2008 Styling - What do you think? (2 Viewers)

[FirstToy]

It's sad they had the Range Rover to benchmark for styling and didn't even come close. At least they ripped off some of the RR's interior detailing..

Comments here (people thinking the LC compares to the LR3, not RR) tells you they really messed up.

RR is so well done, it's too bad for the electronics and reliability. Styling is so well executed, everything the 08 LC/LX is missing.
Toyota obviously is targeting the USA lux-suv market (Lincoln Nav, GMC/Chevy/Cadillac Escalade, Nissan Qship, etc) But I think the Navigator and Escalade are miles ahead on style.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

It's sad they had the Range Rover to benchmark for styling and didn't even come close. At least they ripped off some of the RR's interior detailing..

Comments here (people thinking the LC compares to the LR3, not RR) tells you they really messed up.

RR is so well done, it's too bad for the electronics and reliability. Styling is so well executed, everything the 08 LC/LX is missing.
Toyota obviously is targeting the USA lux-suv market (Lincoln Nav, GMC/Chevy/Cadillac Escalade, Nissan Qship, etc) But I think the Navigator and Escalade are miles ahead on style.

That's the great thing about having opinions. We can disagree.

I think the NRRover is one ugly POC. I wouldn't be caught dead in one.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

It's sad they had the Range Rover to benchmark for styling and didn't even come close. At least they ripped off some of the RR's interior detailing..

Comments here (people thinking the LC compares to the LR3, not RR) tells you they really messed up.

RR is so well done, it's too bad for the electronics and reliability. Styling is so well executed, everything the 08 LC/LX is missing.
Toyota obviously is targeting the USA lux-suv market (Lincoln Nav, GMC/Chevy/Cadillac Escalade, Nissan Qship, etc) But I think the Navigator and Escalade are miles ahead on style.

I know you cited poor reliability. Here's a post from today on the AZ Rover's site. It's the 2nd of the day for engine failures. 1 @ 36,000 and 1 @ 1,000 miles. Maybe the things suck so bad that I can't see them in terms of good looks.

"My '04 Disco had a main bearing seal failure at @ 1,000 miles - Land Rover installed a new replacement engine & it's been running fine. The VIN on the vehicle remained the same even though engine was swapped out so I assume the VIN is not keyed to actual engine. Is there a serial # on the engine or some other way to identify if my engine is one of the potential failing units?"

 

[Dougal]

"My '04 Disco had a main bearing seal failure at @ 1,000 miles - Land Rover installed a new replacement engine & it's been running fine. The VIN on the vehicle remained the same even though engine was swapped out so I assume the VIN is not keyed to actual engine. Is there a serial # on the engine or some other way to identify if my engine is one of the potential failing units?"

If it helps, I can show you a 100 series which had a fuel pump failure at 8,000km.
Repair bill came to $US8000, covered by warranty of course.

 

[FirstToy]

If Toyota made the RR, they would be the envy of all (instead of the envy of all Highlander owners)
I don't like RR's but they have style to burn and make the 08 look like amateur-hour.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

If Toyota made the RR, they would be the envy of all (instead of the envy of all Highlander owners)
I don't like RR's but they have style to burn and make the 08 look like amateur-hour.

Agreed. That white outfit is the slickest I've seen!

 

[uzj100]

Agreed. The RR is the best looking by far of any available SUV in the USA today.

 

[twstrchasr]

Toyota should buy Land Rover, move the Land Cruiser over to Lexus (only in the USA) and concentrate on repairing Land Rovers quality/reliability issues !! Good God !! A Land Rover with wonderful styling AND good reliability ....I am dreaming !!


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
2001 Land Cruiser UZJ100
1989 Land Cruiser FJ62
1991 Range Rover Classic
2003 Mercedes CL55 AMG

 

[uzj100]

That is a great idea!

 

[tntoyota]

I dont have my glasses on whats my sig line say?



Keep up the good work morons!!!

 

[hedydd]

Toyota should buy Land Rover, move the Land Cruiser over to Lexus (only in the USA) and concentrate on repairing Land Rovers quality/reliability issues !! Good God !! A Land Rover with wonderful styling AND good reliability ....I am dreaming !!

I had a 04 Range Rover until I traded it for the Audi Q7 about November last year. It was the best built and most reliable car I have ever owned and that counts a BMW X5, the Audi and the Land Cruiser. Whether this reliability would have lasted to my Land Cruisers age and work done is not likely on the law of averages but I can only comment on my experience with any authority.
The Q7 is different because it is not an offroad vehicle but an allroad vehicle and has to be driven with some compromise for this. It was delivered with poor suspension geometry as indeed was my Land Cruiser at the front end when delivered back in mid 1998. The long term quality of the Land Cruiser shines through after nine years of quite demanding use. Give me another nine years and 120,000 miles out of it and I will be well chuffed.
With fuel issues and politics as they are I don't think I would buy anything so big at the moment. There is a danger that these vehicles will be taxed into extinction over the medium term here in the UK

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

I had a 04 Range Rover until I traded it for the Audi Q7 about November last year. It was the best built and most reliable car I have ever owned

The industry shows that this is not the norm. BMW is not much better reliability-wise. Not opinions. Just data.

