.S. plates. PM me and I'll forward you the contact info. It's NOT mine and I have NO interest in it but I have seen it.

As for not buying a vehicle every 3-4 years, I'd like to go on record with the manufacturers that UNLESS they offer what I want I'll be driving my '82 Toyota LandCruiser diesel 20 years from now!!

[BKCowGod]

Man would I love to be in a position to take you up on that offer!

My next vehicle purchase is a coin flip away from a 1990 Audi Coupe quattro or 1990 BMW 325iX for a daily driver :/

[Scott Brady]

It's not just the government and the auto makers, it our fellow Americans. We've become a nation of couch potatoes, long-range commuters, soft suburbanites. You think the people on this forum represent the mainstream? We're like museum-level ananchronisms, people who want to be self-reliant, survive in the wilderness, explore the unknown without creature comforts...
.

Beautifully said!

I am going to make this the forum qoute...

The consumers dictate the products sold. Many say they want function, but would not be willing to give up their leather seats and latte sized cupholders.

[gcec]

The consumers dictate the products sold. Many say they want function, but would not be willing to give up their leather seats and latte sized cupholders.

Yeah, I love the free market argument, but that dog don't hunt. The products are out there in other markets, and people buy them. Land Rover builds Defenders and IS eager to sell them in North America. They went through a LOT of bother to create the NAS spec vehicles. Then they tried the CKD, but that went nowhere - sadly. And it isn't the consumer that prevents it happening.

For example, Chrysler and Ford have little chance of selling large numbers of full size pickups in the UK but there are some over here - because it isn't ILLEGAL to import them!! Just change the headlights, add a rear fog light, and pass the standard safety test (MOT). They don't even have to be right hand drive.

So what's the problem in North America?

It comes down to one thing - PROTECTIONISM!!

[60seriesguy]

Yeah, I love the free market argument, but that dog don't hunt. The products are out there in other markets, and people buy them. Land Rover builds Defenders and IS eager to sell them in North America. They went through a LOT of bother to create the NAS spec vehicles. Then they tried the CKD, but that went nowhere - sadly. And it isn't the consumer that prevents it happening.

For example, Chrysler and Ford have little chance of selling large numbers of full size pickups in the UK but there are some over here - because it isn't ILLEGAL to import them!! Just change the headlights, add a rear fog light, and pass the standard safety test (MOT). They don't even have to be right hand drive.

So what's the problem in North America?

It comes down to one thing - PROTECTIONISM!!

The products are there in other markets because the market EXISTS. Land Rover *pulled* the Defender from the US because the number of expected sales didn't justify the massive expense of meeting 98+ safety requirements. The CKD was just an exercise in publicity, that was never going to work. If Land Rover estimated huge numbers of potential buyers, they would have done it.

I don't dispute your argument for protectionism, because it does play a HUGE role in the watering down of offers, but I still believe strongly that there just isn't enough of a market to justyify the expense of launching a new model (and more importantly, because of cost), *supporting it* after the launch. The Defender was already here, and if LR hadn't had a minuscule, niche market share, they could have sucked it up and updated the safety features just like everyone else.

[Scott Brady]

If it is protectionism, why don't the protected satisfy the demand? Ford owns Land Rover. Chrysler and it's parent company D-Benz could bring in a stripped G-Waggon. If Toyota felt it was viable, they would just build a plant in the US to satisfy the NA market. Ford would bring in diesel, 5-speed manual, cloth seat D3's.

I am with Henry on this one. Too many Americans only want adventure on the TV or in their movies. Other than that, cush leather, XM, ac in the seats, big V8 and DUBBS baby...:mad:

At least those are my thoughts on the matter :beer:

[pskhaat]

Analogy: how many Linux users are there? They certainly aren't mainstream--often considered to be the ``long-haired freaky people,'' but most every major like software business (like IBM) supports it and produced for it.

Yes, the manufacturers have every given right to put to the market what they want and cater to the big softies and make vehicles that don't match my ideals. But then again, that's what the Big 3 did in the 70s: ``all customers want big, unreliable, unstyled stinky interior goats'' and Toyota, Honda and others shocked that inaction.

