fett
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 8,637
- Location
- South Hampshire
like data says, infact on my 1990 I just sold, (before I replaced most of it with new steel) some times the only good bits were by the ally lol
RR Classic vs P38
- Thread starter MikeV8SE
- Start date
This site contains affiliate links for which LandyZone may be compensated if you make a purchase.
like data says, infact on my 1990 I just sold, (before I replaced most of it with new steel) some times the only good bits were by the ally lol
The Land Cruiser 80 was designed in 1989 compared to the Classic in 1969. 20 years difference in technology so the Cruiser should be a vast improvement but production ended in 1996 which kind of speaks volumes about desirability. As for 300k I gather you can vouch for every one of them miles needing no intervention or repair work. Why come on a Land Rover forum and diss the products when we all know they have issues but still love the brand. Now you can shut the **** up because you are an embarrasment.
fett
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 8,637
- Location
- South Hampshire
if they are for sale at the same time they are comparable.
have you seen my avatar? not a toyota is it? we are just being realistic
80 posts , and your wrong too -fook off and earn your stripes
have you seen my avatar? not a toyota is it? we are just being realistic
80 posts , and your wrong too -fook off and earn your stripes
Last edited:
I know nothing because I have only 80 posts. I have rebuilt more motors than you have times taken a dump so you can **** off gob****e.
West Slope Rover
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 8,617
- Location
- deep underground
More discord. Sad.
Metaphysically, if we as vibrational beings are found caught in a negative exchange we must realize that we are but receivers of the wavelength that we live within.
Let's all breath in through our nose and together slowly release an OOOOOMMMM.
Now that's better.
Metaphysically, if we as vibrational beings are found caught in a negative exchange we must realize that we are but receivers of the wavelength that we live within.
Let's all breath in through our nose and together slowly release an OOOOOMMMM.
Now that's better.
fett
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 8,637
- Location
- South Hampshire
no , because you an embaressment talking like that to a regular even though your a newbie with only 80 posts.
be realistic, :your_wrong:
fett
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 8,637
- Location
- South Hampshire
juiceyv8
New Member
- Posts
- 4,738
- Location
- bordon hants
I think you should go chill out, have a **** and read the female pull out of the daily express.....or do both at the same time.
The fact that you are a regular has no bearing. The OP asked for info about Classics and P38's and off you go about Cruisers. You don't accept that the design of the Classic was floored but it was afterall designed at the same time as the Morris Marina which also didn't stand the test of time the same as your beloved Cruiser. Ask yourself why the 80 series had a short run and you might come to the correct conclusion that it was unpopular. The same cannot be said for the Classic can it. People would still hanker after a new one today. See no swearing needed.
steviebabes
Active Member
- Posts
- 138
- Location
- Eastbourne
I have a 1997 4.6 HSE and my partner has a 2003 4.2 TD Land Cruiser Amazon. They are both great in their own way. I'd really hate to part with either of 'em.
fett
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 8,637
- Location
- South Hampshire
i think they didnt change the rrc for so long because BL etc couldnt afford it and or was a bit lazy like all uk car companies became sadly. toyota had the cash and drive to constantly update there models for better or worse.
you dont need to talk to me about what mike was orginally asking. if he had a problem with my posts he would say (as he tells me to shut up all the time, and rightly so )
and as I keep saying , I love the classic, I have two and untill last week had three. but they are not better cars than the 80 series. we might like them more as we like landrover but they are not better.
so just shut up and go away
you dont need to talk to me about what mike was orginally asking. if he had a problem with my posts he would say (as he tells me to shut up all the time, and rightly so
)and as I keep saying , I love the classic, I have two and untill last week had three. but they are not better cars than the 80 series. we might like them more as we like landrover but they are not better.
so just shut up and go away
fett
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 8,637
- Location
- South Hampshire
I think you should go chill out, have a **** and read the female pull out of the daily express.....or do both at the same time.
lol , hows it going juicy
fett
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 8,637
- Location
- South Hampshire
the 2003, is that a 100 series? nice car (not the series were on about) I bet it is still worth a few bob?
I was amazed at how well they hold there value. you could buy one, put 50k miles on it and sell it for the same money you paid or more. amazing
The Classic was designed in 1969 and the basic design didn't alter right upto the end of production. That was it's problem because all of the corrosion traps continued to be built in. My point was that it is very unfair to compare a car which is designed 20 years later and say it is better. It should be because technology has moved on 20 years. A fair comparison would be say a 1995 P38 which if you spend time looking for a good one it will be comparable in price and quality. I have been around Land Rover and 4x4 in general for over 30 years by the way.i think they didnt change the rrc for so long because BL etc couldnt afford it and or was a bit lazy like all uk car companies became sadly. toyota had the cash and drive to constantly update there models for better or worse.
