Considering a swap from LR4 to HiLux / Tacoma

[Crimond84]

Hi All,

First time post here for me...

I've been running Land Rovers, specifically LR3 & LR4 for about the last 6 years or so.
My LR3 was fairly well kitted out and I frequently enjoyed weekends away exploring trails that the UK has to offer.
I eventually upgraded to an LR4, which coincided with a change in job, putting more reliance on my car for commuting. As a result, I didnt kit the LR4 out, and have significantly ramped down any off-roading undertaken since.

Both the family and myself are keen to get back out off-roading, with a view to taking some much longer European trips into the pyrenees etc.

At this point, I am unsure whether I should invest in kitting out what is now a 12 year old car (they don't make them last like they used to!), with 126k (miles) on the clock. Or, whether I should consider swapping to something such as the HiLux / Tacoma that would significantly lower the cost of repairs and parts, and possibly accessories!
The one issue I have with the Land Rovers is that they carry a heavy price premium, and I am concerned that being somewhat easier to break than most, I could end up having invested X in the vehicle, only for a fault or failure to write it off.

I have other options in the UK, such as the defender - However, noting the above statement about price premium, I am looking at 150% of the cost of the HiLux for a similar age & mileage vehicle. Couple that with the fact I am 6' 2" and 17 stone, it gets a bit cosy in there!

Thanks in advance for anyones thoughts and opinions!

I will post in both the LR and Toyota threads to get a view from both side.
Oh and here's a pic to reduce the boredom levels of the post...

 

[morrisdl]

As my LR3 ages, I have often considered the same move. Really the 4runner is closer comparison to Discovery3/4.

 

[Crimond84]

It is - and I think the 4Runners are excellent, but sadly not available in the UK :-(


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Red90]

Really, you are just dreaming. Parts cost is no different and reliability will not be any different for modern vehicles such as these. They are all complicated and costly to repair. Toyotas are not any more reliable than anything else. It is just a myth.

A Land Cruiser is more accurate comparison.

 

[Crimond84]

Interesting view - thanks.
I’ve done a little bit of research online which suggests parts and accessories are cheaper, but I’ve not tried to calculate by how much.

I guess I’m more worried about the more significant failures and associated cost of repair, such as engine and gearbox failure.

If, as you say, the costs between them are negligible, then it really takes off the cards looking elsewhere, and I’d just crack on!

I guess the only other comparison to note is that I think my vehicle is valued around £12,000.
I can go from a 12 year old car @ 126,000 Miles, to a 6 year old car @ 30,000 Miles...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Ray_G]

Since this is mostly anecdotal, I'll offer my opinion.

The switch would likely be a false economy-and in all likelihood not really net you something significantly better for your application than what you have (and presumably know, from having maintained)

I know that violates the gospel of ExpO where Toyota is the answer to everything, in particular the 100 series or 200 series LC's but I'll stand by the statement.

From what I've seen you get a lot of value for your $ (or GBP) from the Disco/LR 3/4; whereas the cost of jumping into a Toyota is usually exhorbitant-which in turn reduces the theoretical economy of modification.

That's aside from there being a vast gulf in terms of ride quality.

I say that having owned 3 Tacos (we still own one). Ironically my wife's 02 Tacoma would likely net more if we tried to sell than my 06 LR3-or be damn close. What isn't close at all is the quality of the vehicle for long haul travel. Drivetrain, in theory, the nod goes to the Toyota. In application? Negligible difference. Can't speak to the diesels that you have access to however.

I'm sure the Toyota section of ExpO will be all in the other camp. So I'll just render my last thought; I've loved my Tacos for what they are-good, reliable, basic transportation. They lack a soul though, and I haven't been all that impressed by the community. Rover ownership is a relationship and a community.
r-
Ray

 

[DiscoDavis]

From what I've heard lately from outfitters in EU it is still really between Defender and Land Cruiser (70,80 series style or whatever the newish one is, not the 100-200 series). I'd really only consider those two for distance, BUT lately saw a German couple that did EU to Magadan and then Alaska, US west coast etc. in a Discovery 3

Especially because you have access to the TDV6 models with coil suspension and simpler electrics, I'd strongly look at keeping a disco around if that's a comfort question.

 

[Dalko43]

I'm sure the Toyota section of ExpO will be all in the other camp. So I'll just render my last thought; I've loved my Tacos for what they are-good, reliable, basic transportation. They lack a soul though, and I haven't been all that impressed by the community. Rover ownership is a relationship and a community.

Every brand/vehicle has it's own relationship and community aspect. I don't know how it is in the UK, but in North America the community support for vehicles like Jeep Wranglers, Tacoma's, 4runner's and Landcruisers is strong. Land Rover is no different in that regard.

To the OP's post, I don't know what the pricing looks like in your country, but in the US a new LR4 costs considerably more than a new Tacoma or 4runner. However they see very heavy depreciation within the first few years, and mildly used one will have about the same resale value as a Toyota 4x4 of similar condition. In terms of luxury features, a LR4 is more comparable to a LC 200; the difference being that a LC 200 does a better job retaining its value in the used market.

