Land Rover to Land Cruiser (1 Viewer)

[burlsube]

Hello - I have owned Land Rovers for the last 20 years. I have had a bunch of models from Series IIA to a 110. My 110s engine recently died and that in combination with a few other issue has me thinking about selling and looking to get into a Land Cruiser. I guess I'm hoping that the Land Cruiser would be slightly more reliable. I generally can work on most things on the truck, but other times I use a local garage. To give perspective, in the last 6 yrs I have spent over 25k in just getting things squared away on the Rover.

I am leaning towards a 90 FJ62, with two kids and a dog it seems like a good match. That said I know all the ins and outs when looking at used Land Rovers, but is there any resource that outlines what I should be looking for when I look at used FJs?

Thanks!

 

[ceylonfj40nut]

LCs are way better you will find. You will need to baseline it initially because previous owners neglect preventative maintenance because they are so reliable.

 

[wapitimud]

The LC isn't inherently any better than the LR. It depends on the initial state of when you bought it as well. To be $25k into Defender repairs says to me that you paid a mechanic to do most of that work, and these aren't bare component costs, and are instead outside labor.

Parts are far, far cheaper as OEM for LR than what's available for Toyota.

If you want reliable, you can buy a new truck from the dealer with warranty.

For a new vehicle, Land Rover has failed the market, and now sells only luxury vehicles that fail quickly.

Toyota has updated design for seals that don't leak, cabs that are steel units and not modular, like the LR.

Toyota 70-series uses many threaded areas and welded nuts in the chassis. This is easier to build when new, but harder to rebuild when crusty 20 years later. Land Rovers use bolts and nuts that pass through the chassis, easily and cheaply replaced.

Land Rovers use replaceable stub axles, and the axle body is far from the wear area around the hub. It's largely unknown to have a failed axle needing replacement on an LR, for Toyota, it's common.

Ditto on body. Land Rover is all modular.

If you're paying a mechanic to maintain what you have, you should instead be buying new. The LR versus Toyota question is the wrong one to be asking.

 

[burlsube]

I'd say I did a lot of the work. But there are just jobs that I don't have the ability to do like welding and body work/painting. Parts and parts availability have been challenging. I'm happy to work on whatever I end up with next. I know any older car isnt going to be as reliable as a new car, but it would be very difficult to get to Land Rover level in my opinion.

 

[FJBen]

Land Cruisers are more reliable and built better period. Any vehicle can have a lemon. Even though this is a Land Cruiser website, it's not like we are blind thinking the Land Cruiser is the best for everything with no data. There is a reason for the Land Cruisers reputation and it's world wide.


Like @ceylonfj40nut stated, almost every old vehicle will need baselined and will have little bits go wrong here and there. Part of owning an older vehicle which you already well know that.

Axles "CAN" fail on the Land Cruiser, but RARELY stock or even on 33's. Most failures occur on 35's or bigger and usually backing up and cranking the wheel. They are not weak by any stretch of the imagination.

I disagree that the Land Cruiser isn't inherently better than the Rover, but I will agree it depends on the vehicles history and the state you buy it in.


The FJ60 and 62 are basically the same. The main difference being the FJ62 is fuel injected and automatic. Other than a very few minor things, it's the same. Most tend to be slow...The auto is reliable, it's just your typical 80s tech power robbing auto.

CHeck out the 60/62 section on here.
FAQ - 60-series FAQ - https://forum.ih8mud.com/threads/60-series-faq.13183/

and welcome to mud!

 

[Bunga]

Apples and oranges. I have a friend in WY who has 2 LR so he can flatbed one to SLC for things failing. Money and reliability no object, LR has some very nice kit. But I like to be 200 miles from a paved road and I can't afford a heavy lift helicopter.

 

[wapitimud]

If it's a well maintained Series or Defender, it won't fail. If it's neglected, and poorly maintained, you'll have problems. It doesn't go and break just because the logo on the front isn't Toyota.

 

[Bunga]

If it's a well maintained Series or Defender, it won't fail. If it's neglected, and poorly maintained, you'll have problems. It doesn't go and break just because the logo on the front isn't Toyota.

Are Land Rovers Reliability Really That Bad: The Honest Truth | 4WheelDriveGuide.com - https://4wheeldriveguide.com/are-land-rovers-really-that-bad-reliability/
https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/lexus/lx/2016/reliability vs https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/land-rover/lr4

2020 Land Rover Discovery Reliability - Consumer Reports

Get reliability information for the 2020 Land Rover Discovery from Consumer Reports, which combines extensive survey data and expert technical knowledge.

www.consumerreports.org

Land Rover Is the Worst Car Brand You Can Buy for Dependability

Land Rover has a proud history and a loyal fan base; however, when you look at the data these cars are never very dependable.

www.motorbiscuit.com

 

[wapitimud]

We're quoting 'consumer reports?', on stuff you Googled?

