Im not getting worked up or mad. I dont own a TReg. They are just WAY out of the amount of money that I am willing to pay for a car. I will spend that much playing around with one but never on a new car. That being said, the TReg is $30k cheaper than a 200 series. So, if you want to talk about cost of ownership, it has a head start right there. Not to mention it will get an easy 5 or 6 mpg more than the shameful 13 mpg that the 200 gets. Financially, the $2k youll spend every 15k miles on brakes and a tire or two is nothing in the grand scheme.
1. The sales of the Land Cruiser here in the US do show something. Really, less than 300 units sold across the whole of the country. Thats shameful. Its price point being high has nothing to do with it. Land Rover has Discos and Range Rovers that are that high and have no problem moving them. That, and they are more economical. Toyota has slapped the L on the Cruiser and you know how many they moved last month? 291. Land Rover moved 902 Range Rovers in the same month. Even combined with Lexus, its still an unwanted, unsuccessful vehicle.
2. How many 200s do you see in these vaunted Australian magazines? Also, in these same magazines, you know what is voted the best 'ute pickup, a FAR larger market? Its the VW Amarok.
3. The UN also standardized on the Defender, which according to everyone here is a Land Rover and therefore completely unreliable. It also probably has something to do with dealership network. That matters a lot. Its probably the only reason why Scott put an E class Mercedes on the top 10 list. Remember that? That was dumb. New Mercs are nightmares but I guess parts can be had most anyplace when it breaks (but too bad the knowledge probably isnt).
Ive never said, and you can check back, that the TReg is a better truck. I only contested your claims of it being less capable and less safe. Even with out of warranty repairs being more expensive (probably), at $30k LESS and better mileage than a 200 series, you would still spend less on the TReg.
