Armed Polite Society

Main Forums => The Roundtable => Topic started by: RadioFreeSeaLab on January 16, 2007, 10:26:35 PM

Title: Range Rover Classic
Post by: RadioFreeSeaLab on January 16, 2007, 10:26:35 PM
Anyone have experience with these?  The late 70s to late 80s models in particular.  They just look so cool, and I kinda want one for tooling around the trails near my home.
Title: Re: Range Rover Classic
Post by: Zed on January 17, 2007, 12:01:01 AM
Used to own one. (a 79 2 dr 3.5 V8  model)

They have the worst MPG you could imagine (3MPG city, 11 Highway), handle worse than a supertanker (take just as long to stop to), and are only mediocre off-road.
Title: Re: Range Rover Classic
Post by: Standing Wolf on January 17, 2007, 03:03:39 AM
In exactly two words: Lucas electrics.

I've never owned a Rover product, and never will. I've known several people who've owned them. The only one who's been satisified bought an extended, comprensive warranty with a used model. His vehicle has been extensively rebuilt by the dealer.

My 2000 Acura Integra just crossed 70,000 miles. The cigarette lighter stopped working at about 68,000 miles, but resumed working even before I located and changed the fuse. That's been it for problems. It gets 2530 miles per gallon around town, 3036 miles per gallon on the highway. The worst thing about the vehicle is that it includes a speed governor that kicks in at 130 miles per hour. I doubt I'd care to go faster than that more than once or twice a yeardefinitely not in Colorado, which, like Oregon, is heavily patrolledbut in most respects, it's been a champion.

The English can't even begin to imagine, still less build such a car.
Title: Re: Range Rover Classic
Post by: Ex-MA Hole on January 17, 2007, 03:10:40 AM
Personally, I think they are sweet looking autos.  The old ones are just awesome looking.  The new LR3 is a sight to behold.

That said, I will never own one.  The consistently rate at or near the bottom for reliability.  And parts cost big bucks.

Just my 2 cents.
Title: Re: Range Rover Classic
Post by: Cromlech on January 17, 2007, 03:18:25 AM
Range Rovers are damn expensive, and I don't really see the point in them. That being said, I do think that they look awesome.
Title: Re: Range Rover Classic
Post by: Dannyboy on January 17, 2007, 03:44:10 AM
Never been a fan of the Range Rover but I love the Land Rover Defender.  Had a 76 for a while when I was at Ft. Hood.  Right-hand drive but rusted out, bigger than Stuttgart. 
Title: Re: Range Rover Classic
Post by: Jamisjockey on January 17, 2007, 04:10:46 AM
Handsome vehicles with terrible reliability.  Last place you want to be stranded is an off-road trail.  If a 4runner is your style, I'd suggest a pre-86 'runner due to the straight front axle.  The 4cyl is reliable and tough but gutless, stick to the V6.
Title: Re: Range Rover Classic
Post by: roo_ster on January 17, 2007, 05:20:15 AM
We had some stretched wheel base versions in my unit: RSOV, MedSOV.

Thye were more reliable than the Hummers*, more maneuverable in rough stuff, and we could get more RSOVs on transport planes than we could get Hummers.



* Make of that what you will
Title: Re: Range Rover Classic
Post by: Art Eatman on January 17, 2007, 06:41:42 AM
Back-country 4WD play is just like self-defense with a pistol:  Reliability Is All.

After 22 years and 290K miles, I'll stay with my little 4-banger '85 Toyota.  40,000 miles in 4WD in some of North America's roughest back-country.  That engine began life as a forklift motor, and it's as bullet-proof as any I've ever seen.  Stick it down in low range and first or second gear, and I think you could crawl up a building until it fell over backwards. Smiley

SFAIK, the Land Rovers shown in the TV shows about Africa are good, although my opinion of Lucas electrics is as low as anybody's.  I fought those electrics on too many English sports cars...

