Good Buy? 98 LC

[zimm]

If you're not going to rock crawl, this is a wise choice. The Pajero will 98% of things you want to do better than the 100 while only looking slightly less cool.

for instance?

 

[zimm]

Ok..so you get an 03. But it will come with no lockers but you get a 5 speed. Is that worth being locked? Plus any 03 or newer I've seen is much closer to $20k around here. There's a big price jump when you get newer than 2002. I don't think that comparing an 03 to this 98 is fair. Either I will need to spend the money for maintenance on the 98 or on lockers for the 03.

For the money I'm actually leaning towards a Montero. I can get a 2006 for $10k that only has 72,000 miles on it, one owner and it won't need a lift to run 33's.

i missed this post.

actually, i did a auto trader search for an 03 with the SAME mileage as the 98. 03's tend to cost more, because they tend to have 50,000 fewer miles. at the same mileage, i found one with an asking price of 15,5. so youre looking at 14 purchase, realistically.

an o3, has better mileage, more power, the atrac, which, works great. ive been wheeling it for 120,000 miles, i'm only buying lockers because its and old truck to me at this point, and im doing stuff i used to reserve for my locked 40. locked trucks are winching where im winching. i also need to regear because im using larger and larger tires, so theres no point in NOT locking it now. i'll have my choice depending on conditions.

in the end the difference between a LC and Mitsu, is quality and luxury. the mitsu is a good two rungs down the ladder in both. it compares with troopers, not landcruisers. if i was going to consider buying something with that level of quality, id just as soon buy a low mileage ford f250.. but then.. that would cost more.

 

[zimm]

dolomiti responded that the mitsu does the flowing better than the LC 100...

......fuel mileage, speed, and has a door tire as advantages to the LC

i was writing my response below when he apparently deleted it his post......

i took the time, so here it is anyway.





it does 85 better than a lexus does 85? not only doesnt it, it will do it feeling like an economy car.

fully loaded with skids, plates, fuel tanks, racks, rooftop tents, 35's, dual winches, marine batteries, full size co2, entire tool workshop with batter tools, recovery gear with 120ft in straps, shackles and multiple snatch blocks, full fridge, camping gear etc, im over 8500 pounds.

5 days of hard wheeling and a total 1000 city and highway miles, 12,2 mpg. that mitsu wouldnt be able to move. it may get 18mpg same cycle empty whereas mine will only get 14, but its 6 pot would be working such overtime with that equipment, you wouldnt see 10, thats if it didnt break first.

the only comment i got from a rover guy i rode to town was, he couldnt believe the pounding i can give that truck all day, and how silky smooth and luxurious it is to drive on the highway later. not a jutter, not a squeak, not a rattle. just a solid thunk of the doors.

tire on the door? thats because they couldnt fit it under with the narrow frame, and still have a fuel tank. you can tuck a 33 under a 100 and still have room for an aftermarket hitch if you want. move it to a bumper and you can fit up a long ranger spare fuel tank or water tank (if you can find one). if youre concerned about 98% of all situations, 98% of the time a tire anywhere but under is a pain in the ***. the tire is on the door of my G, and smaller feminine types have a hard time on a hill, and i have to clean and relube the door to stop squeaking. . . and a mitsu, aint no G in chassis or body construction.

this a 100% low mileage decision, and if the LC has all maint records, it aint a good one.

 

[theside00]

100's are great rigs and can't take a lot of abuse as zimm said. There is a reason why that cruiser is more expensive then a newer lower mileage Mistubishi.