you dont need to talk to me about what mike was orginally asking. if he had a problem with my posts he would say (as he tells me to shut up all the time, and rightly so
and as I keep saying , I love the classic, I have two and untill last week had three. but they are not better cars than the 80 series. we might like them more as we like landrover but they are not better.
so just shut up and go away
fett
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 8,637
- Location
- South Hampshire
again if its for sale at the same time then its competition. end of.
price, it would have to a be a good one (although I admit I dont look at p38 prices much) quality - they used the cheapest everything so I am not so sure on that but really the key here is reliability. and its no contest there, lets be honest.
you didnt see the UN using P38's did you? so, well enough said.
just leave it there and exit gracefully.
price, it would have to a be a good one (although I admit I dont look at p38 prices much) quality - they used the cheapest everything so I am not so sure on that but really the key here is reliability. and its no contest there, lets be honest.
you didnt see the UN using P38's did you? so, well enough said.
just leave it there and exit gracefully.
Reliability is only an assumption you are making. I have had Toyota, Mitsubishi, Nissan and Suzuki which have all suffered some kind of failures. Their are very few 80 series on the road in the UK and they are probably out numbered 100 to 1 by Range Rovers. Take a look a ones for sale on Auto trader and you won't find many at all. Thousands of Range Rovers though. The UN used SPONSORED vehicles which is something Toyota could afford to do but Land Rover couldn't. I will ask you a question. Why do other manufacturers feel it necessary to compare their luxury 4x4 against the Range Rover? Why not against a Merc, BMW etc etc
joe1972
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 1,595
- Location
- Manchester
The article in this months Landrover World magazine by Roger Hicks compares Land Rover ownership to Leica camera ownership. Ok, Roger has been know to waffle and is a bit of a cock, but he does make a good point.....
Choosing and owning a Land Rover is a consicous decision. That is, you have to want a Land Rover to own a Land Rover. If a potential owner is comparing a LR with another make, chances are they don't really want a LR. Its less applicable with more recent LR models, as I guess LR knew this, but with old LR including Range Rovers you've really got to want one to own one.
...if you expect anything else, you will quickly begin to hate your LR!
just my thoughts
P.S Leica's are generally ****e to use, and not particularly reliable (a mate of mine has owned an M9 for near a year, but 6 months of that has been in the workshop being fixed!)...but he WANTED one, so there it is
Choosing and owning a Land Rover is a consicous decision. That is, you have to want a Land Rover to own a Land Rover. If a potential owner is comparing a LR with another make, chances are they don't really want a LR. Its less applicable with more recent LR models, as I guess LR knew this, but with old LR including Range Rovers you've really got to want one to own one.
...if you expect anything else, you will quickly begin to hate your LR!
just my thoughts
P.S Leica's are generally ****e to use, and not particularly reliable (a mate of mine has owned an M9 for near a year, but 6 months of that has been in the workshop being fixed!)...but he WANTED one, so there it is
fett
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 8,637
- Location
- South Hampshire
Rob, its becuase they are trying to sell them to rich soccer moms from chelsea not people who use them off road.
its by far the other war round in the other hemisphere believe me!
if you on here trying to convince us that a p38 is more reliable than an 80 series landcruiser then you best get your coat.
if your telling us you prefer the p38 thats entiely up to you
as we all know including you ,you dont buy a good landover you build one. and not everyone wants to do that so they buy another make.
its by far the other war round in the other hemisphere believe me!
if you on here trying to convince us that a p38 is more reliable than an 80 series landcruiser then you best get your coat.
if your telling us you prefer the p38 thats entiely up to you
as we all know including you ,you dont buy a good landover you build one. and not everyone wants to do that so they buy another make.
Last edited:
West Slope Rover
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 8,617
- Location
- deep underground
My son owns a '92 fj80 which has adventured in tandem with my RRC for many miles. It compares well with the Landy although my coil conversion puts Stinky a bit ahead of the fj80. The Toy also uses more gas, if you can imagine.
I know people in the, um, "security" business in Afghanistan and the fj was their go to vehicle. They argued over it. Here in the US they are everywhere. Parts are easier to find than RR bits and cheaper.
I will give the prototype Range Rover huge props for its 4x4 innovation - such as the coil spring suspension and full time 4 wheel drive- but I think the Cruiser is a better vehicle.
I know people in the, um, "security" business in Afghanistan and the fj was their go to vehicle. They argued over it. Here in the US they are everywhere. Parts are easier to find than RR bits and cheaper.
I will give the prototype Range Rover huge props for its 4x4 innovation - such as the coil spring suspension and full time 4 wheel drive- but I think the Cruiser is a better vehicle.
The Jap 4x4 are more popular in the Southern hemisphere for geographical reasons as in Japan is a two thirds the distance closer to its common trading partners. I haven't said that a P38 was more reliable I said that it would be wrong to assume that a Toyota is more reliable than anything else. I had a Disco with 312k on it's original engine
Similar threads