It's just that the mfg's choose to ignore my segment, and I am today not convinced it has anything to do with profitability, rather just the whims and desires of the US executives thinking they have a grasp. Toyota--because they already sell 'em--could import a mass of int'l spec'd 70 or 100 series at little or no additional cost to them (especially the LC100) and sell 'em close to the cost of the existing leather bling. I have done fairly extensive CFR investigation for NHSTA rules and they just simply would not be at all complicated for a company like Toyota to make them compliant.

Again, take the international LC105 which would easily qualify for every like safety test as the LC100, but has a preferrable engine(s), axles, frame, and tranny. Someone please tell me why this couldn't be the ``poverty pack'' option when one went to buy an LC? It doesn't even require retooling or shipping changes, they're all coming over from the same plant in Japan, just throw the LC100 airbags in, and drive a couple dozen LC105s on the boat.

Yes, they have the right to sell to the masses, and I have the right to ignore that market and keep hoping for something better. What makes me mad is that there doesn't appear to be anything better.

Ford has the world of options open to them for Rovers and even produce desirable models worldwide, are people really saying Ford doesn't have the resources to bring them nationally? I just find that hard to believe.

[60seriesguy]

If it is protectionism, why don't the protected satisfy the demand? Ford owns Land Rover. Chrysler and it's parent company D-Benz could bring in a stripped G-Waggon. If Toyota felt it was viable, they would just build a plant in the US to satisfy the NA market. Ford would bring in diesel, 5-speed manual, cloth seat D3's.

I am with Henry on this one. Too many Americans only want adventure on the TV or in their movies. Other than that, cush leather, XM, ac in the seats, big V8 and DUBBS baby...:mad:

At least those are my thoughts on the matter :beer:


He, he, you should have seen the Toyota salesguy's face when I asked for steel wheels on my wife's 4Runner...he just couldn't believe I didn't want the 17" alloys that came stock on it. I was there again yesterday looking at an FJ Cruiser and when the guy tried to gauge my interest, I answered (truthfully): "If you guys offered a diesel option I would buy one today."...

He looked at my like I was nuts....

[pskhaat]

I called Toyota USA customer service one time and asked almost verbatim ``why does your Land Cruiser model not come in a manual transmission.'' I got an I don't know response and took my # for someone to call me back. Well, I indeed got a return call about a week later...the response was (again almost verbatim):

``Sir, we have looking into your customer case #<blah> and it appears as though almost 100% of our customers bought Land Cruisers with automatic transmissions,'' he proclaimed.

``Really, let me guess, you show exactly 100% of them since 1988?'' I asked.

``Why, yes, something like that.''

Point of the matter is Toyota only had auto trannies from 1988+. Obviously there data was self-perpetuating, there was no statistical measure to see how many would have auto vs. manual. It may have been John Maynard Keynes (?) who stated the presence of a product creates a market for it.

[cruiser guy]

I called Toyota USA customer service one time and asked almost verbatim ``why does your Land Cruiser model not come in a manual transmission.'' I got an I don't know response and took my # for someone to call me back. Well, I indeed got a return call about a week later...the response was (again almost verbatim):

``Sir, we have looking into your customer case #<blah> and it appears as though almost 100% of our customers bought Land Cruisers with automatic transmissions,'' he proclaimed.

``Really, let me guess, you show exactly 100% of them since 1988?'' I asked.

``Why, yes, something like that.''

Point of the matter is Toyota only had auto trannies from 1988+. Obviously there data was self-perpetuating, there was no statistical measure to see how many would have auto vs. manual. It may have been John Maynard Keynes (?) who stated the presence of a product creates a market for it.

Well perhaps the large influx of Japanese domestic market LandCruisers coming into Canada will cause some head scratching in the boardrooms of Toyota Canada! There will soon be more JDM 'Cruisers in Canada than there are FJ80's or whatever! If THAT doesn't cause Toyota Canada to say "Gee, I didn't know folks actually WANT a diesel and some even WANT a manual tranny :eek: then I don't know what will.
Folks are putting up with right hand drive, harder parts acqusition, long wait for the truck from the time of ordering, hassles from the safety Nazi's etc. etc. all to drive one of these trucks. That's got to make someone in their ivory towers think!

[gcec]

I don't dispute your argument for protectionism, because it does play a HUGE role in the watering down of offers, but I still believe strongly that there just isn't enough of a market to justyify the expense of launching a new model

You missed my entire point. Why does there have to be a US model? Why can't Land Rover just make the Defender, as it is sold everywhere else in the world, available to US dealers. Because the LAW doesn't allow it.

