LC vs Trooper vs Montero

[dylanblada]

That sounds pretty cool actually, I just wish I could get a truck like yours here (especially for significantly less than a Toyota).

 

[off-roader]

The LC80 is better in many aspects than the Montero/Pajero platform.

Full floating rear axle, solid front axle, it's WAY roomier inside, can be had with front and rear lockers from factory, better aftermarket support, motor transplant to diesel is easier. One thing that does suck on the LC80 is the exhaust routing from the factory. It's like they thought of it after the rest of the truck was built. I made a pair of sliders for one and it was a BIOTCH.

The primary reasons for me buying the pajero was it has 2wd, 4hi, 4hi LOCK and 4lo LOCK and was $5-6000 less than the toyota counterpart. :smiley_drive:

Its always easy to make broad claims of the capability of solid axles over ifs but based on my experience wheeling mitsu's, the solid f/r axles in the toy are very attractive but it's rarely stopped other hard core owners from taking a mitsu places you wouldn't take a toy (aka tight squeezes) much less made any difference in overall capability on open trails or the boulders or off camber obstacles. I doubt you'd encounter much that the IFS can't also handle well at least not enough to make solid axles worth the extra thousands of dollars...

That said a good running solid 94-97 SR or 98-00 winter packaged Montero's are probably less than half the cost of a LC80. My $.02 is I'll take a Monty over an 80 based on the extra cost alone.

Your experience may vary...

 

[dylanblada]

You make an interesting point about cost. And with the extra few grand one could fix any known problems and weak areas and even get a start on outfitting for expedition use. I hadn't looked into the Monty with the Winter Package before. That has the rear locker right? How can you tell by looking if the truck has it or not (like if I'm browsing on Autotrader)?

And I think it came up a bit ago about the SFA vs. IFS and for me I think I'd prefer to have a tough IFS mainly because of its on-road feel, because lets be honest, 95% of most trips are done on road. And when I go off road, I'm not really into rock crawling or anything extreme. Its not like this argument hasn't been waged a million time before.

One benefit many argue about is that SFA are inherently tougher and when they do break they are easier and cheaper to repair. While that may be true, I would rather have a tough and proven IFS and most of the vehicle options that have IFS are not known to have many issues.

In fact, the durability of the suspension was part of original idea for this thread: is one of the trucks' suspension especially strong or weak compared to the others?

 

[off-roader]

You make an interesting point about cost. And with the extra few grand one could fix any known problems and weak areas and even get a start on outfitting for expedition use. I hadn't looked into the Monty with the Winter Package before. That has the rear locker right? How can you tell by looking if the truck has it or not (like if I'm browsing on Autotrader)?

And I think it came up a bit ago about the SFA vs. IFS and for me I think I'd prefer to have a tough IFS mainly because of its on-road feel, because lets be honest, 95% of most trips are done on road. And when I go off road, I'm not really into rock crawling or anything extreme. Its not like this argument hasn't been waged a million time before.

One benefit many argue about is that SFA are inherently tougher and when they do break they are easier and cheaper to repair. While that may be true, I would rather have a tough and proven IFS and most of the vehicle options that have IFS are not known to have many issues.

In fact, the durability of the suspension was part of original idea for this thread: is one of the trucks' suspension especially strong or weak compared to the others?

The 94-97 SR's all had a 3.5L engine with the locking rear differential. the later Winter Package versions all "should" have seat warmers, headlight washers, & a rear locker.

Locked diff versions all have a locker switch at the bottom left side of the center console. All came from the factory with sticker on the door and driver side footwell area on the right side.

Unlike other pneumatically actuated lockers this one is a low pressure unit and you have enough power in your breath to actuate the locker. Won't save you on the trail or anything but its probably just slightly more reliable than a higher pressure system like an ARB. Oh, and for the front locker, there is an ARB RD110 locker available.

 

[dylanblada]

Verrrry interesting..... I'll have to look around at those. Thanks.

 

[RttH]

I dislike the lack of articulation in the IFS of my 2000 Montero, but...I love its handling on washboard roads. The inexpensive purchase price of the Montero allowed me to add front and rear lockers and a lower geared transfer case. These things have a narrow track width and mine turns extremely tight which is great on mountain trails. I love Land Cruisers but the extra cost and size/weight was part of my deciding factor, ( I would still be happy with one! esp. the 70 series troopies!). Monteros have very strong axles too.

