Top 10 Used Overland Vehicles: Do you agree?

[Frank]

Rides as well as friends stock unlimited rubi that I driven. Ive driven many H1 civilian models as well.

 

[Rocket Ship]

I was really surprised when I read one post saying the only time their vehicle was in "the shop" was for a burnt tail light! Well I would never think to use a garage to get a bulb replaced!

I guess you've never encountered an LED tail-lamp module on a modern vehicle?

 

[Equipt]

Thanks Scott for putting this list together. I've enjoyed the commentary on the different choices to be made here. I think the list is in good order myself. A bit biased though. I've had my '99 100 Series for going on a decade now, and haven't found a vehicle I would rather have.

Any truck will have it's low points, and even those can be addressed. Load up most of the list and few will get better than low to mid teens mileage wise. So be it. Add capacity. Check. IFS is much better for open road travel, dirt or paved. At least comfort wise. But what about crawling around nasty stuff like the 80s? Front ARB and 4.88s. Check. As I said, a bit biased. To each his own.

Cheers,

 

[Elbee]

I'm surprised the 3rd gen 4runner did't get a mention or the Jeep Cherokee. Two land rover discovery models made it it in, and the image and prestige that they evoke are well deserved and they should be there, but in terms of cost and reliability there should be a honorable mentions for these two great SUVs that can be found on and off the trail in high numbers with solid fan base and aftermarket community. They have earned their stripes in at least North American over-landing. The 3rd gen 4runner when considered with its surf hilux counter parts has a solid backing worldwide

 

[Elbee]

If this was to include vehicles that were not produced for the US market , then the list would be different. It would definitely include land rover defender and 70 series cruiser.

 

[john101477]

This was a great thread Scott. I laughed, I cried (from laughing so hard), and was astonished by some of the cry baby antics. I drive a 86 4runner and have much love for it. It has been nearly bullet proof and never stranded me.
I dig the 4door taco but have equal love for the 1st gen 4 door tundra (taco on steriods hahaha love that!).

I saw a white wagon the other day and it reminded how much I like the H1s and how much I hate the H2/3s

hahaha an H2 is not a hummer, it is just a heavy tahoe with a different body that gets worse MPG than a ford f250 with the freekin V10.

 

[78Bronco]

Far too many Toyotas in that list that mostly use all the same junk.

Patriot? What is that thing capable of 3 days into the bush at most.

Land Rover has the prestige and the worst designed electronics in the world. No thanks.

We have been very happy with our Expedition for it's all around versatility in a low cost platform. Ford has never left me stranded. No bias here.

JK has marginal engineering and they can't be built up without reinforcing all the stock parts (axle sleeves) barf!

G wagen if you can afford it sure. Mercedes wagon maybe...

 

[deadbeat son]

I see youve never had a problem with your JKs but yours arent exactly off the production line, now are they? Didnt see that mentioned.

The JK is cool and all but it has one major flaw: its a Chrysler product. That means poor quality control and reliability. I know that Scott says that he has done a lot in them but I have to inquire whether they were regular Rubicons and not specially built ones (Mopar "skunk works", etc...)?

You've twice alluded to the point that somehow Scott's Jeeps have special fairy dust and are not representative samples from the population of "real" JKUs on the market. Prior to your posts, Scott had this to say about their origins:

I bought my first JK right off the lot in Denver, then strapped the EarthRoamer conversion to it and proceeded to drive it all the way to the Darien Gap. Zero failures in over two years of ownership, trips to Baja, trips to the NE, etc. I took one of the XV-JPs over the Rubicon too- nothing wrong.

The Overland JK is even more shocking. It is an S2 first article truck that spent a summer on the Rubicon trail with journalists, then was a Superlift development vehicle, then was turned over to Fourwheeler for the Border to Border trip, then we finally got it and have put another 30,000 miles on it, including using it as a training vehicle for the US military! Again, not a single solitary mechanical failure. Nothing.

Jonathan's Editor's Jeep was brand new and he put nearly 40,000 miles on it which includes the miles of dirt road to his house and a bunch of trips. Not a single mechanical failure.

On our Central America trip, there were actually three JKs, all purchased by the owners. Three trucks representing over 30,000 miles of combined, overloaded miles through jungle, dirt roads, beaches, volcanoes, etc. Not a single mechanical failure.

