Landrovers....In your opinion

[RattlesnakeBob]

..Just a little something to discuss amongst ourselves ..no agenda...just interested !.:-)

Whilst at a local Vintage Show t'other day I had my old Series 2 on display along with a maybe a couple of dozen or so other Landrovers of all distinctions......everything from an absolutely incredibly rebuilt early 80" done up as a RAC truck to a modern 110" all fitted up for serious off roading.....everything was represented...

Now... as usually happens at such shows , folk wander by and stop to chat and usually end up giving their opinion on what they're stood in front of......and as usual some did this 'politely' ....and some maybe not ....:cool2:..

I was intrigued at the variety of such opinions and wondered what everyone on here thinks?

........(I'm guessing probably 99% of you have some experience , one way or another with Landrovers???)

One fella firmly declared the Series 2a to be "the worst Landrover ever built"...another claimed the 80" was a "waste of time, bloody awful".........the next thought Series 3s should never have been built and one just more or less mocked everything Landrover had ever built ! :cry:.......

My thinking is this......

......the Landrover is a very good vehicle..........:-D

....very dependant on being driven and maintained well (as is just about any vehicle I guess)....

....Yes LR sat on it's laurels for far too long and should have brought out a completely new model when they brought out the Series 3 but... not because it is an 'awful vehicle'......simply because 'the game' was moving rapidly by then and they should have seen the Japanese competition for what it was....(IMHO far better build quality and reliability and generally much more 'modern' designs and prices)...

....However...... it is given that LR was part of British Leyland at that point and was struggling to control quality and also struggling with a meagre budget for development ...(we won't go into mis-management at this point :-\)....

so..perhaps the Series 3 was understandable? ...(lets be honest here though....a syncro gearbox , a plastic dashboard and slightly better seats does not a new vehicle make !)

So rather than ask "Which was the best Landrover?" ......

.......lets hear your opinions on which was the worst .....but you have to justify it properly , not just say "ooooh it was c**p" etc !!:-)

 

PS: I also acknowledge the possibility that you may at some point in your life have owned or used one that could be described as 'an absolute dog'......but ......please consider whether this was as a result of being 'a terrible vehicle in the first place'... or...... moreas a result of some very hard abuse and use ..........

Edited September 14, 2012 by RattlesnakeBob

[MiketheBike]

I guess a landrover was what it was, a tool to do a job. Probably less so these days (or at least those that are used for the Sainsburys run).

 

Its good at what it does, never pretended to be comfortable, and most folk with half a mechanical mind can fix the majority of things that go wrong.

 

Maybe some of the flak comes from folk that have owned one that has had a hard life, and expect them to go on for years with no maintenance. If you took any vehicle off road, I would expect it to take a bashing and require more maintenance?

[gritineye]

People forget that most LR sales used to be to farmers, commercial users and the military, all of these types (especially the first) are not fond of change, very fond of holding onto their money and not much bothered about driver comfort or styling.

[c101 comando]

the very best thing about landrovers is everybodys uncle has one in bits at the bottom of there garden so spares are plentiful

[RattlesnakeBob]

the very best thing about landrovers is everybodys uncle has one in bits at the bottom of there garden so spares are plentiful

 

:Dnot the very 'best thing about them' but......... very true !....hahahahaha

I've honestly lost track of the number I have bought off folk over the years that have suffered the fate of

"yeah mate I've had it about X number of years.....I bought it to restore and took it to bits but never got round to doing it "

Edited September 14, 2012 by RattlesnakeBob

[lightweight]

I've owned a Series 2a 109", a series 3 109", a Lightweight, a 101, two 90's (I still drive one every day), a 110, and a Disco. On top of those, I've driven several Range Rovers, a Series 1 86",a series 2 88" and a Freelander.

 

In my opinion, the worst has to be the 2b Forward Control - ugly as sin, horribly underpowered and top heavy. Mind you, I've never driven one so I'm prepared to take that back if I ever do and it turns out to be a pleasant experience....

 

A close second has to be the petrol Mk 1 Freelander which has all the same problems listed above but they sold more of them so I'm assuming that more people like them.