Art
Title: Re: Range Rover Classic
Post by: charby on January 17, 2007, 07:00:34 AM
I have always wanted a Rover, especially a 88". They are mechanical a-holes and I have now considered a full size Toyota Land Cruiser instead. Someday I'll find one that I want and can afford.

-Charby
Title: Re: Range Rover Classic
Post by: Iain on January 17, 2007, 07:01:22 AM
Heard some stat a while back that claimed that 75% of all Landrovers made are still on the road. They've probably been making a lot more of them in recent years, but they have existed since 1955.

My uncle (farmer) got good years out of an Isuzu Trooper, went round the clock on it and a good bit of that was off road and off main roads.
Title: Re: Range Rover Classic
Post by: InfidelSerf on January 17, 2007, 08:30:49 AM
While I agree they are cool looking.  Unless you replace the wiring with a PainlessProducts aftermarket harness you'll learn to hate it.

You want a tough and reliable 4x4.. find an old Toyota FJ40  now those are beasts.

And the entire engine and drivetrain are interchangable from 1954 to 1982

Toyota did a good job maintaining the lines of the original
Title: Re: Range Rover Classic
Post by: RadioFreeSeaLab on January 17, 2007, 09:03:14 AM
I'd love an old Fj40, but they aren't cheap.  I'll probably end up with a Jeep Cherokee or old Wrangler.
Title: Re: Range Rover Classic
Post by: Perd Hapley on January 17, 2007, 09:23:59 AM
What is that new-fangled blue Toyota?  An FJ40?  I've seen a few, but didn't know what they were.

Them look really cool. 
Title: Re: Range Rover Classic
Post by: Dannyboy on January 17, 2007, 09:34:59 AM
That would be the new FJ Cruiser.  Neat looking but I'd rather have one of its predecessors, pictured above.
Title: Re: Range Rover Classic
Post by: Gewehr98 on January 17, 2007, 12:09:35 PM
Speaking of 4x4 trucks...

Looks like my wife is having me go look at this soon, it's similar to the one she had as a younger girl years ago:







Somebody put some time and effort into restoring it.  I'm not so sure the 350 Chevy engine is what came with the J10 trucks, but it makes working on it and finding parts easier.
Title: Re: Range Rover Classic
Post by: Cromlech on January 17, 2007, 12:28:41 PM
We had some stretched wheel base versions in my unit: RSOV, MedSOV.

Thye were more reliable than the Hummers*, more maneuverable in rough stuff, and we could get more RSOVs on transport planes than we could get Hummers.

Are you sure they were Range Rovers, and not Land Rovers?

Heard some stat a while back that claimed that 75% of all Landrovers made are still on the road. They've probably been making a lot more of them in recent years, but they have existed since 1955.

Yep, we see them all over the place here, old as the hills but still going strong.
 
Title: Re: Range Rover Classic
Post by: Zed on January 17, 2007, 12:49:15 PM
Dunno the FJ Cruser is a prity well equiped little SUV, only real downside is the IFS can be a little more expensive to lift.
Title: Re: Range Rover Classic
Post by: RadioFreeSeaLab on January 17, 2007, 12:54:19 PM
That, and the massive blind spot and tiny windows.
Title: Re: Range Rover Classic
Post by: Tallpine on January 17, 2007, 03:56:47 PM
cool picture, veloce - what mountain range is that in the background?

dang!  there's an old landcruiser sitting with a 4sale sign along the hiway between here and town.  if i wasn't so broke i would buy it just for fun.