And you're right when you say "there just isn't enough of a market to justify the expense of launching a new model". Especially when import quotas mean they can only sell a certain number of units per year. No point bringing in a low margin utility vehicle when it means that they can sell one less high margin vehicle. I think the US market influence is a key reason that the Discovery III has been dumbed down so much. Land Rover looked and said; we're allowed x number of vehicles into the US, we need to maximise our profits on those vehicles, so we need to appeal to the broadest section of the public - aim for the soccer mom. Hey presto - Discovery III.

However, remove the quotas and the prohibitive "safety requirements" and you'll be able to buy any vehicle you choose. It has NOTHING to do with consumer demand - because it is not a free market economy. It has been structured to protect the North American auto industry and deny consumers their right to make their own decisions.

Did I mention that this whole topic REALLY upsets me :)

[durango_60]

Again, take the international LC105 which would easily qualify for every like safety test as the LC100, but has a preferrable engine(s), axles, frame, and tranny. Someone please tell me why this couldn't be the ``poverty pack'' option when one went to buy an LC? It doesn't even require retooling or shipping changes, they're all coming over from the same plant in Japan, just throw the LC100 airbags in, and drive a couple dozen LC105s on the boat.



Yes, but why would Toyota incur the same shipping cost to bring over a vehicle that will most likely sit on the lot longer and sell for a lower profiit?

[Scott Brady]

Upon further review of this discussion, I think there is a cycle that creates the issue. The cycle does start with regulations and tariffs though.

Look at the defender 90 for example, which only left the US because of regulations. Now, Ford would likely LOVE to bring them back, but the regulations from the US gov make it difficult.

Regulations are borne from lack of personal responsibility (and our liberal litigation limits), which build in more safety to protect the peons from themselves. This puts trucks like the 70 series, Defender, etc. at a disadvantage. Then, the likely low sales volume cannot justify the effort to meet regulations.

People get stupider (sic) and we get more vehicles our demographic cannot stand.

It is a vicious cycle my friends. Time to move to Argentina...

[cruiser guy]

Yes, but why would Toyota incur the same shipping cost to bring over a vehicle that will most likely sit on the lot longer and sell for a lower profiit?

True, but IF you could order and even wait for say a diesel powered 105 for the same profit margin as the UZJ100 wouldn't that make you look ALOT harder at doing so? I can tell you that for me IF I could order the diesel 105 it would significantly increase the possibility of my purchasing new 'Cruiser in the future, but if there is only the UZJ100 available I'm frankly not interested! I'm not sold by the number of cupholders and bling on a truck. I'll buy a JDM one then and get the diesel and whatever else I want that way and live with right hand drive!

[pskhaat]

why would Toyota incur the same shipping cost to bring over a vehicle that will most likely sit on the lot longer and sell for a lower profiit?

Not exactly, you see if it's not on the lot folks such as myself--I'm guessing also at least a few thousand more in aggregate--aren't going buy the UZJ100, I'm not going to replace my desired product with their replacement, these are not `canabilistic' (economic term) products. Retailers for instance just don't dump the lowest margin (profit) items, you'd end up with lower selection, loose diversification in your product mix and loose customers.

If you're a grocer and jelly was just not your key profit product, would you eliminate it? Someone's going to find a store that sells jelly along with everything else and do the remainder of their shopping there.

The whole point is finding the supply #s that reach the demand. If there is at least a dollar to be made by selling 500 of them a year, Toyota's still making money, increasing customer base, increasing parts sales, increasing market share, and ensuring additional sales. The key here is that they just need to find the sweet spot on both price and units, but a multi-billion multi-national should have absolutely no problem doing that.

By not doing this, they are either strategically elimating a customer base such as us (which doesn't make sense considering their FJ introduction) or simply acting in poor/blind business practice. Y'all'll have to forgive me for believing it's the latter case.

The example here is Toyota, but barring any regulatory action as being mentioned, this applies to the majority of models & manufacturers IMO: they're not seeing the whole of the auto market; I don't believe this is particular to 4WD, but to the greater set of automobile markets in general. My current thinking is the auto industy is too big or too hopped up on a dated business practice.

