|
General » rec.autos.4x4 » Most reliable SUV
| Most reliable SUV [message #526187] |
Thu, 24 November 2005 10:05 |
|
What is considered the most reliable SUV out there (AND with decent
handling!)? I have very good experience with Isuzu Trooper (and mediocre
with Dodge), and would consider another Trooper but am unsure how their
diesel engines perform (want turbo diesel this time)...
Also, I hear Toyota Lancruisers are very reliable but they're one of the
most expensive ones...
TIA,
Peter
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #526188 ] |
Thu, 24 November 2005 10:30 |
|
Peter wrote:
>
> What is considered the most reliable SUV out there (AND with decent
> handling!)? I have very good experience with Isuzu Trooper (and mediocre
> with Dodge), and would consider another Trooper but am unsure how their
> diesel engines perform (want turbo diesel this time)...
>
> Also, I hear Toyota Lancruisers are very reliable but they're one of the
> most expensive ones...
>
> TIA,
> Peter
My Trooper (diesel) performs very well. Newer ones even have more power.
To my opinion Landcruiser will remain the most reliable though and yes,
expensive.
Kind regards,
Erik-Jan.
--
http://www.fotograaf.com/trooper
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #526189 ] |
Thu, 24 November 2005 11:30 |
|
"Peter" <peter [at] greatnowhere.com> wrote in message
news:dm3vo9$ngg$1 [at] news1.greatnowhere.com...
> What is considered the most reliable SUV out there (AND with decent
> handling!)? I have very good experience with Isuzu Trooper (and mediocre
> with Dodge), and would consider another Trooper but am unsure how their
> diesel engines perform (want turbo diesel this time)...
>
> Also, I hear Toyota Lancruisers are very reliable but they're one of the
> most expensive ones...
>
> TIA,
> Peter
That is like asking which lake has the best fishing, read and fend for
yourself but since you asked any of the Jeep line.
--
Coasty
Remove The SPOOGE To Reply
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #526191 ] |
Thu, 24 November 2005 13:43 |
|
Coasty wrote:
> "Peter" <peter [at] greatnowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:dm3vo9$ngg$1 [at] news1.greatnowhere.com...
>
>>What is considered the most reliable SUV out there (AND with decent
>>handling!)? I have very good experience with Isuzu Trooper (and mediocre
>>with Dodge), and would consider another Trooper but am unsure how their
>>diesel engines perform (want turbo diesel this time)...
>>
>>Also, I hear Toyota Lancruisers are very reliable but they're one of the
>>most expensive ones...
>>
>>TIA,
>>Peter
>
>
> That is like asking which lake has the best fishing, read and fend for
> yourself but since you asked any of the Jeep line.
>
Older jeeps were pretty good until Dahlmer got their hand in them
--
-----------------
www.thesnoman.com
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #526192 ] |
Thu, 24 November 2005 14:32 |
|
"TheSnoMan" <admin [at] snoman.com> wrote in message
news:7Aihf.3059$aA2.2855 [at] newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> Coasty wrote:
>> "Peter" <peter [at] greatnowhere.com> wrote in message
>> news:dm3vo9$ngg$1 [at] news1.greatnowhere.com...
>>
>>>What is considered the most reliable SUV out there (AND with decent
>>>handling!)? I have very good experience with Isuzu Trooper (and mediocre
>>>with Dodge), and would consider another Trooper but am unsure how their
>>>diesel engines perform (want turbo diesel this time)...
>>>
>>>Also, I hear Toyota Lancruisers are very reliable but they're one of the
>>>most expensive ones...
>>>
>>>TIA,
>>>Peter
>>
>>
>> That is like asking which lake has the best fishing, read and fend for
>> yourself but since you asked any of the Jeep line.
>>
>
> Older jeeps were pretty good until Dahlmer got their hand in them
>
> --
>
> -----------------
> www.thesnoman.com
Hate to break it to you but, today's Jeeps are far superior to
pre-Chrysler-AMC-Jeep. Older ones rusted out as they drove off the lot,
engines were very dirty burning, 100k was max life, they needed constant
tinkering, they leaked, the soft top was poor design, gauges often failed,
and god help you in a crash just to name a few.
Today's jeeps are made of galvanized steel and last for many years with out
rusting, they do not require the intensive maintenance the older ones did,
the engines last beyond 300k, the new sail cloth tops are quieter, stronger,
and last for may more years, the liberty is the only SUV on the market with
a clean burn diesel, they are far superior in crash tests than older Jeeps,
today's jeep engines are cleaner burning that the past and tougher than
ever.
Since you say older ones were pretty good compaired to today's Jeeps may I
ask how many jeeps you have owned?