Title: Re: Range Rover Classic
Post by: MechAg94 on January 17, 2007, 04:38:49 PM
GMC Sierra 1500 - 90,000 miles and no issues.  Smiley  Had a Chevy S10 Blazer that wasn't such a good vehicle previously so I won't sing the praises of GM.  Sometimes, I think they give the good vehicles to you when you buy the warranty and the bad ones when you don't.
Title: Re: Range Rover Classic
Post by: RadioFreeSeaLab on January 17, 2007, 04:39:51 PM
I have a car that I drive daily, so any 4x4 would be just for weekend fun.  Streetability isn't super important.
Title: Re: Range Rover Classic
Post by: Sylvilagus Aquaticus on January 17, 2007, 04:39:58 PM
I agree with Art. Range Rovers are for masochists. I'll refrain from posting all my Lucas electric one-liners at this time, but between the aluminium Rover engine (derived directly from an otherwise stalwart Buick engine) and the positive ground electrical system, British automotive products, no matter what the vintage or provenance is simply not something I'd willingly subject myself to.

Land Cruisers, on the other hand, are a different breed of cat.

If you want something that could run forever, get a Toyota. If you feel the need for more horsepower and torque and can't handle the expected 10MPG from an FJ40 with the original inline 6, you can graft a smallblock Chevy into it.

Even the later Toyota 4wd pickups with the independent front suspension go plenty of places to get you into trouble without breaking the truck. We put 300k miles on an old live axle 4WD Toyota pickup we used as a shop truck, hauling loads that would have destroyed a domestic light pickup.

Time will tell if the FJ Cruiser is just a poser, but so far, every one I've asked who owns one seems to like it well enough.

Regards,
Rabbit.
Title: Re: Range Rover Classic
Post by: Art Eatman on January 17, 2007, 07:26:19 PM
Back when the first Toyota Land Crushers showed up, our local dealer pointed out that the 6-cyl was made under license from GM.  Interchangeable parts!

I guess I crawled around under every one of the small 4WD pickups, back in the late '70s, looking at how they were built.  The Toy had the strongest frame and running gear.  Plus, the 4-banger won't overstress things.

Back around 1984 or '85, the Rover folks brought a half-dozen Range Rovers out to Terlingua for advertising photography.  We locals tried to persuade them to play "Follow me!" but they wouldn't.

A buddy of mine had an early Isuzu Trooper.  They're also a tough critter.  A bit down on power, but for back-country that's not really important.   
Title: Re: Range Rover Classic
Post by: RadioFreeSeaLab on January 17, 2007, 07:31:25 PM
Troopers have also crossed my mind.  I like ugly boxes on wheels.
Title: Re: Range Rover Classic
Post by: Perd Hapley on January 17, 2007, 07:41:33 PM
Troopers have also crossed my mind.  I like ugly boxes on wheels.
Then you need a Hummer; or one of those Scion monstrosities. 
Title: Re: Range Rover Classic
Post by: Zed on January 17, 2007, 07:43:55 PM
Have a friend with a Nissan pathfinder that he says is as tough as nails, and the power to weight ratio is pretty decent (V6 2dr model)
Title: Re: Range Rover Classic
Post by: Dannyboy on January 18, 2007, 05:42:04 AM
This thread reminded me of a night out in Nice last year.  I was sitting outside a cafe, talking with an Australian guy that was working in London.  We were talking about cars, we were there for the race, after all.  He said his boss drives a Ferrari 360.  Well, his boss goes to some kind of meeting and comes back all bummed out.  Turns out the head guy at the meeting drove a new Range Rover and this guy's boss felt inadequate because he only drove a Ferrari. 

I thought it was a funny story and it gives you an idea of why people would want a Range Rover.  I think the new ones look kinda cool but I'll take the Ferrari any day.
Title: Re: Range Rover Classic
Post by: glockfan.45 on January 18, 2007, 12:28:20 PM
I am not much of a Rover fan but I would love to have one of the last models defenders (but good luck finding one for a reasonable price). If you want tough as nails drive it to the end of the earth reliable an old toyota 4runner or pickup is hard to beat. I bought one to drive durring the winter when I first moved to Northern Minnesota. I spent the first few weeks of winter in my 2WD Ranger before I bought and old 92 4WD Tacoma. Talk about to Hell and back reliability and if the bumper were not in the way I am convinced it would climb straight up a wall.