[durango_60]

Not exactly, you see if it's not on the lot folks such as myself--I'm guessing also at least a few thousand more in aggregate--aren't going buy the UZJ100, I'm not going to replace my desired product with their replacement, these are not `canabilistic' (economic term) products. Retailers for instance just don't dump the lowest margin (profit) items, you'd end up with lower selection, loose diversification in your product mix and loose customers.

If you're a grocer and jelly was just not your key profit product, would you eliminate it? Someone's going to find a store that sells jelly along with everything else and do the remainder of their shopping there.

The whole point is finding the supply #s that reach the demand. If there is at least a dollar to be made by selling 500 of them a year, Toyota's still making money, increasing customer base, increasing parts sales, increasing market share, and ensuring additional sales. The key here is that they just need to find the sweet spot on both price and units, but a multi-billion multi-national should have absolutely no problem doing that.

By not doing this, they are either strategically elimating a customer base such as us (which doesn't make sense considering their FJ introduction) or simply acting in poor/blind business practice. Y'all'll have to forgive me for believing it's the latter case.

The example here is Toyota, but barring any regulatory action as being mentioned, this applies to the majority of models & manufacturers IMO: they're not seeing the whole of the auto market; I don't believe this is particular to 4WD, but to the greater set of automobile markets in general. My current thinking is the auto industy is too big or too hopped up on a dated business practice.

I hate to point this out, but when I look in your garage it appears that Toyota isn't missing the mark by very far. And besides, if we could have our diesel 105 the only stuff left to dream about at night would get us in trouble with our sig others...:o

Do you truly think Toyota could sell 500 105's with rubber flooring, vinyl seats, standard tranny, and a am/fm radio in the US for 45k plus? I think we should just feel lucky that Toyota did decide to gussy our Cruisers up with leather etc. so people who don't give a crap about the mechanicals will pay 60k and we can buy them 4-5 years later. The alternative would be a US without a new Cruiser since about 1992.

Does it make me less of a man to acknowledge the fact that I much prefer supportive leather seats over cheap vinyl after a long day in the bush?

[Scott Brady]

Does it make me less of a man to acknowledge the fact that I much prefer supportive leather seats over cheap vinyl after a long day in the bush?

:D

I do like cupholders, I must admit... :sunflower

[datrupr]

Hey, my cupholders do a great job of holding my Venti Cinnamon Dulce Latte, with out spillage:p

[pskhaat]

Do you truly think Toyota could sell 500 105's with rubber flooring, vinyl seats, standard tranny, and a am/fm radio in the US for 45k plus?
I don't know the magic price (thinking sub 40), but absolutely I think they'd sell 500 a year, even being cheaper I bet you they make $.


Does it make me less of a man...
Durango_60, there are just so many things that make you less of a man :) that your preference for a hot sweaty rear end on leather is just a drop in the bucket. :O

[pskhaat]

your garage..appears that Toyota isn't missing the mark
But I didn't buy our UZJ100 new, I bought it after gross depreciation set in. Bring me even an FZJ105 and I'll go to the dealership tomorrow, and that's where the big $ is for the auto companies.

To keep this on Rover topic, bring me a new D90 something tomorrow and I'd sell my 3FJ40 without a tear and drive to the nearest dealership.

If Jeep put the CRD in the Rubicon, I'd do the same (gotta admit, I'm tempted daily to just get a Rubi as it is), Jeep at least is close.

[Scott Brady]

To keep this on Rover topic, bring me a new D90 something tomorrow and I'd sell my 3FJ40 without a tear and drive to the nearest dealership.

If Jeep put the CRD in the Rubicon, I'd do the same (gotta admit, I'm tempted daily to just get a Rubi as it is), Jeep at least is close.

Amen brother... me too.

[durango_60]

Durango_60, there are just so many things that make you less of a man :) that your preference for a hot sweaty rear end on leather is just a drop in the bucket. :O


Touche, but you're making me uncomfortable with this talk of my rear...

I'm with you on the Rubicon, I was just looking at the new Unlimited and if they come out with a diesel I believe my 80 will be yesterdays news.

[ShottsCruisers]

Many say they want function, but would not be willing to give up their leather seats and latte sized cupholders.

