Choosing my first overland vehicle

[BuffaloFunk]

Never had any issues with the Xterra seats. That said, that is a personal preference.

Same here. I know my Pro-4X seats are a bit different, but I thought it was just upholstery and not the actual seat. Longest I've gone without so much as a bathroom or gas break was 6 hours and I was fine. I do have the lower portion of the seat adjusted to the extremes though, so I'm all out of movement. Luckily, it's perfect for me.

 

[Eniam17]

In your initial post you stated you probably won't be "wheeling" but just remote camping. If you really won't be "wheeling" or "offroading" or whatever the term is, I think all the vehicles you are considering are actually overkill. They are for more capable in stock form than what you would need to camp with your family. This thread is discussing LR3's, Xterra's, 4runners, LC's, Rubicons, etc. which are a group of the most capable offroad SUV's that exist. Going back to your last line of the post, you probably could do what you want to do in a Forester.

I would not sacrifice on road comfort for something that is more capable offroad based on your initial post.

I have to agree with the xterra comments, my brother had one and while it was extremely reliable and seemed rugged, it was just not that comfortable.

 

[phobucket]

First of all, the term "brodozer'd" is awesome! Thanks for that.

I picture going on adventures that are the west coast equivalent of this thread: http://www.expeditionportal.com/forum/threads/106194-100-Series-Family-Adventure-Rig
I'd also like to go to Moab, but don't really see myself trying to tackle the Rubicon trail. That said, I'm a total noob and don't know what Moab is like. It looks neat though.

Maybe one way to rephrase the question is where can an Xterra/LR3/Land Cruiser go that a Forester can't? If the answer is "places I don't want to go anyway", then Eniam17 is probably right. The other thing that I think about is the likelihood of towing...the Forester can only tow 1500lbs, which seems like not much. I'd rather err on the side of more capability than less, as I don't want to be forced into an upgrade 2 years down the road as my boys take up bigger kid activities.

More test drives are definitely in store. I forgot how much more room is on the inside of the LR3.

 

[PhyrraM]

.......More test drives are definitely in store. .......

In this day of information overload it's easy to "over" read, "over" research, and make up your mind (as to the perfect truck) before even driving the subjects of our attention. It's a mistake many folks make these days - including me on occasion.

I would strongly caution one to keep internet research and opinions as strong, but secondary to actual hands on, touchy feely research and test drives. I even take the boys along, as they find stuff (such as heated rear seat buttons, storage bins, and cup holders) faster than I do.

 

[LR Max]

On that note, also look at a used Toyota Sequoia. Originally I was against them, but they are stupid cavernous and durable. MPG is gonna suck but they are hosses.

The old toyota highlander was another great car. AWD but amazing for road trips. Good capacity as well.

On that line of thought, the Hyundai Santa Fe/Kia Sorento are AWESOME small SUVs. Cheap, fully loaded, peppy, economical, and decent carrying capacity. I'd rather have one of them over a Forester.

Lastly, I've rented numerous Chevy Equinox's and Traverses. Great trucks and their GMC brothers are super nice. I know this forum champions Toyotas, but really, if you aren't going to wheel but want piece of mind, the current cross overs offered are great. You can get all the great road manners while having AWD and traction control for that one muddy spot you'll encounter on the way to the camp site once every other year.

 

[DiscoCO]

I have an '04 Discovery and my wife has an '08 LR3 HSE. I love them both (because they're Rovers), but the LR3 offers more power, more internal space (for 2 kids (age 10 and 8) and all their stuff) that goes with camping/road trips, a much better ride overall, and better MPG. I love the looks and uniqueness of the Discovery and we tend to camp out of it for the most part (with a CDN M101 trailer in tow), but we are still limited on space. Spent a week in western Colorado and SE Utah in the LR3 and not one complaint. I believe the LR3 is more capable in all ways that matter to me, but I have had a love for the look of the Disco's since they came into the country in '94. I have recently considered trading the Disco for another '08 LR3, but I'm not ready to give it up. Of course my wife wants me to take her LR3 and pick up a newer LR4 for her...and I'm ok with that!

So like others have said - look at the newest LR 3/4 your budget can afford! They truly are amazing trucks!

 

[idrivemyself]

Given that I'm on my third LR now (a modded Disco II after a P38 and an L322...), I agree, an LR3 would be a great choice given your needs. It also affords you the ability to build out should you choose to do so, while still being incredibly capable even in stock form. As previously mentioned, buy the newest one that your budget will allow.