--
Coasty
Remove The SPOOGE To Reply
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #526194 ] |
Thu, 24 November 2005 21:04 |
|
Coasty wrote:
> "TheSnoMan" <admin [at] snoman.com> wrote in message
> news:7Aihf.3059$aA2.2855 [at] newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
>>Coasty wrote:
>>
>>>"Peter" <peter [at] greatnowhere.com> wrote in message
>>>news:dm3vo9$ngg$1 [at] news1.greatnowhere.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>>What is considered the most reliable SUV out there (AND with decent
>>>>handling!)? I have very good experience with Isuzu Trooper (and mediocre
>>>>with Dodge), and would consider another Trooper but am unsure how their
>>>>diesel engines perform (want turbo diesel this time)...
>>>>
>>>>Also, I hear Toyota Lancruisers are very reliable but they're one of the
>>>>most expensive ones...
>>>>
>>>>TIA,
>>>>Peter
>>>
>>>
>>>That is like asking which lake has the best fishing, read and fend for
>>>yourself but since you asked any of the Jeep line.
>>>
>>
>>Older jeeps were pretty good until Dahlmer got their hand in them
>>
>>--
>>
>>-----------------
>>www.thesnoman.com
>
>
> Hate to break it to you but, today's Jeeps are far superior to
> pre-Chrysler-AMC-Jeep. Older ones rusted out as they drove off the lot,
> engines were very dirty burning, 100k was max life, they needed constant
> tinkering, they leaked, the soft top was poor design, gauges often failed,
> and god help you in a crash just to name a few.
>
> Today's jeeps are made of galvanized steel and last for many years with out
> rusting, they do not require the intensive maintenance the older ones did,
> the engines last beyond 300k, the new sail cloth tops are quieter, stronger,
> and last for may more years, the liberty is the only SUV on the market with
> a clean burn diesel, they are far superior in crash tests than older Jeeps,
> today's jeep engines are cleaner burning that the past and tougher than
> ever.
>
> Since you say older ones were pretty good compaired to today's Jeeps may I
> ask how many jeeps you have owned?
>
How about 4 so far and currently two and the AMC engines where far
better than the Chysler mills. I have a 79 J20 that I have had for about
20 years now. It started life in farm service then when I got it it
towed horse trailers for many years and plowed snow too and it STILL
runs good and tranny works like new too. It has had a extremely hard
life. AMC/Jeed used to use a heaiver D44 than anybody else did in the
front of full size vehicles (thicker axle tubes) and mine has never
broken any driveline parts even pushing snow with 2000lbs in the bed up
a drifted lane with 4 chained tires spining. Dodge did not hurt it too
much but Dalhmer is really kinda clueless as to what a Jeep is and
stands for as the Liberty proves.
--
-----------------
www.thesnoman.com
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #526201 ] |
Fri, 25 November 2005 10:49 |
|
"TheSnoMan" <admin [at] snoman.com> wrote in message
news:l1phf.3216$aA2.1020 [at] newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> Coasty wrote:
>> "TheSnoMan" <admin [at] snoman.com> wrote in message
>> news:7Aihf.3059$aA2.2855 [at] newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>>
>>>Coasty wrote:
>>>
>>>>"Peter" <peter [at] greatnowhere.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:dm3vo9$ngg$1 [at] news1.greatnowhere.com...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>What is considered the most reliable SUV out there (AND with decent
>>>>>handling!)? I have very good experience with Isuzu Trooper (and
>>>>>mediocre with Dodge), and would consider another Trooper but am unsure
>>>>>how their diesel engines perform (want turbo diesel this time)...
>>>>>
>>>>>Also, I hear Toyota Lancruisers are very reliable but they're one of
>>>>>the most expensive ones...
>>>>>
>>>>>TIA,
>>>>>Peter
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>That is like asking which lake has the best fishing, read and fend for
>>>>yourself but since you asked any of the Jeep line.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Older jeeps were pretty good until Dahlmer got their hand in them
>>>
>>>--
>>>
>>>-----------------
>>>www.thesnoman.com
>>
>>
>> Hate to break it to you but, today's Jeeps are far superior to
>> pre-Chrysler-AMC-Jeep. Older ones rusted out as they drove off the lot,
>> engines were very dirty burning, 100k was max life, they needed constant
>> tinkering, they leaked, the soft top was poor design, gauges often
>> failed, and god help you in a crash just to name a few.
>>
>> Today's jeeps are made of galvanized steel and last for many years with
>> out rusting, they do not require the intensive maintenance the older ones
>> did, the engines last beyond 300k, the new sail cloth tops are quieter,
>> stronger, and last for may more years, the liberty is the only SUV on the
>> market with a clean burn diesel, they are far superior in crash tests
>> than older Jeeps, today's jeep engines are cleaner burning that the past
>> and tougher than ever.
>>
>> Since you say older ones were pretty good compaired to today's Jeeps may
>> I ask how many jeeps you have owned?
>>
>
>
> How about 4 so far and currently two and the AMC engines where far better
> than the Chysler mills. I have a 79 J20 that I have had for about 20 years
> now. It started life in farm service then when I got it it towed horse
> trailers for many years and plowed snow too and it STILL runs good and
> tranny works like new too. It has had a extremely hard life. AMC/Jeed used
> to use a heaiver D44 than anybody else did in the front of full size
> vehicles (thicker axle tubes) and mine has never broken any driveline
> parts even pushing snow with 2000lbs in the bed up a drifted lane with 4
> chained tires spining. Dodge did not hurt it too much but Dalhmer is
> really kinda clueless as to what a Jeep is and stands for as the Liberty
> proves.