[john_g_kearney]

Which was the worst Land Rover? A philosophical question, this...

 

In terms of comfort, the 80 was the worst, I suppose. But at the time it was built, and for the tasks for which it was built, it was a splendid vehicle, without which there would be no other Land Rovers.

 

From the point of view of the average owner, the worst Land Rover would be the one that was most unreliable. I don't think any Land Rover has won prizes for its reliability, but all soldier on none the less. Is there a Land Rover that was so spectacularly unreliable that sales collapsed and the model had to be withdrawn? Not that I can think of...

 

John.

[.303fan]

we own 3 101's , 2 109 2a's a 109 s3 .. a 88lw and a 90.

owned a 109 s3 6pot, a 88s2 disco1 and a disco 3

the worst land-rover was the discovery3 hse.

after it came out of warranty it had electric faults, suspention faults and how to get a mastiff and a wheelchair in it when the tail gate cables break..a vehicle that was not even 4 years old it's tragic.

 

she sold it, to buy the defender 90, who had 4 major faults in a year BUT it was a toy. it had been used hard as offroader so no complaints here.

my fiance now drives the series 3 ex raf, currently sitting with a head gasket problem. thats just maintenance i guess.

[RattlesnakeBob]

..a vehicle that was not even 4 years old it's tragic.

 

 

yep hear you there...

I had a mate that had a modern RangeRover about 3 years ago......it was barely a year old when he bought it..think it was a 4.6 HSE??........and it was truly dreadful .

..Horrendous gearbox and transfer box problems and when they were managing to hang together ?......the constant velocity joints flew apart for fun and then the central viscous diff would join in as well...

after numerous visits back to the RR Dealer where it had come from, they more or less accused him of abusing it and said it was the way he was driving....as he did road miles only and at a sensible speed on a journey of no more than 60 miles or so a day in total you may understand he was a bit peeved.........they finally refused to repair the vehicle anymore and becuase they also refused to offer him anything like a sensible price against something else he was forced to go to an Audi dealer who gave him a fair exchange against a car......

a bad one??????? or would that be a common enough experience with the latest RangeRovers?.....

In defence I'd have to say I once had a 1975 2 door and also a 1989 4 door Vogue.... both with V8s in and they were both awesome (as was the fuel bill ! :cool2:)

Edited September 14, 2012 by RattlesnakeBob

[mike65]

I do not count Freelander's as Land Rovers.

A Disco is, well was half way there.

Range Rovers have long past there original roots so wust be totally discounted.

There is only one real Land Land Rover. and they have not really changed that much, be it Series or Defender or whatever.

 

Cannot understand how somebody raves about the Series 2/"a and slates the Series 3. After all they were not exactly much different.

I like my Series 3, but then I prefer the looks of a Series truck to the later ones. Something to do with the srt back radiator.

I prefer LWB to SWB, again a personal thing

Yes you need to maintain them, as you do all cars.

Some people seem to forget this with modern cars.

The best this is I can fix it with simple tools and a set of hammers.

The only computer needed is for ordering parts, when required.

None of this taking it to the garage to be told it with cost £50 to plug the computer in before we even tell you what is wrong, assuming the computer knows (been there done that) upon which the answer is to throw expensive parts at it in the hope it cures the problem.

 

Real Land Rovers were built for a purpose, which does not involve shopping, and they did it. My father used to use one on a farm to spray, harrow and other stuff.

 

A lot of people seem to slate them because they are comparing them to a modern car of newer design.

Ask them to bring there modern car back in 20-30 years. Your Land Rover will be there but there car will be long gone.

 

Mike

[jaces]

I won't go near a land rover to unreliable on the plus side parts are readily available and everyone makes the goodies to make them do the job land rover intended them to,I run navara d22 double cabs all imports because the uk model self destructs at very low mileage, I think modern cars/trucks are built to a price and hang the consequences well just fob them off .

on http://www.nissan-navara.net some of nissans responses to issues would drive you insane,but one fella has quite a few top model landies that have spent more time at the stealers than on the road.