Exactly. ME included! :victory:

[ShottsCruisers]

Again, take the international LC105 which would easily qualify for every like safety test as the LC100, but has a preferrable engine(s), axles, frame, and tranny. Someone please tell me why this couldn't be the ``poverty pack'' option when one went to buy an LC? It doesn't even require retooling or shipping changes, they're all coming over from the same plant in Japan, just throw the LC100 airbags in, and drive a couple dozen LC105s on the boat.


Very true. And I'd luv a 105 for my "2nd" 100. "Preferrable" to you maybe, however to the US "test drive" the 105 would suffer in sales as the ride and handling does also. I prefer the UZJ to the 105. Sure wish we could pick though like you said! :ar15: = Toyota America :D

[Z O O R O P A]

hmm interesting topic and responses. Again just want to thnk eveyone for being so re eptive ot others opinions without being dismissive as other forums I have visited.

Having owned Toyotas and 2 Discoverys I have an informative opinion.

The goal to me is to offer a 4x4 that is worthy on the trail without to much modification but comfy to run the kids around or take the wife to a nice place for dinner and not making everyone galk when you pull up to valet or perhaps to solicite the tender affections (for those of us single) without being perceived in the wrong light.

Certain things like roof racks orheavy duty springs winches etc must be understood to be aftermarket and always will be with the exception of basic bike racks like those offered by Nissan,Dicos rails,Toyotas Rails and small racks which are highly limited. As it would not be finacially viable since such a small market actually would use them and they hamper mpg

When driving my HSE LR I long for Toyotas reliability period, all the time, every day. I have not had any issues with this Rover yet but it only has 50k and its a 2004 but DAMN maybe its the duality of life that everytime I am reminded how much I enjoy it I also am reminded how much I pay for it in insurance and potentially repairs. My first Rover exped. equipped cost on average 6k$ in repairs after regular matin. not do to bad driving or to much subjection to trail beatings and left my lady in the side of hte road to many times

Toyota lacks Rovers conveiance in everyway. Seats, looks, sex appeal, but can handle 10x the beating. I have seen Toyotas do many things Rovers never would have stood for. Like 10 year old Toyotas with wood beds go 15K without an oil change and never complain. They eat 87octane like its King Crab legs and traverse below zero days without a strain or whine. Lightbulbs last and are more bright than my HSE and electronics are far less complicated. Insurance is cheap
and blah blah

I never thought much of Jeeps since they just didnt seem my style of car and didnt seem to do well but lately I think they have come miles and miles but are not the solution to our problem nor is Nissans attempt

The vehicle must be comfy and sexy and capable under that skin. The Disco series one was great fof road and on....when it ran. For evey 100 series 1s I'd guess 60-70% had MAJOR problems The early series 2s had as many issues until 2003 which they now have difference issues but fewer it seems for the most part although in 2004 I think it was Land ROver finished LAST in reliability

Toyota is predictable and a safe bet but lacks the charachter however look at Lexus and the Land Cruiser by Toyota. It seems to be the very perfect combination of comfort and performance with little mods

As far as Defenders go we can only look to Jeep and that will be all as I dont see Toyota stretching its legs any further off the trail than the new Cruiser and we are lucky I think it made it through the red tape. Why should they since the Tacoma 4Runner and Cruiser are all very capable off the line and with little mod

Give Jeep a chance and see what they are willing to risk I applaud them for the effort and gamble

jmo

[pskhaat]

I sadly have not owned a Rover but have come very close.

As per reliability (and absolutely not stating anything about anyone's maintenance capabilities; luck also comes to play) but I've seen the worst designed vehicles go without issue as long as they were kept up-with.

I have a lowly Ford commuter with just under 200k and nothing but tires, oil, and fuel, getting within 1-2 mpg economy the same as it did off the lot, and still many years ahead. Yet, others of this model have met very early and unfortunate deaths many years ago.

I guess my point/question is: most of us here are probably quite anal about maintenance and up-keep: is it not reasonable to expect folks like us to get quite a lifetime out of any vehicle we have whilst the remainder of the population seemingly has frequent and costly repairs along the way. (Who knows, maybe I've got luck playing on my team).

[ShottsCruisers]

Great post. Many truths in there!

For me it's simple....my main reason for opting for Land Cruisers is reliability. There are 4-wheelers out there that I like as much or better. To me, nothing is more important that reliability and in-breakability.

I'd also LUV a Disco. So far, I can't make the jump due to what I hear and read about troubles. Hmmm, sure would luv one though! Nothing is better looking IMO than a Disco II or III. SLURP!