Believe me, I have experienced the worst of what Jeep can offer (I owned two ZJ Grand Cherokees!), but these JKs have been perfect, at least for us and our immediate travel partners.

As for those clamoring for the XJ to be added to the list, I feel it definitely has some shortcomings precluding its inclusion.

While I agree the Cherokees are rather robust, simple vehicles, IMO they are also ridiculously uncomfortable to drive for extended distances. I had a '99 for a number of years. With under 30k on the truck's odometer, I took it on a trip from Denver, CO to upstate NY (north of Syracuse) by way of Columbus, MS. This was an excruciatingly long road trip with a lot of contiguous hours of seat time. I couldn't believe how uncomfortable the vehicle was for distance travel. It left me sore and achey for days. Although I absolutely love the simple, understated, boxy style of a stock Cherokee, I would never consider one again for a trip of sizable distance.

 

[4D55 Performance]

I have owned many expedition vehicles over the years and only three were standouts. I have owned Jeep's, Isuzu's, Chevy's, Dodge's, Mitsubishi's, Toyota's and even a VW Sportwagen.


The VW Jetta Sportwagen is clearly a standout. It has lots of room for gear, it can hold as much as an FJ80. VW is the largest car manufacturer in the world so getting service should not be an issue. The JSW also has an LSD in the front to help with traction. But the real reason it's a standout is the fuel economy. It always gets up to 47-48mpg on the open road and it is so comfortable. You can drive it for 12 hours with out any issues. The biggest con with the JSW is it is only available in 2wd. It can only tackle mild dirt roads.

The FJ80 is also a standout, but for different reasons. It has great build quality, amazing offroad capability and reliability. I love the FJ80 so much, I have owned 2 of them. The first one I owned was 1996 LX450 without lockers. It died protecting its master. I replaced it with another 1996 LX450, but this time I got one with lockers. I added an OME lift, 33" tires, and Safari snorkel. They were great vehicles but they have there short comings. They second row has no leg room, there are no cup holders, MPG's are 13 city, 13 hwy and the vehicle is way underpowered. I can handle 13mpg, but the vehicle better have some grunt. Getting 13mpg and being underpowered is unacceptable in my opinion.

The last standout is the Mitsubishi Montero. I personally like it better as a daily driver and for expedition use more than the FJ80. The Montero feels like it has much more power due to it lower gearing. The whole drivetrain is better than the FJ80. The engine is solid, it does not have the HG issues, the automatic tranny is silky smooth and never hunts for gears. The Tcase has 4 modes, 2wd, AWD, 4Hi, and 4Lo. This allows the Montero achieve 22-24mpg on the open road and 18-20 in the city. The Montero has tons of leg room in the second row for adults. The Montero also has more creature comforts the FJ80. It has heated leather, cup holders head light washers, tool kit, 3 power outlets, storage bins under the seats, all the seat fold flat into a bed etc. It's just a much more well thought out vehicle. The Montero also can perform on the trail due to it's factory locking rear differential. While the it does sport an IFS, the IFS is capable of handing 37" tires with out any issues. It's so overbuilt you never have to worry about breaking the IFS like you do on other makes. Lastly, while the Montero's aftermarket is limited, the Montero will run 33" tires with out requiring a lift. With a small lift you can run 35-37" tires. It's just a very well thought out vehicle, but what would you expect from the most dominant vehicle in Dakar history.

 

[HillbillyfromAL]

I think the best one is the one you like the best. It's all about personal opinion really. What would you want to be seen driving across the World in. What is important to you. Most importantly does it fit your needs. One mans trash is another mans treasure, or at least that's what I tell all my of X's boyfriend's the great thing about the Expedition Portal is so many different people have some many different things. It's great to get ideas from each other.