Yes, you shouldn't be buying a used Land Rover, a tractor, trailer, tablesaw, or anything else that may eventually need maintenance or eventual repair.

A new vehicle with dealer warranty may be a better choice for you during the warranty period.

The problem with most pets, and also vehicles, is often the owner.

 

[burlsube]

If it's a well maintained Series or Defender, it won't fail. If it's neglected, and poorly maintained, you'll have problems. It doesn't go and break just because the logo on the front isn't Toyota.

Sound like you probably haven't owned Rover. I have owned many and regardless of how much maintenance you provide, they are not particularly reliable. All of my trucks have been maintained by myself or Rover specific shops and they haven't been close to comparable to say my family's Tacoma.

 

[wapitimud]

Yes, I'll just go and un-own my three Land Rovers and two Toyotas for that consumer reports article. My grandmother used to read those same CR reviews as well in print back in the day.

Saying that Land Rover is bad, Toyota good, is the same as saying John Deere good, never buy Kubota. It lacks wisdom.

If we were to compare something like a 2002 Toyota HDJ79 Land Cruiser at 100K miles, against it's analogue, a 2002 Land Rover Defender 110 td5 at 100K miles, assuming the same value at an arbitrary $20K, we'd find the following:

Toyota: -less routine maintenance on drivetrain required. Upgraded oil/fluid seals all around.
-higher mileage between rebuilds for drivetrain.
-single cab design reduces water ingress while fording

Land Rover: -much lower OEM parts cost and wider supply of OEM drivetrain parts.
-full aftermarket supply of all chassis electrical harnesses.
-less corrosion of the alloy body than the steel Toyota
-almost no threaded fittings to corrode on LR chassis, replaceable bolt, nut, washer on LR against the 79's threaded chassis holes.
-reduced specialty tools in LR FSM for drivetrain rebuild against Toyota FSM.
-higher parts count and hence cheaper rebuild on several major axle parts. Half shafts are integral to driven members on Toyota rear axle, They are two cheap parts for LR.
- Axle casing at wheel bearing is a single section of steel on Toyota. It's a replaceable stub axle that bolts on for LR
-better paint on steel sections and parts, quite thin paint on Toyota and more prone to corrosion.
-modular design of cab, rather than single joined section of steel allows easier drivetrain replacement, and vehicle maintenance.

New against new, if the same value, the Toyota LC was probably the better vehicle at the dealership in 2002.

Given the span of time, and as a hobby vehicle for enthusiast use, where replacement parts must be installed, I don't know if the same math applies as evenly now, on an older vehicle. It would depend entirely upon vehicle history, location, condition, and past maintenance.

One can't be polishing their brand logos here.

 

[D21FJ60]

The 60 series body is a classic and seemingly iconic design. It will cost money even if it's been properly maintained. Being in NE, youll want to baby that frame so you dont lose the truck to rust. Id say go for it, but keep the rover for posterities sake.

 

[Pura Vida]

My family used to live in Afghanistan, and the only car that could travel the rough terrain reliably was a Toyota. Toyotas saved my life and that’s why I’ll always buy Toyota

For reference, my dad ran tour groups into the country for tourists, and after every trip, they would have to completely replace all the shocks. Zero chance a Land Rover would have survived.

 

[wapitimud]

I would have to say there's probably zero chance that thousands of landrovers were used in Iraq and Afghanistan, and that they survived.

IED's were their downfall there, rather than any terrain or mechanicing. Heavier vehicles than LC and LR were used later in the conflicts there.

 

[Devils Paw 80]

Sound like you probably haven't owned Rover. I have owned many and regardless of how much maintenance you provide, they are not particularly reliable. All of my trucks have been maintained by myself or Rover specific shops and they haven't been close to comparable to say my family's Tacoma.

Are you still looking at FJ62?
Maybe my favorite LC sold in N. America.
Quite prone to rust, unfortunately. That’s why I sold mine after owning 18 years.
The wet coastal Alaska climate wasn’t a great match for it.
Regarding Land Rovers, a friend of mine has two of the older models and says the same thing:
Don’t bother owning one unless you love to tinker because they are constantly having issues. Even after rebuilt, that is. Obviously an older rig that hasn’t been restored will need a ton of attention.