G-Wagen vs. TLC 70/80
- Thread starter G-force
- Start date
As an outsider reading this thread it makes me sad to see what it has developed in to. An innocent question "Would you all who have G-wagons rate the reliabilty better than a Land Cruiser?"(#12) has turned this in to something ugly.
Gurkha, YOU are the main flamer, you started this, and continued it again and again, and you have done this in other threads too! It is you who call Toyotas Tonka toys and Toyota drivers Tonka Boyz thereby taking every reasonable discussion down in the gutter. I have not seen others make any references to sausages, ill prepared cabage or small men with funny mustages at the expence of either the G or you.
It is you who acts like a religious celot in your praising of the G-wagen at the expence of others. It is never pretty to see somebody trying to climb a bit higher by treading on others!
And now you try to act like you did not have a part in it. As for excluding others, well beware, it might be you who are banned, as I recall it has happened before right?
Gurkha, YOU are the main flamer, you started this, and continued it again and again, and you have done this in other threads too! It is you who call Toyotas Tonka toys and Toyota drivers Tonka Boyz thereby taking every reasonable discussion down in the gutter. I have not seen others make any references to sausages, ill prepared cabage or small men with funny mustages at the expence of either the G or you.
It is you who acts like a religious celot in your praising of the G-wagen at the expence of others. It is never pretty to see somebody trying to climb a bit higher by treading on others!
And now you try to act like you did not have a part in it. As for excluding others, well beware, it might be you who are banned, as I recall it has happened before right?
Please check the thread again at who started it, the Tonka toy reference came when direct, derogatory comparisons were made by Toyota guys at the G and Gurkha quoting my post. If I praise the G Wagen like a Zealot, its because this thread is dedicated to the G Wagen and not Toyota Land Cruiser. Sausages, Cabbages, small men with funny mustache, are those stereotypes about Germans? I guess another Toyota boy got hurt, go fix idler arm or weld that cracked chassis. Now you attack German race directly pulling this thread down to a level lower than any, no one attacked Japanese race here including myself.
LC/LR4Life
Adventurer
Regardles Ghurka the Land Cruiser will out wheel a G-Wagen any day of the week. Just watching your video post earlier with the Red G-Wagen on trail with those Land Rovers shows how the G-Wagen has no articulation. Furthermore you wouldn't have all these LC owners jumping in here except that you insult the Land Cruiser and expect nobody to say anything. Got news for you, Land Cruiser owners are rabid, so be careful of their bite.
Now back to the G-Wagen build.....
Now back to the G-Wagen build.....
Root Moose
Expedition Leader
This thread needs more cow bell.
If you don't have anything to directly say about G-Force's truck then ********.
I suppose at this point the thread might as well be deleted anyway - unless a mod wants to trim/edit with extreme prejudice.
If you don't have anything to directly say about G-Force's truck then ********.
I suppose at this point the thread might as well be deleted anyway - unless a mod wants to trim/edit with extreme prejudice.
39Ronin
Adventurer
The only comment that seems to bother me is when people talk about how LC are widely used by Nato and throughout Africa, rather than a compliment to the strength of the LCs I think it is more of a price point issue that makes them the choice. If G's were the same price as LCs we would see alot more in service. The Toyota seems like good value for your money. The HZJ77 being one of my favorites, but to say LC's wheel cricles around G's or G's outwheel LCs is laughable. Don't forget the driver is the most important equation here when we are splitting hairs about which vehicle is the end all be all.:smiley_drive:
datrupr
Expedition Leader
*Soapbox/On*
OK, one more time. This thread needs to get back on track! I have never wheeled a G and I have never wheeled an LC. I like them both. I think they are both just as capable. And for my needs, a 3rd gen Montero with unibody and IRS works beautifully. Anyone want to flame about that in this thread too? This is rediculous. What has this board turned into? The level of disrespect brought on to G-force's thread in inconceiveable. The original question was posed to G-Force (who has owned many G's) was if he felt the reliability on the G's was good (a very valid and good question). And then it went straight down hill form there. Please, lets get this back on track. I don't care who "thinks" their truck is better. I love them all and want to look at and learn about them all. I want to see them built up and watch the build up process (despite the brand, I learn a lot and get some great ideas from different buil up's). This is turning into some of the LR threads. It is getting rediculous. If you like your brand and are blind to the attributes of all others then you should not post anything. The reason behind ExPo is that we are all interested in vehicle dependant travel, type of vehicle being a non-factor. We need to get back to that level. Please.
Also, Ronin, you are right, the driver is about 90% of any vehicles capabilities.
G-force, please tell us more and lets get this thread back on track.
Mods, can we please help by editing this thread to bring it back to where it should be?
Thank you.