I have had other brands and each has its own +/-, but dependability is a factor for me too.

 

[dylanblada]

I'm right with you on all those points Roger, the LC name seems to come up all the time and it seems like the reputation might unfair, if not inflated. Before I buy I'll see if I can find a good Monty to test. Since this might still be a few years out, how do the newer Montys compare (and do they have ARBs available?)

 

[Box Rocket]

Just to continue the duscussion. I have to be honest I'm not "in the know" on market prices for Monteros or Troopers but I have a better idea what the market is for Cruisers and I think you might have a false perception as to the cost of an 80 series Land Cruiser these days. They are extremely affordable. Sure, finding a low miles one (under 100K miles) is gonna cost you but you might also search and search and never find one of those low miles ones for sale. But a good 80 series cruisers can easily be had for $7-8K. You can still find higher mileage ones that have been well maintained are are still very reliable for under $5K.

I just thought I'd point that out because it sounded like people were assuming that the Cruisers were costing thousands more than some of your other choices, and I don't think that's really the case, unless your looking at Monteros or Troopers that are in the $2-3K range. And if that kind of cost difference is really an issue, I don't understand why you are tossing around the idea of a newer Tacoma which (even used) will likely still be well over $20K?

But coming back to overall capabilities, I own both an 80 Series Cruiser and a 2003 Tacoma. Each has it's strengths and weaknesses when compared to each other. So if Tacomas and Cruisers remain on your list (sounds like they are close to dropping off in favor of a Montero) here are my pros/cons of them for overland type travel. This one my own opinion as one who owns both, and based purely on my own experiences.

80 Series Land Cruiser PROS:
Extremely capable and strong
Overall build quality is hard to match. (my 1993 Cruiser with ~250K miles still feels more tight and well put together than my Tacoma that is 10 years newer).
Very comfortable with lots of interior space. (Ability to sleep inside the truck if necessary).
Excellent aftermarket support.
Optional front/rear locking diffs.
Reliable drivetrain.
Accessible parts/service worldwide.
Front/Rear solid axles (full float).
Proven in all conditions around the world.
Capable of overland travel as well as more technical/difficult "rockcrawling" type off-roading.

80 Series Land Cruiser CONS:
Underpowered for its size. (Can be improved with available Supercharger).
Overall size can be a hinderance on tight trails.
Poor fuel economy.(although this can be "overcome" with available long range fuel tank.)
Can be somewhat top heavy especially when loaded for long travel.
Solid Front axle (Only a negative point when considered for use on higher-speed corrugated roads. While the coil suspension is very good, a nice IFS truck will handle this condition better).
A few problematic maintenance items i.e. PHH.
Headgaskets can be cause for concern on higher mileage trucks.

Tacoma PROS: (these are observations of a 1st Gen DoubleCab)
Reliable drivetrain.
Drivetrain strength well matched to its size/weight.
Optional rear locker.
Acceptable interior space. Good bed space for its size.
Decent power, even better with supercharger.
Very acceptable fuel economy.(I managed between 18-20mpg on my last overland trip.)
Good aftermarket support.
IFS suspension very well suited for highspeed overland travel.
Capable of sleeping in bed of truck with a topper. (5' DC bed could be too short for this.)
Capable in variety of terrian from graded roads to moderate/diffucult trails.

Tacoma CONS:
Could use more interior and bed space for long trips.
Weak rear frame section needs to be reinforced for typical overland travel type loads.
Less common outside US with potential for difficulty finding parts/service.
IFS weaker on more difficult trails.
Limited suspension travel with IFS.
Ball joints should be inpsected on higher mileage trucks.

Those are the things that come to mind as I look at my own trucks. I love both trucks for different reasons and feel fortunate to have both. Recently I've had two different off-road trips. One was nearly 1000 miles of dirt roads (mostly mild difficulty with a few sections of moderate difficulty). I had the Tacoma on this trip at it was outstanding. There was a large percentage of highspeed dirt travel and the Tacoma outperformed my Cruiser in terms of comfort and handling in this type of travel. The other recent trip was to Moab for some moderate/difficult "rockcrawling" type off-roading. I had the Cruiser on this trip and was glad to have the strength and capability of a Land Cruiser. I've used my Cruiser on overland type trips and it has been excellent and very comfortable, especially when I have my family with me. the only drawback I see when compared to my Tacoma is how comfortable I feel pushing it at higher speeds. The handling and higher COG make it so I don't feel like I can push as fast as I can in the Tacoma. Isn't necessarily a bad thing, but an observation.