 

[tmpolice]

You can lift a lr3 for 100 dollar and I still don't know any 4wd that can do that. The lr3 are amazing and I'm not sure a LC would give you more happiness.
I looken at lc 100, 120, 4-runner and lr3. I found a good one in allmost mint condition so I bought it. I love it. I can't find the same feeling in a lc and don't like the cargo door on lc (well lc 100 is better but I couldn't find one then).
I really like the 4-runner and thinking of buying one to.

Problems with the lr3?
I haven't had any but compressor, egr and some more were changed when i bought it. It is a extreme 4wd out if the Box. Buy some rods to gain two inches more. There are front, Rear bumpers, sliders and so on for the lr3. They have a really good 4wd system and with good tires it takes you to most places. I also like the air suspension. When I lovad the car I put it into lowest so i can reaching better. It's a hell of a car and the realbility is far better then people say.
Try one and compare to the lc.

 

[Ryanmb21]

Lr3 and lr4 sure look sweet and no doubt they would be rocking. But, What about the maintenance? Bushings, air suspension systems? Wheel bearings?johnson rods, fault mates?

Threads on here all the time, with all of the above at play and commonly needing to be changed within the first 100k, I don't understand how it's a recommended vehicle. Honestly what is the running cost to to drive one 150k miles, has anyone done it?

 

[SouthPawXJ]

Other vehicles to consider for your needs: Tahoe/Yukon or Suburban/Yukon XL. Decent fuel economy for a truck (20 MPG hwy on the newer ones), and cavernous. The Domestic forum on here has quite a few people who've built theirs for Expeditioning.Another benefit to these: you can literally find a Chevy dealer just about anywhere in the Continental US if you need a part or service while traveling.

 

[LR Max]

Lr3 and lr4 sure look sweet and no doubt they would be rocking. But, What about the maintenance? Bushings, air suspension systems? Wheel bearings?johnson rods, fault mates?

Threads on here all the time, with all of the above at play and commonly needing to be changed within the first 100k, I don't understand how it's a recommended vehicle. Honestly what is the running cost to to drive one 150k miles, has anyone done it?

Toyota recalled the frames on the Tacomas because they rotted out...THE FRAMES. Not even Land Rover frames are that bad...and they are known for frame rot. How could you recommend a truck like that?

Every vehicle/manufacturer has its drawbacks. You can take one thing and blow it out of proportion. I've heard people complain about EFI and its complexity, but the reality is that its great. Sure you have a sensor go bad and whatnot, but once fixed you are back to awesome.

Every vehicle needs work at ~100k. My "dead reliable" sedan has already needed a fuel pump and timing belt tensioner. Both left me stranded. The car has 100k on it. Give it a break! The fact that you can dump a couple grand into a vehicle and pretty much bring it back up to spec is actually a pretty good deal. Oh and show me any vehicle with 100k on it and the radiator is still performing at 100% capacity as it was brand new.

And before you say how great Toyotas are, I saw three on the side of the road this morning driving to work. Lord knows how many more were masked by the dark.

It is what it is.

 

[toylandcruiser]

Toyota recalled the frames on the Tacomas because they rotted out...THE FRAMES. Not even Land Rover frames are that bad...and they are known for frame rot. How could you recommend a truck like that?

Every vehicle/manufacturer has its drawbacks. You can take one thing and blow it out of proportion. I've heard people complain about EFI and its complexity, but the reality is that its great. Sure you have a sensor go bad and whatnot, but once fixed you are back to awesome.

Every vehicle needs work at ~100k. My "dead reliable" sedan has already needed a fuel pump and timing belt tensioner. Both left me stranded. The car has 100k on it. Give it a break! The fact that you can dump a couple grand into a vehicle and pretty much bring it back up to spec is actually a pretty good deal. Oh and show me any vehicle with 100k on it and the radiator is still performing at 100% capacity as it was brand new.

And before you say how great Toyotas are, I saw three on the side of the road this morning driving to work. Lord knows how many more were masked by the dark.

It is what it is.

Funny, the frames were made by Dana. DANA. Americans can't even make a frame. It's amazing that 90% of rovers are still on the road. The other 10% actually made it home. Probably less if it wasn't counted at night so they were masked by the dark.

 

[mpinco]

Funny, the frames were made by Dana. DANA. Americans can't even make a frame. It's amazing that 90% of rovers are still on the road. The other 10% actually made it home. Probably less if it wasn't counted at night so they were masked by the dark.

Supplier quality control is the responsibility of the vehicle manufacturer, in this case Toyota. Each lot of product is tested and certified to be in compliance with the manufacturer's specifications. DANA process and Toyota QA failed in this case.