*Soapbox/Off*
OK, one more time. This thread needs to get back on track! I have never wheeled a G and I have never wheeled an LC. I like them both. I think they are both just as capable. And for my needs, a 3rd gen Montero with unibody and IRS works beautifully. Anyone want to flame about that in this thread too? This is rediculous. What has this board turned into? The level of disrespect brought on to G-force's thread in inconceiveable. The original question was posed to G-Force (who has owned many G's) was if he felt the reliability on the G's was good (a very valid and good question). And then it went straight down hill form there. Please, lets get this back on track. I don't care who "thinks" their truck is better. I love them all and want to look at and learn about them all. I want to see them built up and watch the build up process (despite the brand, I learn a lot and get some great ideas from different buil up's). This is turning into some of the LR threads. It is getting rediculous. If you like your brand and are blind to the attributes of all others then you should not post anything. The reason behind ExPo is that we are all interested in vehicle dependant travel, type of vehicle being a non-factor. We need to get back to that level. Please.
Also, Ronin, you are right, the driver is about 90% of any vehicles capabilities.
G-force, please tell us more and lets get this thread back on track.
Mods, can we please help by editing this thread to bring it back to where it should be?
Thank you.
*Soapbox/Off*
snyder.hunter
Adventurer
Amen! Back to the original question. This is going to sound so weird but I've only owned G Wagens my entire life. Provided I've been driving for four years now hehe. My first was an 81 300GD SWB, super super reliable and so much fun. I consistently got 20-24 mpg and it NEVER broke down on me. My next was an 84 280GE (6 cylinder gas engine - piece of ****). The motor overheated and blew a headgasket. So we canned that motor and did a proper turbo diesel swap and I've been returning awesome gas mileage 25+ mpg. This engine is freakishly efficient and powerful.
Anyway, yes the G is a GREAT car in terms or reliability. Parts are expensive (some of the most expensive cars in the expediton world i'd assume), but they are all of high quality. I love my G's. If anyone has any questions at all, feel free to PM me; be more than happy to share my stories and experience with them.
Scott Brady
Founder
WOW, there is some serious misinformation and brand-fueled ignorance spewed in this thread.
Here are the facts:
A vehicle is evaluated on several criteria, not just one. This is particularly true when considering an overland vehicle. I have a G-Wagen and have owned, wheeled, raced many Toyotas, including the 80 and 70 series.
Capability: Tie
To say that a G-Wagen is more capable on the trail than an 80 or 70 series Land Cruiser is absolutely false. An 80 and a G-Wagen is essentially the same, both in design and in use. The G has a slight advantage in sand with the ability to perform a rolling (5mph) hi to low range gear change, but other than that, they will be exactly the same. The 80 series is more stable, the G has faster acting lockers. The G has a better departure angle, the 80 has better differential clearance - splitting hairs. The Jeep Unlimited will run circles around both.
Durability: G-Wagen- Barely
The G-Klass is build to a higher degree of durability, with larger axles, heavier frame, larger components overall for the GVWR. This comes at a cost in purchase price, curb weight and poor fuel economy (yes, there is a truck that gets WORSE fuel economy than the 80 series).
Reliability: Land Cruiser
Sure, the G-Klass is reliable, but even the most basic understanding of automotive manufacturing proves that it is impossible for the G-Wagen to be more reliable than the 70 series. This is by nature of the assembly process, the G being built in small volumes, by hand. No matter how good the workers are, there are variables impossible to control. Though reliable, the Gs failure modes will be less predictable. Toyotas are build under the TMS, the best in the world. Reliability issues will always be more predictable with Toyota. Based on the service history of my 463, the G-Wagen does have more issues than a comparable 70 series.
But, for the sake of argument, lets assume that a 70 series and G-Wagen 461 are exactly the same reliability. Then why would the Toyota win? Serviceability! Go to any developing country in the world, and there will be 70 series trucks running around and a dealer network and mechanics to service them. Fact.
There is a difference between durability and reliability. Durability is the designed ratings and construction of the individual components. Reliability is the workmanship, the assembly, the long-term service of the various systems without failure.
People are passionate about their trucks, and they want to "prove" that their purchase decision, or brand is the best. The fact is that no one truck is perfect. The Jeep is more capable on the trail than the G or TLC, yet the G is more durable than either and the TLC is more reliable and serviceable than them all. Pick your flavor.
The real advantage of the G-Wagen from my perspective is the fit-finish, durability, balance of road/trail performance and that it is so unique. The G-Wagen gets us the classic design and uniqueness of the Defender, but the build quality of a Toyota. For me, that is worth the price of admission
Here are the facts:
A vehicle is evaluated on several criteria, not just one. This is particularly true when considering an overland vehicle. I have a G-Wagen and have owned, wheeled, raced many Toyotas, including the 80 and 70 series.
Capability: Tie
To say that a G-Wagen is more capable on the trail than an 80 or 70 series Land Cruiser is absolutely false. An 80 and a G-Wagen is essentially the same, both in design and in use. The G has a slight advantage in sand with the ability to perform a rolling (5mph) hi to low range gear change, but other than that, they will be exactly the same. The 80 series is more stable, the G has faster acting lockers. The G has a better departure angle, the 80 has better differential clearance - splitting hairs. The Jeep Unlimited will run circles around both.
Durability: G-Wagen- Barely
The G-Klass is build to a higher degree of durability, with larger axles, heavier frame, larger components overall for the GVWR. This comes at a cost in purchase price, curb weight and poor fuel economy (yes, there is a truck that gets WORSE fuel economy than the 80 series).
