Quick question before buying a 100! (1 Viewer)

[HDMac07]

I'm looking for a project to keep me busy throughout the winter and I've narrowed it down to two different vehicles. I have the opportunity to buy a 100 series (1999, 280k miles) for $2000 or a 1998 Jeep Cherokee Classic with 148k for $3500. The Cherokee is in better shape, but it's still not a Land Cruiser. I have owned a 100 series before with 132k miles that was pristine and was a huge mistake to get rid of. I currently own a GX470, 4th Gen 4Runner, and a camry. Long time toyota owner.

Land Cruiser is a 1 owner, dealer serviced vehicle with some bumps and bruises on the body. Timing belt was done by Toyota 30k miles ago. It will likely need base-lined otherwise. I can do all of my own work. I'm thinking if I put another $2500 in it (lift, tires, baseline maintenance) it would be a great weekend offroader. Are we all in agreement that the land cruiser is the right buy?

 

[GatorBait1551]

I don't think anyone on a Land Cruiser forum is going to tell you not to buy one, especially at that price, unless its a rust bucket

 

[HDMac07]

Zero rust actually, it has been well maintained. Just a few decent sized dents from being driven by teenagers many years ago. CEL is on for an 02 sensor. No manifold leak that I could tell. Starts and shifts great. No leaks other than PS rack, couple bottles of Lucas should cure that

 

[CanyonLX]

Buy the LC

 

[HDMac07]

Buy the LC

I believe I will. Thank you!

 

[D21FJ60]

Yeah that is a very good price unless the frame is one winter away from being swiss cheese.
This could be a test to make sure those on 'Mud are of sound mind and would recommend a Cruiser over a Jeep?

 

[cjmoon]

I paid 2k for a non-running 250k mike cruiser. Sounds like a good deal. Jeep sounds expensive. My dad has a 98 xj. Picked it up for like 1500 running driving

 

[highkick05]

Zero rust actually, it has been well maintained. Just a few decent sized dents from being driven by teenagers many years ago. CEL is on for an 02 sensor. No manifold leak that I could tell. Starts and shifts great. No leaks other than PS rack, couple bottles of Lucas should cure that

CHeck the diff hubs for damage or signs of being thrashed out. $2,000 though you could probably just buy 2 new ones for another $1k

 

[slowpok3]

Buy the Jeep and send me the number for the guy selling the LC.

 

[hickuptruck]

How beat is this $2k cruiser mechanically? $2k cruiser could easily turn into a $5k Cruiser since it's OEM parts or nothing with 100s.

 

[HDMac07]

How beat is this $2k cruiser mechanically? $2k cruiser could easily turn into a $5k Cruiser since it's OEM parts or nothing with 100s.

I know for a fact it needs sway bar links and is on all original suspension parts. I would put an OME lift, 555 ball joints and tie rods, new Timken bearings, and replace the steering rack bushings to freshen up the suspension and front end. It's hard to tell how mechanically sound it is until I start tearing it apart, but it runs and drives perfectly. The owners are still using it as a daily driver.

 

[boca1]

buy the LC before I do

 

[cmck]

I'm looking for a project to keep me busy throughout the winter and I've narrowed it down to two different vehicles. I have the opportunity to buy a 100 series (1999, 280k miles) for $2000 or a 1998 Jeep Cherokee Classic with 148k for $3500. The Cherokee is in better shape, but it's still not a Land Cruiser. I have owned a 100 series before with 132k miles that was pristine and was a huge mistake to get rid of. I currently own a GX470, 4th Gen 4Runner, and a camry. Long time toyota owner.

Land Cruiser is a 1 owner, dealer serviced vehicle with some bumps and bruises on the body. Timing belt was done by Toyota 30k miles ago. It will likely need base-lined otherwise. I can do all of my own work. I'm thinking if I put another $2500 in it (lift, tires, baseline maintenance) it would be a great weekend offroader. Are we all in agreement that the land cruiser is the right buy?

Right, buy the LC

 

[namsag]

If you like it, and you can do the work, and you're looking for a project then it sounds good at that price. Someone mentioned about spending money on it, but the way I look at it, that's kind of what you do when you're looking at this as a project. You will put money into parts but the project will provide something to do in the form of a hobby, and the satisfaction of doing the work yourself, and your Cruiser gets better and better as you go along. I say go for it.

It's not like you're saying "I got two grand and I need a reliable daily driver." Sounds like you look at it like I do. Do it.

 

[Beauski100]

XJ's are WAY more affordable to work on. But both are easy to work on (thanks to this forum!)

I agree another $2,500 will MAKE it a great weekend off-roader, but we should ask @ClassyJalopy how much it has cost him to KEEP his 100 a great weekend off-roader. haha

 

[D21FJ60]

Seal the deal? Any pics yet?

 

[sammybones]

Jeeps suck.

 

[DDabs]

XJ with the 4.0 would be pretty awesome. Especially if it has a 5-speed.

 

[phatdragon]

What rear end is in the Cherokee? I know some of them were better than others (Chrysler 8 1/4" I believe). The Dana 35 rear axles are notoriously weak.

Both seem pretty realistic price wise but I would still go with the LC unless you are thinking of making a true hardcore trail rig then I would go with the Cherokee. Mileage and maintenance aside the big difference for me is the ride quality on and off the highway, the V8 and and towing capability. I have done the towing the trail rig thing and at this point I would much rather be able drive the rig to and from the trail. The LC is capable of doing 95% of what the dedicated trail rig was.

145k on a Cherokee = 250k on a LC with similar maintenance, IMO.

 

[HDMac07]

Seal the deal? Any pics yet?

Picking it up at 1600 central time. Will post once I pick it up.

XJ with the 4.0 would be pretty awesome. Especially if it has a 5-speed.

It's automatic.. if it was 5-speed I would have already bought it simply to flip it considering the condition it's in. 5 speed Cherokee's bring good money around here.

What rear end is in the Cherokee? I know some of them were better than others (Chrysler 8 1/4" I believe). The Dana 35 rear axles are notoriously weak.

Both seem pretty realistic price wise but I would still go with the LC unless you are thinking of making a true hardcore trail rig then I would go with the Cherokee. Mileage and maintenance aside the big difference for me is the ride quality on and off the highway, the V8 and and towing capability. I have done the towing the trail rig thing and at this point I would much rather be able drive the rig to and from the trail. The LC is capable of doing 95% of what the dedicated trail rig was.

145k on a Cherokee = 250k on a LC with similar maintenance, IMO.

I'm honestly not sure. Did not check diff tags or run the VIN for details.