With that being said why the heated debate about comparing a D2 to a JK? I'd really be worried about Jeep if their 5 yr old vehicle wasn't more reliable than my 8 yr old vehicle. The same way with any other vehicle for that matter. I don't know many soccer moms that turn wrenches. In 3 yrs you guys let us know how many 2007 JK's are still considered reliable. Getting one with alot of problems right off the bat gives people the opinion that all are that way but every manufacturer has had that happen. I loved my 05 Rubicon but it wouldn't work for my family anymore. I found the JKUR didn't have the seating position the same as the TJ, and it just didn't feel like a Jeep to me anymore. Then I found my 04D2 and I couldn't be happier, even tough it wasn't taken care of and needed some work right off I knew to expect that with any used car. The LR3 isn't a Land Rover to me. What idiot put the spare underneath it, and gave it independent suspension? It's a very capable SUV because of terrain response but that's it. I'd let the wife buy one but I don't like them personally. The best thing about the Discovery to me is does so much, so well, and fits my needs perfectly. The only thing I wish was different would be 300TDI, a 5 speed manual tranny, and the accessories I haven't got around to adding yet.

 

[jimny]

the suzuki samurai i thinks is one of the best value for money 4x4, cheap, simple, reliability, easy to work and fix

 

[Expedition_Bound]

The last standout is the Mitsubishi Montero. I personally like it better as a daily driver and for expedition use more than the FJ80. The Montero feels like it has much more power due to it lower gearing. The whole drivetrain is better than the FJ80. The engine is solid, it does not have the HG issues, the automatic tranny is silky smooth and never hunts for gears. The Tcase has 4 modes, 2wd, AWD, 4Hi, and 4Lo. This allows the Montero achieve 22-24mpg on the open road and 18-20 in the city. The Montero has tons of leg room in the second row for adults. The Montero also has more creature comforts the FJ80. It has heated leather, cup holders head light washers, tool kit, 3 power outlets, storage bins under the seats, all the seat fold flat into a bed etc. It's just a much more well thought out vehicle. The Montero also can perform on the trail due to it's factory locking rear differential. While the it does sport an IFS, the IFS is capable of handing 37" tires with out any issues. It's so overbuilt you never have to worry about breaking the IFS like you do on other makes. Lastly, while the Montero's aftermarket is limited, the Montero will run 33" tires with out requiring a lift. With a small lift you can run 35-37" tires. It's just a very well thought out vehicle, but what would you expect from the most dominant vehicle in Dakar history.

Could you please tell me which model years of the Montero get 22-24mpg on the open road and 18-20 in the city. I'm looking for my first expedition vehicle that I'll also be using as a daily driver. If the Montero truly does get that good of MPG I'll buy one in a heartbeat.

 

[redthies]

I can't believe I wasted all that time with my "underpowered" LX450! I guess it was the lack of power and not the fulltime 4WD that kept me from smoking the tires all over town.

But really, 37s on stock IFS AND 24 mpg? Put me on the list too! We didn't get the mighty Mitsu here in Canada, but I will certainly look at them in the future.

 

[RttH]

I don't think he meant 24 mpg's on 37's, but I averaged 20 mpg on my drive from Expo back to Colorado in my 2000 Montero and that was loaded, with 33's and a RTT, and a lot of crosswind. My mileage varies, I have seen 16 in dead of winter with cold temps, and 24 with a tail wind on the highway. When stock and smaller tires it was getting 24 regularly. Just depends on conditions and driver, load.

I should add that my speedo is off by 6 mph at highway speed (75mph) so I may be getting better mileage than I think?

 

[4D55 Performance]

I don't think he meant 24 mpg's on 37's, but I averaged 20 mpg on my drive from Expo back to Colorado in my 2000 Montero and that was loaded, with 33's and a RTT, and a lot of crosswind. My mileage varies, I have seen 16 in dead of winter with cold temps, and 24 with a tail wind on the highway. When stock and smaller tires it was getting 24 regularly. Just depends on conditions and driver, load.

I should add that my speedo is off by 6 mph at highway speed (75mph) so I may be getting better mileage than I think?

Roger, you are right, the 24 MPG is with 31" tires. It doesn't need a tail wind with the 31" tires to achieve good MPG's in a Montero. I have talked to a few who run the 37's and they say they get 15-16 MPG on the freeway. Sorry if there was any confusion.

Roger if your speedo is that far of then you are getting 8% better MPG than you are calculating. So when your rig was loaded down on your last trip you actually averaged 21.6 MPG. That's not to bad especially if you had the tent or bikes on top.