I'd say in general that the Land Rover brand has become more focused on luxury rather than true offroad utility (the old defender and the LR4 being the main exceptions to that trend). The company is catering to a crowd that, again speaking in generalities, doesn't care about the cost or severity of repairs. The Toyota 4x4 platforms by comparison (LC Prado/4runner, LC 200, Hilux) are very much built for hard use in the different developing markets. There perhaps is some hyperbole to the "Toyota's are indestructible" and "Land Rover's always break" mantra's, but there is a grain of truth in them as well, mostly because the two companies have different consumers and markets in mind.

If you're looking for a cost-efficient and reliable rig to explore (outside of what Land Rover offers), I'd look at the Toyota Hilux, Toyota LC Prado (the international version of the 4runner) and the Ford Ranger. All three are global platforms with well-established track records. The Hilux is a different vehicle from the Tacoma, though there might be some shared parts.

 

[Crimond84]

Thanks Dalko - appreciate the feedback.

I love my LR4 and would love to have it as the overland vehicle for me - but owning to the above premium price, specifically the reliability and associated cost of repair I do feel there are more appropriate options for me to look at.

Am hoping to convince the wife to take on the LR4 so it doesn’t leave the family


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[David Harris]

Really, you are just dreaming. Parts cost is no different and reliability will not be any different for modern vehicles such as these. They are all complicated and costly to repair. Toyotas are not any more reliable than anything else. It is just a myth.

A Land Cruiser is more accurate comparison.

A Tacoma and Hilux are every bit as reliable as a Land Cruiser, but are lighter duty vehicles overall. As regards reliability, I have not personally owned an LR3 or LR4, but from the feedback of friends that have owned them, they have not been completely trouble free in the first 100K, and caused a few more problems in the next 20K. On the other hand, my now 2.5 year old Tacoma has had absolutely zero issues, not even a single rattle or squeak, and drives the same now at 76000 miles, as it did at 20 miles. I expect it to do the same for the next 75000 miles. With that said, I love Rovers, but probably wouldn't buy anything after 1995 since I just prefer the earlier trucks.

 

[spikemd]

I owned a 2003 4Runner and put 100k miles on her. Good, relatively reliable truck (frozen calipers and a few niggles), and sold her at 200k miles. In the US, high mileage Yota trucks still command a premium. I then bought a 2001 Range Rover P38, which everyone says is the worst truck LR ever built...and I love it...still do after 9 years and 80k miles, many offroad. For me, the LR community is amazing and more to my liking, not to bash any toyota guys. I now have a 2006 LR3 and just imported a Santana/Defender 109 for overland build.

The Toyota is just so pedestrian or as some people say...beige... boring, no soul. Yes, it will get you from point A to B, but driving them is boring. After sitting in an LR, I hated the driving position in the 4Runner. How mechanically inclined are you? If you can't turn a wrench, don't buy an older LR. In the UK, parts are much cheaper and readily available than the states.

The newer LRs from about 2007 on are eons better in terms of reliability compared to the earlier models. The main issues are suspension which will wear in every vehicle, but the LRs are heavy and eat up bushings. To make any LR much more reliable, ditch the air suspension and go coils and many headaches or trails issues are gone. The engines and trannys are strong and reliable now. I have seen many Jag engines push into 300k miles with few issues.

Car buying is a practical and emotional decision. Drive each vehicle and see what feels best for you. Stand back and take another look...are you excited when you lay eyes on her? She is going to be your companion for offroad adventures. I think you should have an emotional connection to your vehicle which also keeps the spark lit for exploration.

 

[DorB]

Really, you are just dreaming. Parts cost is no different and reliability will not be any different for modern vehicles such as these. They are all complicated and costly to repair. Toyotas are not any more reliable than anything else. It is just a myth.

A Land Cruiser is more accurate comparison.

On what do you relay your reply?

I've worked with hilux from various models.
I see my travel companions who drive with new hilux and ones with LR3/4, and there is world difference in maintenance costs and reliability.

Maintenance is much simpler and cheaper for the hilux.


The hilux is not as roomy and luxurious as the LR, but the new ones are very far from the old pickup work truck of the early 90', and much more comfortable.

But it's still a truck.

A LC would be more of a natural comparison to the LR, unless you want the benefit of the truck.

 

[Red90]

3 decades of wheeling with everything out there. By far the most trail repairs by brand are on Toyotas . Mainly because their owners are the worst at keeping them maintained. In my experience they all break as much as the other. And all of the new ones are costly to repair.

 

[DorB]

The trucks from 3 decades ago are not relevant for comparison, not with the current hilux, and definitely not to late LR models.

Did you own/used/paid for maintenance of one of the candidates?

I own a 1997 hilux, for the past 16years, it's robust, reliable and cheap in overall cost during that period and I think the current hilux is better.

Yes, I have a solid front axle and most of the truck can be fixed with pice of wire and hammer, but the new models in overall give you more.

My travel companions drive Toyotas and LR from different models, all well maintained vehicles, and yet, the reliability difference and the total cost is very different.

Any way, it's not relevant to compare an old simple truck not even from 15 years ago to these new ones.

And a hilux is not a Tacoma.