 

[RttH]

I'm right with you on all those points Roger, the LC name seems to come up all the time and it seems like the reputation might unfair, if not inflated. Before I buy I'll see if I can find a good Monty to test. Since this might still be a few years out, how do the newer Montys compare (and do they have ARBs available?)

The newer Monty's have independent suspension front and back and they actuall have more travel and more clearance stock than a gen 2 stock (I think?). Yes you can get an ARB rear locker for gen 3 Montys.

Regarding cost between LC and Montero. I think a comparison between same years might show LC costs a little more than same year Montero. Gas mileage and repair costs might be less for the Montero too. That being said I have not actually checked so this may be a false assumption. LC are known the world over for excellent quality and reliability, I think this is why they have more aftermarket support and with more popularity maybe can demand a little more $$. Service on our 2001 Toyota Highlander costs a lot more than on my 2000 Mitsubishi (if going to a dealership for routine maintenence).
:coffeedrink:

 

[tdesanto]

For gen III Monteros (2001-2007) both front and rear ARB lockers are available, and they work well

 

[dylanblada]

Adam - I check Autotrader, IH8MUD, and here regularly and apples to apples (same year, similar miles, lockers) FZJ80s are definitely a few thousand more. t seems that some of that is reputation (both deserved and inflated), luxury features that don't appeal much to me (I prefer cloth seats), and the sticker price (Cruisers were/are way more expensive new).

I first mentioned these $3k-$7k trucks with a diesel conversion in mind, but it looks like that may not be feasible and still have money left over to outfit the truck. Also, if some cash falls through, these all should be a good base if I have less than my targeted $20k.

As mentioned before, the Tacoma has its advantages and I wouldn't be getting a brand new one. I can get a suitable Access or Double Cab '05+ for something like $15k now. So in a year or two when I'm ready to roll, they should be a little less. I'll also check out earlier ones too thanks to I would probably be OK using the Taco as a daily driver, at least until it gets weighed down with armor etc. But my thought is that the Taco is more than an early 100 series and the only real benefit (for my purposes) is that it gets somewhat better MPG. And I think I'd take a 100 over an 80 because a decent 100 is about $3k more than a decent 80 and the 100 would be better for long term ownership for me.

At this point a '98-'99 100 series is on top of my list, then a Montero, Tacoma, and 80 series are somewhere behind. This is still because I haven't heard anything back from the RIs I've contacted about legalizing an HDJ80.

And wow, thanks for your Pro/Con list. it covers pretty much all that's relevant to me. I've picked up on most of those points so its good to see those points confirmed by an owner. I wonder how the superchargers would affect economy?

Roger - Thanks for the info and I think you're about right with your "assumptions". I think the 80 is a little more overall, but one could argue they have that value based on the worldwide reputation you mentioned. As far as aftermarket support, the Cruisers have about as much as all the other mentioned here combined. But that won't be a huge issue for me. As long as I can get lockers one way or another, that's my main requirement for aftermarket support. I have a lot of cool ideas that will require custom work anyway. I plan to do most maintenance DIY, but like you mentioned, there might be a price difference in parts. I don't think that will be too much of a factor for me though unless a ball joint costs $200 on one and $1200 for the other...

tdesanto - Your Monty is AWESOME, its almost like I would build it, including the box with the air compressor. I saw a post on your build thread discussing the pros and cons of the Montero vs. Montero Sport. It sounds like the Sport is closer to the other vehicles mentioned here. I wonder how it would compare to the others? One cool thing about the sport is I have a good friend that has a well maintained, low mileage, CLEAN, white, 2001 Sport, so I have a bit of behind the wheel impressions of it. Strong engine, probably enough space. I wonder how tough it is though. Did the Sport come out to carry the torch of the earlier versions? Interesting that Wikipedia mentions that the Gen III has longer suspension travel.

Thanks for the replies guys, this is really helping me sort some of this out and hopefully it can help others too.

 

[gretzky]

Just out of curiosity, how did your Discos treat you Tacoma4life (I could have guessed you were a Toyota fan haha)?

And one other idea: what do we think about the CRD Grand Cherokees? It seems they can get 20+ MPG and they are starting to break the $20k mark now, so in a few yeas they should be a viable option...