 

[96Cruiser13]

It is absolutely, without a doubt, underpowered. That, and the s***ty power windows are my only gripes about the 80.

HAHA
i agree 100%
s***ty winows

 

[hedydd]

The industry shows that this is not the norm. BMW is not much better reliability-wise. Not opinions. Just data.

I changed the X5 for the RR and they shared the same model engine and main gearbox along with most of the electrics and electronics. Some of the problems I had with the X5, such as failed wiper linkage, a battery that discharged if the system was woken by some environmental type magnetic forces such as at train stations and so on, had been sorted at the factories by the time I had my RR. The BMW was also one of the many cars I have owned from new built with the wheel geometry out of proper alignment. I had absolutely no problem with the Range Rover. None.
The only problem with the Q7 so far has been wheel alignment.
The Land Cruiser 100 was built [in 1998] with poor front wheel alignment and had a foggy foglamp and a lazy seatbelt replaced under warranty. Since then and apart from service items and wheel brake discs, it has had a couple of bulbs [globes], a rear wheel bearing and the steering column motor no longer lifts and lowers the wheel. Just today the leather on the steering wheel started to peel back at the stitching at the '10 to' position and I put a bit of superglue on it to hold it down. I mustn't forget that the height position light thing in the instruments sometimes fails to light for a while and the seat lumber support failed many years ago.
All in all, if the new model is as good as my 100 has been and continues to be, then it will be great.
Pity about the style though. I may get to like it with time because I just didn't like the latest Discovery for quite a while but it has grown on me and it is now very pleasing to my eyes.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

I changed the X5 for the RR and they shared the same model engine and main gearbox along with most of the electrics and electronics. Some of the problems I had with the X5, such as failed wiper linkage, a battery that discharged if the system was woken by some environmental type magnetic forces such as at train stations and so on, had been sorted at the factories by the time I had my RR. The BMW was also one of the many cars I have owned from new built with the wheel geometry out of proper alignment. I had absolutely no problem with the Range Rover. None.
The only problem with the Q7 so far has been wheel alignment.
The Land Cruiser 100 was built [in 1998] with poor front wheel alignment and had a foggy foglamp and a lazy seatbelt replaced under warranty. Since then and apart from service items and wheel brake discs, it has had a couple of bulbs [globes], a rear wheel bearing and the steering column motor no longer lifts and lowers the wheel. Just today the leather on the steering wheel started to peel back at the stitching at the '10 to' position and I put a bit of superglue on it to hold it down. I mustn't forget that the height position light thing in the instruments sometimes fails to light for a while and the seat lumber support failed many years ago.
All in all, if the new model is as good as my 100 has been and continues to be, then it will be great.
Pity about the style though. I may get to like it with time because I just didn't like the latest Discovery for quite a while but it has grown on me and it is now very pleasing to my eyes.

One truck's account here and there do not count. One must go by the average. Since 98, the Land Cruiser has been the most reliable in the industry. This year, every year. BMW and Land Rover are always way down in quality. It's good you've had good luck with yours though. The X5 is on their avoid list based on data from subscibers (not CR opinions).

 

[FirstToy]

One truck's account here and there do not count.

Of course it "counts" Gee, you've never offered your opinion based on your truck before?
So the guy posts about his Range Rover and you post a Land Rover reliability sheet?

Range Rovers are nice. They have issues. Like someone else said, if Toyota made their version of a RR, it would be king.
It says something that RR's are so iconic, even w/ problems. It is almost pure style and design that pulls people in. Ferrari's, Lamborghini's and McLarens aren't as reliable as a 350Z or RX-8. But in 5 yrs, the Ferrari will be worth MORE and the RX-8 will be a even trade w/ a Corolla.
Toyota is the exact opposite- 2008 generic styling w/ reliability being the selling point.

JD Powers ratings- Range Rover
mechanically/electronics - avg to below avg
overall performance and design - among the best

So hedydd had the top rated RR suv and enjoyed the style and no problems. He would be the expert at what it's like to drive a trouble-free, king of style suv. (albeit for only several years).

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

Of course it "counts" Gee, you've never offered your opinion based on your truck before?
So the guy posts about his Range Rover and you post a Land Rover reliability sheet?

Range Rovers are nice. They have issues. Like someone else said, if Toyota made their version of a RR, it would be king.
It says something that RR's are so iconic, even w/ problems. It is almost pure style and design that pulls people in. Toyota is the exact opposite- 2008 generic styling w/ reliability being the selling point.

