With all the cherry 80 series out there, tell me why you went with the 100 series. I am just curious to hear your answers.....
Why you picked a 100 over an 80 model
- Thread starter TexasBadlands
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
Just drive them both and answer your own question. That is what I did.
The 80 feels like a truck. The 100 is quiet, smooth, and much more comfortable.
I test drove about 5 80s and the owners all wanted too much money for them even with 130k on them. My 100 was on a dealer lot and the Acura dealer didn't know quite what to do with it. I drove it once and said "write it up". I didn't know the finer differences between the 80 and 100 at the time but could easily tell the difference between the 100 and the other vehicles I had driven.
Trade that Rover for an 80 or 100 and you can't lose.
Trade that Rover for an 80 or 100 and you can't lose.
Why pick one over the other??? 
s
i
g
|
|
|
|
|
\/
s
i
g
|
|
|
|
|
\/
I had just sold my my 84 FJ 60 and needed a new cruiser. I wanted an 80 mainly for ease of lifting and I had seen a couple with factory lockers front and rear. We test drove an 80 and a 100 and that sold my wife on the 100. She always hated the 60, ride and power issues. I thought the 80 was a big step up from the 60 and that the 100 was too plush for 4 wheeling.
Well you know who won that argument.
We got the 100 and I have had no regrets. It goes everywhere I point it off road, in absolute comfort. Gotta luv that V8 too! I would never go back to the straight 6.
Well you know who won that argument.
We got the 100 and I have had no regrets. It goes everywhere I point it off road, in absolute comfort. Gotta luv that V8 too! I would never go back to the straight 6.
- Thread starter
- #7
NMuzj100 said:
Speaking of wives, I might have thought to trade the Rover for a 100 series 'just because' but she wouldn't let me anyway
The Discovery II has been a fantastic vehicle for us. I might try to talk her into a 100 series if I could afford to get into another payment, but I can't as I just went and got on the list for the FJ Cruiser. At this point there is no Land Rover we would consider buying new because none of the newest are worthy of our attention. Why? Because they seem like they are more oriented towards on road luxury than off road travel.
Does the 100 have the ATRAC like the FJ Cruiser?
- Thread starter
- #8
Crap I just came from the Toyota web site from building a Series 100..... Wow it was like $63,199.00 ......... Boy are they proud of that thing! I thought the Discovery was high.......
Building the new Land Rover LR3 came out to $56,875.......
What the heck, the vehicles depreciate so fast why are they selling for such high prices anyway......?
I paid just under $50,000 for my Disco II loaded and now blue book is like $22,000 if I sell it? What a rip especially since it's in such good condition with only 43,000 miles on it.
Building the new Land Rover LR3 came out to $56,875.......
What the heck, the vehicles depreciate so fast why are they selling for such high prices anyway......?
I paid just under $50,000 for my Disco II loaded and now blue book is like $22,000 if I sell it? What a rip especially since it's in such good condition with only 43,000 miles on it.
Last edited:
Texas, there is a reason the 100 msrp is so high and it's resale is high. There is also a reason the LR's resale is so low.
However, w/ the slow suv market, you can get quite good deals on 100's. I think someone posted here about getting a LX470 for $10K off (?) [anyway, something big like that]
Do you compare the LR3 to the 100? I see the 100 as a clear step up from that.
However, w/ the slow suv market, you can get quite good deals on 100's. I think someone posted here about getting a LX470 for $10K off (?) [anyway, something big like that
]Do you compare the LR3 to the 100? I see the 100 as a clear step up from that.
TexasBadlands said:
"The lesson here is NEVER buy a New truck, car, anything. Always let someone else take the BIG depreciation HIT. Never, NEVER buy a new truck, car, etc. Unless of course your worth several millions of dollars and just don't care."
Gman
Cheers to that Gman. Thank god for rich people who drive the new cruisers to the Mall. Without them I probably wouldn't have one. I chose the 100 for the extra power and improved braking system. Not to mention the 8k off blue book for an old 88 YJ Wrangler that actually made it to the dealership and ran great for them...just my luck!
I've been lurking for several weeks now, but saw your post and wanted to respond (and introduce myself).
About three months ago I realized that I had outgrown my Jeep Liberty - hunting and fishing trips with my two sons and all the gear just wouldn't fit anymore...
Starting looking around - a friend at work bought an 80 series last year and really fixed it up nice - good price too. I test drove a couple of 80's around town and was dismayed by the lack of power to get onto the highway. I think the 80 has a better truck look and has less problems lifted (straight front axle).
The 100 was a clear winner for me in power first, then creature-comforts! Also, the 100 is a little bigger in cargo capacity (or at least it seems that way) and that's something I really needed. Lastly was price - the '98 - '00 models seemed to be only a few thousand more and the miles were typically less.
I've had my '99 Riverrock Green for about two months now and love it. I bought it w/80K miles on it and have had the timing belt and all the other PM stuff done that's been outlined here on the board.
Anyway, I enjoy the postings here on the board and hope to post more often as well!
