Posted by Berzerker on January 07, 2000 at 03:42:53:

In Reply to: Series III vs. Toyota FJ-40 Land Cruiser posted by Lars Young on November 25, 1997 at 10:27:03:

Howdy,
Will anyone read a reply to a post this old? Probably not but I don't have anything better to do. Well since we have heard from a Land Rover bias person, lets hear from a Land Cruiser bias person! I think a FJ-40 is a far better off-road machine than any Land Rover.

Here is why FJ-40's rock the house:
1. Its a Toyota, it will out last you.
2. Availability of aftermarket parts is far greater.
3. The drivetrain is heavy duty and will handle as much abuse as you can give it.
4. No puny 4 cylinders here, only 6 cylinders of power.
5. If the I-6 isn't enuff then you can swap in a Chevy V8 with ease.
6. In fact you can swap in any Chevy part with ease.
7. Chicks dig them.
8. Larger following, ie: lots of advice, and if you break down on the trail you can borrow other people's spare parts.
9. Easier to find one and cheaper.
10. Stock low gears for pre-1973(2.32 X-fer case, 4.11 axle).
11. Bolt up a set of Heavy Duty Con-Fer shackles and cut the rear fender a little and your read to bolt up a set of 33x12.5x15 tires.
12. And on and on and on....

I only have three things to say about Land Rovers because I don't know that much about them.
1. Their damn cool looking.
2. Their way over priced, every one thats is selling their old Land Rover deams it a "classic" and tries to sell them for upwards of $8,000 American.
3. I have never heard of any company making any aftermarket parts, or any parts, for old Land Rovers but I haven't tried looking that hard eather.

Eather way you go at least you won't be getting a jeep, so you won't be that bad off.

Happy Wheelin'
-Berzerker, 1973 FJ-40