[timbo]

I run a s3 lightweight and am in the process of restoring (well dismantling) a s1 86". When i first bought my lightweight i was telling my neighbour how incredibly cheap i found landrover spares to be. He just smirked and said 'thats coz there is such a high demand for them'...and he was right! Still love em to bits though ( but not as much as cvrts of course)...

[private mw]

ive owned in the past lots of landrovers 110 s series 2 and 3 and lightweights i do miss my lightweight although i think my suzuki jimny does put a landrover to shame ! :undecided:

[rog8811]

I have always considered series landies as being multi seat tractors...(without exception I have owned diesels), My last I described as a series 2 1/2 as like so many it had been mucked about with over its long career. Every one I have had has been someone elses project that was never completed so lots to keep me occupied.

 

What I had most recently looked like a series 3 with the chassis engine and gearbox of a series 2A, I loved working on it and, eventually, driving it. Sadly mrs rog didn't like driving it and as her company car goes back soon I had to sell the landie to get a daily drive for her.:blush:

 

I Still have the number plate so WHEN I get my next one, as I surely will, it will have to be a 1963 model to match the number plate!

[ruxy]

80" twee , unsorted esp. steering ,design of steering tested by buyers

 

86" better , most things sorted, more usable

 

S2 - I prefer slab-sides , early diesel set ball rolling + 2.1/4 pet & diesel , diesel OK if not in a hurry or live in the hills

 

S2A - progressive improvements over 10 years

 

I have a Rover 10 88" and a 109" , 109" 1961 & No.66 - both working pick-ups.

 

The 109" is always going to be the better ride , a 88" is a brain bruiser but has a better turning circle

 

2A 109" chassis construction - probably better than the pressed clamshell S3 design.

 

Mid 1960's chassis steel quality dropped off and again late 1970's due to BOSS LD converter steel (high scrap & thus impurity).

 

The main thing with any metal dash Rover is that the cab is very open (unlike the S3 plastic dash where you are closed in - I have a 88" S3 CL)

 

As I prefer slab-sides and military - it had to be the Lightweight , I have had all models & ages (and still do ) other than a S2A with wing head-lamp boxes - why when compared against a S3 ? Also I have not had a last of line KD - this was 24 volt but not FFR (bit pointless unless you are the RAF ,still plenty of time and I know of a good one)

 

Best Lightweight - probably KA (abt. 1983) or newer , why - best gearboxes, best engine (5mb) 11" front drums (that you need) high level seat belts & anti-burst door locks , of course being Meccano you can DIY your exact spec.

 

Oh ,, I do have a 90" Ex-MOD but hardly a true Rover.

 

ps. The S3 steering is far superior to the earlier Series LoL

 

IMHO of course - but you did ask ..

Edited September 14, 2012 by ruxy

[redneck]

As a land rover owner (well a mk1 disco) and having worked on numerous land rovers I am under no illusion about their failings, however I do quite like them (older ones not the new junk).

What I do find funny is the rose tinted glasses that many land rover owners have regarding their preferred vehicle.

 

I've just got myself an RB44 with all its alleged faults, that everyone seems to very quick to criticise, however the similar failings of land rovers (crap brakes, funky suspension, rust in front of your eyes and poor performance) seem to be revered by the land rover fraternity.

 

p.s the rb44 is proving to be a far more capable and useful tool than any landy I've come across;)

[landyandy]

we have had them in our family from day one grandad brought a centre drive in 1948,then a 80",86",107 station wagon,dad had the first series 2 109,then 2a 109,2b forward control with 6 pot soon got rid of that s3 station wagon 109 i brought my first 88 soft top then109 hard top s2a ffr,s3 ffr then a few ex mil 110s,still have one as daily runabout have also owned a couple of jap pickups but not as easy to repair as the landies so guess you can say there in my blood ,oh forgot the disco 1 then disco 3 soon went back to disco1 the 3 spent more time in garage then out,yes they have their short comings but they were always built for a rough life and if looked after will always work when needed

[RattlesnakeBob]

we have had them in our family from day one grandad brought a centre drive in 1948,

 

 

crikey.......:shocked:

....it must have been one of the pre-production prototypes models then because as far as I know?...... Landrover never sold them officially.........and there were only a few ??? only 1 or possibly 2 I think???...made with the wheel in the centre......