First off I’ll offer a word of caution on the CRD Grand Cherokee. While, on road, it was by far the best SUV I’ve ever had (smooth, tons of options, and even more power) I couldn’t get parts in major metropolitan areas. Jeep dealers wouldn’t touch it and Mercedes dealers wouldn’t even look at it. I ended up having the transmission service done at a Dodge Sprinter dealership. They also don’t respond well to any changes in tire size. Great truck, but I’d be very concerned taking one through South America (I’d take one to Europe in a heartbeat though).

As for the other options, I picked up an FZJ80 recently for camping and skiing trips in Colorado. It’s far better offroad than anything else I’ve owned, yet still comfortable on the road. Don’t get too hung up on the lockers. People are willing to pay a huge premium for factory lockers when ARB air lockers can be had front and rear for under 2k (plus then you have onboard air). Further yet, you can get a rear aussie locker for $300, and while you don’t have a front locker I don’t foresee it being an issue for most people. It is anemic though, and the supercharger kits cost far more than I paid for the truck.

On another note, I have a deep love for diesel 110’s and diesel G’s I just couldn’t justify the cost. It would take a lifetime in the truck to pay off the difference, and while you’re in the states parts would, again, be hard to find (unless you happen to find a w123 in a G, in which case you could rebuild the engine in a NAPA parking lot… exaggerating but still).

One last platform to think about if you don’t care about the “I-belong-to-a-cult-in-Montana” image would be a diesel K10 Blazer. SFA, 6.2l diesel, solid trans, and simple as can be. They can be purchased anywhere from $500-2000 on the government auction website depending on condition. For that price you could afford to go through the engine, slap on a banks kit, go through the axles, t-case and transmission and basically have a new truck before the trip. This would appeal to some people and be completely unheard of to other since, well… they’re kind of ugly.

Just my .02. Best of luck on the search.

 

[dylanblada]

Thanks for the info on the CRD. That sucks that even dealers won't work on it. And as for the pros/cons of an 80, well most of those issues are cleared up (for my needs) by just getting a 100 series with the rear locker (fairly common). I would probably get a front ARB to shore up the early front diff and to have onboard air, like you mentioned.

And I'm with you on the diesel G-Wagon/D110. VERY cool, bit a decent one would be too expensive to buy/own for me, but the MPG savings on a 300tdi D110 would be sweet.

“I-belong-to-a-cult-in-Montana” - haha
I hadn't really considered those since I imagine those would be not as nice to use for a long trip. I suppose you could retrofit it to make it more livable though. There is something to be said for simplicity for sure (see D110).

I have seen that from '94-'97 there was a V8 Detroit Diesel option on the Chevy Tahoe/Yukon. They are reasonably priced (about the same as an 80 series) but kinda rare. That has been an idea for me, but there are a lot of unknown quantities with those (reliability mainly).

 

[tdesanto]

Adam

tdesanto - Your Monty is AWESOME, its almost like I would build it, including the box with the air compressor. I saw a post on your build thread discussing the pros and cons of the Montero vs. Montero Sport. It sounds like the Sport is closer to the other vehicles mentioned here. I wonder how it would compare to the others? One cool thing about the sport is I have a good friend that has a well maintained, low mileage, CLEAN, white, 2001 Sport, so I have a bit of behind the wheel impressions of it. Strong engine, probably enough space. I wonder how tough it is though. Did the Sport come out to carry the torch of the earlier versions? Interesting that Wikipedia mentions that the Gen III has longer suspension travel.

Thanks for the comliment. As for the compressor box. If you get one, I recommend not doing it. It takes up too much space. I'd recommend either installing the compressor in the 3rd-row seat compartment (if you can figure out some ventilation) and the tank underneath, or placing both underneath and extending a breather to the inside for the air intake. I'm actually looking at trying to do one of these options to re-gain some cargo space inside.

The Montero Sports are tough trucks too and have the solid axle in the rear. They just don't have the cargo space; cabin space is also a bit smaller. So, it's a personal choice there, but rest assured they are good trucks for taking off road too and share a lot of the same components. I believe the front diff is the same; so, the ARB would be compatible for it as well.

 

[dylanblada]

I'll have to get some more seat time with my buddy's Sport then. I'll be taking out the 2nd row seats (at least most of the time) so I think it would be good for space. And for the compressor, do you need to have a tank with that little ARB to operate lockers and pump up tires? Or is that more for air tools? Air tools would be cool to have, but may not be the best use of space with that compressor.

looks like the Sport is pretty close in specs to a 4Runner. I wonder how they would compare?