Bill
Phoenix, AZ
About three months ago I realized that I had outgrown my Jeep Liberty - hunting and fishing trips with my two sons and all the gear just wouldn't fit anymore...
Starting looking around - a friend at work bought an 80 series last year and really fixed it up nice - good price too. I test drove a couple of 80's around town and was dismayed by the lack of power to get onto the highway. I think the 80 has a better truck look and has less problems lifted (straight front axle).
The 100 was a clear winner for me in power first, then creature-comforts! Also, the 100 is a little bigger in cargo capacity (or at least it seems that way) and that's something I really needed. Lastly was price - the '98 - '00 models seemed to be only a few thousand more and the miles were typically less.
I've had my '99 Riverrock Green for about two months now and love it. I bought it w/80K miles on it and have had the timing belt and all the other PM stuff done that's been outlined here on the board.
Anyway, I enjoy the postings here on the board and hope to post more often as well!
Bill
Phoenix, AZ
TexasBadlands said:
Avoid the British - the Rovers and Jags drop the fastest of all luxury.
Well my 1957 MGA is still appreciating so go figure! =)
I would dump the FJ and go with a $30k 100 series.
That would get you a 2003 or so with probably 40-60k miles on it.
MUCH more vehicle for the money then the FJ. I was on the FJ list too and after driving one and driving a 100 series it was a very easy decision.
100 has A-TRAC but I would like to see it have the rear locker like the FJ too but that's an easy fix.
That would get you a 2003 or so with probably 40-60k miles on it.
MUCH more vehicle for the money then the FJ. I was on the FJ list too and after driving one and driving a 100 series it was a very easy decision.
100 has A-TRAC but I would like to see it have the rear locker like the FJ too but that's an easy fix.
Imola Red said:100 has A-TRAC but I would like to see it have the rear locker like the FJ too but that's an easy fix.
You can get a 100 with TRAC and triple lockers.
- Thread starter
- #16
I like the FJ for it's size as a personal vehicle, and we have the Disco as the 'family' vehicle. I had no qualms about the FJ when I test drove it off road in the 6 speed model and am sure about my purchase there. The Rover, even though we have had no troubles with it for 4 years, is just that, 4 years old. Cost of maintenance on it will start to soon set in for it and I am sure it's more expensive than a Toyota (I hope) for up-keep.
PS - No, I consider the Land Cruiser a better vehicle than the LR3, but it is still a whopping difference in cost!
PS - No, I consider the Land Cruiser a better vehicle than the LR3, but it is still a whopping difference in cost!
TexasBadlands said:
The 100 does not cost more than the LR3. In fact, it's cost of ownership is far less than that of the Rover.
You can't just go by initial cost.
You need to figure in:
Depreciation
Maintenance costs
Repair costs to keep it on the road
Four-wheeling breakage (almost unheard of on Cruisers)
Etc
Etc
The Rover's live in the shop, cost a fortune to keep going and can be had for about half the initial cost 2 years later.
At the 3-5 year mark that LR3 owner will have paid dearly while the Cruiser owner is simply making payments and getting fluid changes.
Not knocking Rovers. I luv them. I just can't afford one. (Same reason we just bought a Mazda Rx8 over a Corvette)
hoser
SILVER Star
Just for kicks, Edmunds.com has a "True Cost of Ownership" feature:
'06 LR3 HSE
http://www.edmunds.com/new/2006/landrover/lr3/100604444/cto.html
'06 LC
http://www.edmunds.com/new/2006/toyota/landcruiser/100535810/cto.html
The default location is Chicago, IL but you can change that. I plugged in my zip code and the costs were about $8k more over the 5 years for both vehicles.
According to them, the LC costs $1100 more to own over 5 years. This is when factoring in Depreciation, Finance, Ins, Tax, Fuel, Maintenance and repairs. I'm betting a 5-10 year comparison would show different results in favor of the LC.
'06 LR3 HSE
http://www.edmunds.com/new/2006/landrover/lr3/100604444/cto.html
'06 LC
http://www.edmunds.com/new/2006/toyota/landcruiser/100535810/cto.html
The default location is Chicago, IL but you can change that. I plugged in my zip code and the costs were about $8k more over the 5 years for both vehicles.
According to them, the LC costs $1100 more to own over 5 years. This is when factoring in Depreciation, Finance, Ins, Tax, Fuel, Maintenance and repairs. I'm betting a 5-10 year comparison would show different results in favor of the LC.
Last edited:
hoser said:
It depends on what they figure into "their" calculation. Depreciation alone is a huge differnence. You can buy a new Disco for $48K and sell it 2 years later for $16-18. They're all over the place. Edmunds must not figure this in?
My buddies on the AZ Rover forum are posting 24/7 about MAJOR failures within the first 5 years. Failures that 100's don't fall prey too.
hoser said:
Looked at those sites. I think Edmunds had UNDER-estimated the maintenance big-time on the LR3. They already are service-pitts. I also noted that depreciation on the LR3 may not be as bad as the Disco's were.