.......and if you still had it???

Well it'd be 'name yer price time' in some sorta order cos as far as I know, there's no known survivor?

Edited September 15, 2012 by RattlesnakeBob

[Kufra Kiwi]

i think my suzuki jimny does put a landrover to shame ! :undecided:

 

My 1993 Suzuki Samurai would also put any Landrover to shame when driven off-road (but not on the highway:embarrassed:)!

 

I once owned a 1967 swb soft-top Landrover from new and loved it to bits and had no problems at all. In my opinion anyone who has "mechanical empathy" will be rewarded by loyal performance and longevity from almost any vehicle.

[Tony B]

When all said and done. Seventy five odd percent of all Land Rovers built are still runnning, sometimes three in the same vehicle! :cool2:

[john_g_kearney]

I'm afraid that I cannot contribute anything from personal experience on Land Rover reliability. My own 90 was built as recently as 1993, so it is too soon to say what reliability is going to be like long term.

 

John.

[AndyFowler]

My personal favourite Land rover is my old Pajero ! Cheep, very capable for my needs and almost indestructable ! Worked on Landrovers for a few years in my youth and then hired a Pajero on holiday one year , looked underneath and noticed no oil spread all around ! Assumed it had not any left in and was amazed to find it was full ! That I'm afraid stopped me buying a landrover when I was in the market for a 4x4 ! Having said that I do think RangeRovers have the edge on styling and if money was no object I'd give one a try :-D

[Richard Farrant]

Have worked on and with Land Rovers since 1974, and have a lot of faith in the older ones. In my mind, the best was the last of the 2A series, no frills like foam padding on the dash and plastic grille. I was involved in preparing and driving a 2A in a rally across Australia, much of it on bush and desert tracks, covered about 5,000 miles and only a leaking clutch slave on the last day. This vehicle was about 30 years old then. The worst one was the 1 tonne ( never known as a 101 in army circles, this was something that eminated from the LR magazines), access to work on the engine was not good, drivers position and access to and from it was awful for someone of normal height (ie. 6 foot). The Lightweight 1/2 ton was a favourite, and I was involved in restoring 5 for a special role at the Tower of London.

 

 

Also .... the poster who said one of his family had bought a centre steer Land rover in 1948, seems a bit untrue, I was under the impression there was only one, a handmade prototype, built in late 1947. Rover were hardly likely to dispose of it before production was hardly underway, it appears that it was still with the company for some years.

Edited September 15, 2012 by Richard Farrant

[.303fan]

i started with a 1965 109 diesel,

a 88lw and a 101fc.

all three where in a bad state with engine, electrics and chassis.

i bought a 1500 pounds 109 petrol from 1962 ish ( stated on the paper work like that)

and it went on and on with heavy loads, played offroad with it and when i tried to sell it my dad thought it was shamefull to get rid of it.

he got it for his birthday and is still the best and hardest working vehicle we got.

 

the 90 that had four major faults in a year, its a 300tdi with zf22 autobox. two oilseals replaced, driveplate broke and internal box fault as something went bang.

could be something as simple as a bent cranckshaft from offroad action, so i don't class it as unriliable.

it is a 1993 defender.

[ruxy]

The Land Rover : Workhorse to the World. by Graham Robson (1976) , I would say is correct.

 

The very first prototypes were certainly not pure Rover, by any means ,,

 

To save time, a Jeep chassis was used under the vehicle, mostly with Rover designed fittings ,,

 

This is considered to be "the" 1947 "centre-steer" prototype

----

I would have to study up again :-

 

The Early Years by Tony Hutchins and Land Rover : The Early Years by John Smith

 

- I am certain between these books the correct story is present

 

----

 

ISTR , things are a little unclear and there is no true definative history at this stage prior to the "pre-pros" , IIRC considered opinion is there were more than one prototype and "the" "centre-steer" evolved into a normal RH steer and thus was lost..