[ChuckB]

I must say Rovers are what brought me here. When I was in my teens I went on a trip to the Carribean with my parents. A "safari tour" in the back of D110 around one of the islands got the expedition bug in me... When I was finally in a position to buy my own vehicle questions about reliability sent me toward Toyota and I ended up with my FJ60. I honestly have no regrets, even though its 20 years old it has been the most reliable vehicle I have owned thus far. I have beat on it pretty hard and it just keeps on ticking...
I will always have a thing for early Series Rovers and D110s!

[Sharkman]

If I lived somewhere other then the US then a new Defender 110 would be my choice. In the US it would be an 2004 Discovery 2 (4.6L, CDL, etc)

I’m not sure I would consider the DIII / LR3 to be ‘dumbed down’. I’ve seen these trucks off-road and have been amazed at what they can do. But with 27 computers, Independent suspension and serious limitations when it comes to modifying the LR3 wouldn’t make my wish list.

My opinion is that there is no ‘do all’ production expedition vehicle but the LR Discovery 2 is my choice for the following reasons………

>On highway it is very acceptable even with MTRs, rack, lift, etc (80mph all day along)
>Off-road it is very capable (CDL, TC, heavy duty build, solid axles)
>Easy to modify/upgrade for improved off-road performance (lift, lockers,etc)
>Large selection of factory and aftermarket accessories
>Capacity/comfort (not big enough) but decent with a SD rack and creative packing.
>Reliability (Based on my experience and others in our group) Yes we have replaced parts on the trail but I’ve never experienced issues with well maintained trucks.
>LR expedition heritage and ‘way-cool’ factor.

I currently own a 1999 Discovery 2 w/87Kmiles and a 1995 RRC SWB w/110Kmiles.

We have not spent much time off-road in the RRC yet but the Discovery gets out on the trail a couple times a month. The reliability of the both trucks has been great and the Discovery has never been to a mechanic or dealership since the warranty expired at 40Kmiles (warranty was for minor things). I find the truck easy to work on and maintain. I have never owned a Toyota so I have no first hand experience to compare.

In general LRs like to be maintained and are an acquired taste…some people don’t get it but once you do you’re hooked.

Steve

www.gllrc.com

[Nullifier]

Well in my mind the tranny and other options debates are simple. Part #'s and set up time. Now I know that you guys are gonna say well they make the taco in a 5 speed why not the d-cab. Well Almost all "work" trucks sold are reg cabs. Not to many crew cabs at all. Those D-cab rigs are sold mostly to Joe public, and 80+% of Joe public wants an auto for battling traffic lights.

It helps to decrease cost in assembly time if trucks or cars are made with one drive train option. It is cookie cutter and that is what helps profitability for the builders. You can't get a d cab with manual windows either. It's power all the way and for the same reason. taking the time for assemblers to switch from electric to manual cranks takes time and opens up room for mistakes in assembly just as in tranny options.

Ultimately I wish I could have got an '04 style tacoma with a manual tranny, deisel, front bench seat, manual windows and manual hubs like our bordering nations can get. Hell they could fill that niche market by just bringing them up from Mexico with hardly any major cost but they won't do it because Bling is in. Even if they said ok we will bring in 25 units at a time and have pick up only availability somewhere in Texas I doubt they would sell enough of them to make it worth there wild.

[ShottsCruisers]

My wife's mint 2004 Double Cab 4WD TRD goes on sale tomorrow. Has the Hoe and Deav Baja 1000 package (and more). Was taken on a dirt road once for poser pics. Never 4-wheeled.

http://shottscruisers.smugmug.com/gallery/636402

[Ryanmb21]

how much for the '04 tacoma?

[ShottsCruisers]

how much for the '04 tacoma?

Not sure yet. I'll know the next 1-2 days. I know that a stock one Private outs at $19,890 though I have many extras not figured in. I'll hold onto it until I get top dollar. It's like new. It'll hit eBay in a week or so.

[gjackson]

If I lived somewhere other then the US then a new Defender 110 would be my choice.

Why limit yourself?! Seriously, D110s are great vehicles, but the best was never imported into the US. TDI and disk brakes all round for a start. The current price of D110s over here is staggering, but you can always find grey market ones for a little bit less. Just have to be careful and watchful.

cheers!