JD Powers ratings- Range Rover
mechanically/electronics - avg to below avg
overall performance and design - among the best

So hedydd had the top rated RR suv and enjoyed the style and no problems. He would be the expert at what it's like to drive a trouble-free, king of style suv. (albeit for only several years).

No matter how NICE they are, they are unreliable. It's a fact. That's all.

 

[hedydd]

In over 600,000 miles use with LR products I have never been standed once. Older ones had build quality issues and issues with suspension bushes and leaks, both body and mechanical which called for many dealer visits. With each new one from 1987 on they have consistently improved but I deliberately missed the Range Rover MkII. I am also aware that the MKIII like mine was prone to front diff failure but I did not experience this. However it should be noted that the Land Cruiser 100 is also prone to failures in the front diff, but I have not experienced that either.
I don't pretend to believe that the Land Rover products are equal in short term reliability to a Land Cruiser but there are plenty of LR Discovery's and RR's around here with in excess of 200,000 miles on them and some that have crossed 300,000 miles so they can't be that bad long term. My experience until the last RR is that they need a fair bit of warranty work in the first two years but after that they settle down to be excellent workhorses with at least average reliability and well above average longevity. Shotts' experience seems to be confined to reading about them.
For the record I have used LR products for well over 600,000 miles in total and Land Cruisers for about 200,000 miles, about 120,000 in my current 100 and 60,000 in a 1993 80 and the rest in a business Collorado [90] D4D. Never been stranded in any of them. But then neither have I in the 1995 Mitsubishi in 160,000 very hard miles. Not all of these miles have been driven personally because a small group of us drive these things. I also have an Isuzu Trooper which is now up to around 115,000 miles which has had more electrical problems than all the others pooled together, twice over. Mechanically perfect though apart from a clutch and a water pump.

I should say, for those that haven't been to the UK, that Land Rovers and Range Rovers are so common here that they are almost like flies. There are a few Land Cruisers but they are rare in comparison. X5's and M Class are also very common in comparison to Cruisers. BMW 3 series easily outsell the Ford Mondeo. That is the kind of market we have. Premium products sell very well and only business fleets tend to buy new family saloon cars. The best sellers of all are the small class like the Ford Focus and Fiesta hatchbacks. There are many small cars and many SUV's which have replaced the family saloon in the middle ground. Just thought you'd like to know.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

In over 600,000 miles use with LR products I have never been standed once. Older ones had build quality issues and issues with suspension bushes and leaks, both body and mechanical which called for many dealer visits. With each new one from 1987 on they have consistently improved but I deliberately missed the Range Rover MkII. I am also aware that the MKIII like mine was prone to front diff failure but I did not experience this. However it should be noted that the Land Cruiser 100 is also prone to failures in the front diff, but I have not experienced that either.
I don't pretend to believe that the Land Rover products are equal in short term reliability to a Land Cruiser but there are plenty of LR Discovery's and RR's around here with in excess of 200,000 miles on them and some that have crossed 300,000 miles so they can't be that bad long term. My experience until the last RR is that they need a fair bit of warranty work in the first two years but after that they settle down to be excellent workhorses with at least average reliability and well above average longevity. Shotts' experience seems to be confined to reading about them.
For the record I have used LR products for well over 600,000 miles in total and Land Cruisers for about 200,000 miles, about 120,000 in my current 100 and 60,000 in a 1993 80 and the rest in a business Collorado [90] D4D. Never been stranded in any of them. But then neither have I in the 1995 Mitsubishi in 160,000 very hard miles. Not all of these miles have been driven personally because a small group of us drive these things. I also have an Isuzu Trooper which is now up to around 115,000 miles which has had more electrical problems than all the others pooled together, twice over. Mechanically perfect though apart from a clutch and a water pump.

I subscribe to the AZ Rover's site. I have many Rover friends. They are superb people and drive very capable vehicles. You would not believe what failures I read about 24/7. Things that fail and things that are so basic that it puzzles me. Examples are too numerous to count. Many members bail from the brand becuase of this. Some will not give up on the brand. I'd luv a DiscoII but the trouble and expense is not worth it to me.

Judging by the respondants to CR, horiffic reliability is the "standard" despite it not being what "you" experienced.

 

[hedydd]

I should mention that the difference between best and worst reliability is less than it has probably ever been and Japanese manufacturers are to be credited for raising everyones game.
The build quality is still too variable and the worst car I have seen recently in internal build quality has been the Chrysler Sebring which has mismatched and poorly fitting trim made out of cheap plastic with hard sharp edges. They are misguided in bringing that into the UK because I forcast that it will not sell in any numbers. The 300C otoh is a car that I would seriously consider with the Mercedes V6 turbo diesel and selectronic gearbox. Nice.