Recall: 150,000 Toyota Tacoma pickups for frame rust

"........While this is the Tacoma's first rust-related recall, it's a continuation of a much bigger problem that Toyota had already attempted to fix. In 2008, Toyota was forced to extend corrosion warranties and even repurchase Tacoma pickups from the 1995-2000 and 2001-2004 model years -- a span covering roughly 800,000 vehicles -- because entire frames were rotting out. ...........

........Even while most automakers have perfected rustproofing, Toyota and others still get it wrong. In 2010, Ford recalled about 475,000 Windstar minivans for rusting rear axles that reportedly were falling off the frames and entered a customer-service fiasco when owners demanded Ford buy back their vehicles (eventually, it did). In March, Chrysler recalled nearly 210,000 Jeep Liberty SUVs for suspension components that could rust and possibly break off.........."


Personally I think Toyotas are just boring. As Chris Snell pointed out: "The Tundra wasn't doing it for me. It was just okay for family road trips but parking it around town is a nightmare and offroad, it was a TuRD. Most incapable 4WD system I've ever driven." And as pointed out in several vehicle shootouts, Toyota trucks have fallen way behind other manufacturers. There is a reason Toyota is one of the top manufacturers: Highly competitive prices ......... managed at the supplier level through high volume/low cost and with simple systems.

 

[BuffaloFunk]

Highly competitive prices ......... managed at the supplier level through high volume/low cost and with simple systems.

I don't find any of their trucks to be competitive when it comes to pricing. A Frontier undercuts the Tacoma by a big chunk. The Xterra is also quite a bit cheaper than a FJ Cruiser, and if you want to put it up against the slightly larger 4Runner, it is astronomically cheaper. Also, the Tundra is a bit more expensive than it's competition and you get worse fuel economy with similar to worse power and torque ratings.

But back to the point. Just go test drive whatever you might consider. You might possibly want a FJ Cruiser? Go to the dealer and drive one. Bring the kids to see if they'll fit, and they'll find things you'll miss. You want a Land Cruiser? Well, you'll be looking used, so that will be hard, but you could still find a dealer than has one. Want a Rover? Go find a used one at the dealer. Even if the exact one at the dealer is out of your budget, you can still drive it and see if that platform is even worth considering based on your needs.

The best way to pick a car is to try a bunch of them. All the internet reviews can give you some heads-up, but ultimately it comes down to your preference and your budget.

 

[toylandcruiser]

Supplier quality control is the responsibility of the vehicle manufacturer, in this case Toyota. Each lot of product is tested and certified to be in compliance with the manufacturer's specifications. DANA process and Toyota QA failed in this case.

Recall: 150,000 Toyota Tacoma pickups for frame rust

"........While this is the Tacoma's first rust-related recall, it's a continuation of a much bigger problem that Toyota had already attempted to fix. In 2008, Toyota was forced to extend corrosion warranties and even repurchase Tacoma pickups from the 1995-2000 and 2001-2004 model years -- a span covering roughly 800,000 vehicles -- because entire frames were rotting out. ...........

........Even while most automakers have perfected rustproofing, Toyota and others still get it wrong. In 2010, Ford recalled about 475,000 Windstar minivans for rusting rear axles that reportedly were falling off the frames and entered a customer-service fiasco when owners demanded Ford buy back their vehicles (eventually, it did). In March, Chrysler recalled nearly 210,000 Jeep Liberty SUVs for suspension components that could rust and possibly break off.........."


Personally I think Toyotas are just boring. As Chris Snell pointed out: "The Tundra wasn't doing it for me. It was just okay for family road trips but parking it around town is a nightmare and offroad, it was a TuRD. Most incapable 4WD system I've ever driven." And as pointed out in several vehicle shootouts, Toyota trucks have fallen way behind other manufacturers. There is a reason Toyota is one of the top manufacturers: Highly competitive prices ......... managed at the supplier level through high volume/low cost and with simple systems.

So let me get this straight. Back in 1995, Toyota was supposed to look at the frame and know that it was going to rust. It must me nice to be psychic. What's your excuse for land rover? The whole world knows and talks and jokes about the reliability issues with them. Why aren't they being help to the same standard? Interesting. And that's our opinion about toyotas being boring. I happen to really enjoy my land cruiser. I would find it boring to constantly have to spend money on and fixing my truck. But I guess that's why I own a cruiser instead of a rover. I love you you quote another person and trying to use it as a fact. It's not even your opinion. It's someone else's. Why don't you try and just google frame rust on a random vehicle. It's more common than you may think.