Reliability: Land Cruiser
Sure, the G-Klass is reliable, but even the most basic understanding of automotive manufacturing proves that it is impossible for the G-Wagen to be more reliable than the 70 series. This is by nature of the assembly process, the G being built in small volumes, by hand. No matter how good the workers are, there are variables impossible to control. Though reliable, the Gs failure modes will be less predictable. Toyotas are build under the TMS, the best in the world. Reliability issues will always be more predictable with Toyota. Based on the service history of my 463, the G-Wagen does have more issues than a comparable 70 series.
But, for the sake of argument, lets assume that a 70 series and G-Wagen 461 are exactly the same reliability. Then why would the Toyota win? Serviceability! Go to any developing country in the world, and there will be 70 series trucks running around and a dealer network and mechanics to service them. Fact.
There is a difference between durability and reliability. Durability is the designed ratings and construction of the individual components. Reliability is the workmanship, the assembly, the long-term service of the various systems without failure.
People are passionate about their trucks, and they want to "prove" that their purchase decision, or brand is the best. The fact is that no one truck is perfect. The Jeep is more capable on the trail than the G or TLC, yet the G is more durable than either and the TLC is more reliable and serviceable than them all. Pick your flavor.
The real advantage of the G-Wagen from my perspective is the fit-finish, durability, balance of road/trail performance and that it is so unique. The G-Wagen gets us the classic design and uniqueness of the Defender, but the build quality of a Toyota. For me, that is worth the price of admission
Scott Brady
Founder
Combining the various posts from those with TLC and G colored glasses
Well done, I felt sorry for G-Force's build thread.This link says all about G Wagen service.
http://www.4x4abc.com/Carlos_adventures/MB_road_side_long.html
And yes, definitely plenty of misinformation, both sides are guilty, myself included and yet I will repeat, G Wagen rules supreme due to many facets not present in its competitors.
http://www.4x4abc.com/Carlos_adventures/MB_road_side_long.html
And yes, definitely plenty of misinformation, both sides are guilty, myself included and yet I will repeat, G Wagen rules supreme due to many facets not present in its competitors.
Last edited:
Very good point on the price factor, that has deterred even those who have yearned for this vehicle and are capable of showing of its prowess off road. Many fear to take a US$80,000+ vehicle in trails for the exact same reason. I am not innocent, I do more off roading with my Gurkha than with my G300 for the very same reason.
This thread should be edited to include:
Post#1.- with a little more specificity as to intended purpose and cost parameters.
Post#54- by Scott highlighting relative differences with respect to the difference between "reliability" "durability" and how both vehicles fit into those categories. (in a cursory more overview type way which hopefully would lead to some more detailed "examination" vs. "bashing".)
added to the above it would be nice to examine a few of the main weaknesses/owner complaints of each--ie.
--80series HG issue.
--80 series departure angles
--80 series non-diesel option in US.
---G series articulation
---G series initial cost-costs of ownership-repair etc
--- aftermarket support /performance enhancment cost etc
POST #1 didnt really highlight the parameters of cost and intended use ie (expedition,rough expedition,onroad-offroad dual useability etc). Not factoring in cost is fine for Saudi Sheiks---but for 99% of the real world- cost to performance is probably the main factor in the decision making and comparison process. Obviously more focused 'intended use' details may help.
In many forums that ive noticed- cost to performance is glossed over. Comparing a $80k new stock vehicle to a $10k-100,ooo mile vehicle is useless. Likewise comparing a stock vehicle to a slightly or heavily modded vehicle is also equally useless UNLESS you start to factor in "cost" and "intended use" parameters.
I wish post #2 was- "whats your intended use that you are examining these two vehicles within" and "do you want to put x-$$$ into either? or leave stock"
Post#1.- with a little more specificity as to intended purpose and cost parameters.
Post#54- by Scott highlighting relative differences with respect to the difference between "reliability" "durability" and how both vehicles fit into those categories. (in a cursory more overview type way which hopefully would lead to some more detailed "examination" vs. "bashing".)
added to the above it would be nice to examine a few of the main weaknesses/owner complaints of each--ie.
--80series HG issue.
--80 series departure angles
--80 series non-diesel option in US.
---G series articulation
---G series initial cost-costs of ownership-repair etc
--- aftermarket support /performance enhancment cost etc
POST #1 didnt really highlight the parameters of cost and intended use ie (expedition,rough expedition,onroad-offroad dual useability etc). Not factoring in cost is fine for Saudi Sheiks---but for 99% of the real world- cost to performance is probably the main factor in the decision making and comparison process. Obviously more focused 'intended use' details may help.
In many forums that ive noticed- cost to performance is glossed over. Comparing a $80k new stock vehicle to a $10k-100,ooo mile vehicle is useless. Likewise comparing a stock vehicle to a slightly or heavily modded vehicle is also equally useless UNLESS you start to factor in "cost" and "intended use" parameters.
I wish post #2 was- "whats your intended use that you are examining these two vehicles within" and "do you want to put x-$$$ into either? or leave stock"
Last edited:
Similar threads