> --
>
> -----------------
> www.thesnoman.com
I agree about the AMC engines but over all the Wranglers are better today
are better than they were a Rubicon is the altimate 4x4. As far as the
Liberty, it is a grocery getter with minor 4x4 capability. The Cherokee and
the unlimited are becoming the high $$ vehicles to comptet with Land Rover
and Lexus. However, taken what they are I would own a Jeep before any other
4x4 SUV.
I go to a place in PA that is an off road park called Paragon and overall
the Jeep line kicks off road butt compaired to all others. Last week end I
was in WV and we had a Ford explorer, a Chevy Trailblazer and a Dodge
Dakota. Well, guess who kept getting stuck and bogged down it wasn't the
JeepWranglers or the two Cherokees.
--
Coasty
Remove The SPOOGE To Reply
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #530547 ] |
Fri, 25 November 2005 18:24 |
|
Its all a matter of what you are doing with your truck. Land Rovers
will consistantly get 300k miles, gotta keep em maintained but thats
the same with anything. If you want mostly on road performance with the
off road ability, get a Rangie, if you want more off road and can
compromise on onroad performance than get a Discovery.
As to the Jeeps, well, they are okay for what they are... wranglers and
rubicons are loud inside, incomfortable for long distances. And they
require extensixve mods (IE teraflex) to articulate the way the rovers
do. The others Cherokee and such are yuppie SUVs with no real
capability without extensive mods. Whereas with the Rovers you get out
of the box comfort and luxury and the ability to go almost anywhere.
They are the only vehicles we use after attempting Jeeps and Cruisers.
(its just a shame more people dont use them off road). If you want
something really incredible offroad, check out the Mercedes G
class...astounding....!!!
--Corey Shuman
www.goldrushexpeditions.com
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #530548 ] |
Fri, 25 November 2005 18:30 |
|
A little OT we were talking about Jeeps not POS over priced rovers.
--
Coasty
Remove The SPOOGE To Reply
"Corey Shuman" <cshuman [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1132939480.234104.134610 [at] o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Its all a matter of what you are doing with your truck. Land Rovers
> will consistantly get 300k miles, gotta keep em maintained but thats
> the same with anything. If you want mostly on road performance with the
> off road ability, get a Rangie, if you want more off road and can
> compromise on onroad performance than get a Discovery.
> As to the Jeeps, well, they are okay for what they are... wranglers and
> rubicons are loud inside, incomfortable for long distances. And they
> require extensixve mods (IE teraflex) to articulate the way the rovers
> do. The others Cherokee and such are yuppie SUVs with no real
> capability without extensive mods. Whereas with the Rovers you get out
> of the box comfort and luxury and the ability to go almost anywhere.
> They are the only vehicles we use after attempting Jeeps and Cruisers.
> (its just a shame more people dont use them off road). If you want
> something really incredible offroad, check out the Mercedes G
> class...astounding....!!!
>
> --Corey Shuman
> www.goldrushexpeditions.com
>
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #530549 ] |
Fri, 25 November 2005 19:12 |
|
Coasty proclaimed:
> A little OT we were talking about Jeeps not POS over priced rovers.
>
The newsgroup is rec.autos.4x4, not limited to jeeps.
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #530551 ] |
Fri, 25 November 2005 20:12 |
|
Coasty wrote:
> "TheSnoMan" <admin [at] snoman.com> wrote in message
> news:l1phf.3216$aA2.1020 [at] newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
>>Coasty wrote:
>>
>>>"TheSnoMan" <admin [at] snoman.com> wrote in message
>>>news:7Aihf.3059$aA2.2855 [at] newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Coasty wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>"Peter" <peter [at] greatnowhere.com> wrote in message
>>>>>news:dm3vo9$ngg$1 [at] news1.greatnowhere.com...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>What is considered the most reliable SUV out there (AND with decent
>>>>>>handling!)? I have very good experience with Isuzu Trooper (and
>>>>>>mediocre with Dodge), and would consider another Trooper but am unsure
>>>>>>how their diesel engines perform (want turbo diesel this time)...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Also, I hear Toyota Lancruisers are very reliable but they're one of
>>>>>>the most expensive ones...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>TIA,
>>>>>>Peter
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>That is like asking which lake has the best fishing, read and fend for
>>>>>yourself but since you asked any of the Jeep line.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Older jeeps were pretty good until Dahlmer got their hand in them
>>>>
>>>>--
>>>>
>>>>-----------------
>>>>www.thesnoman.com
>>>
>>>
>>>Hate to break it to you but, today's Jeeps are far superior to
>>>pre-Chrysler-AMC-Jeep. Older ones rusted out as they drove off the lot,
>>>engines were very dirty burning, 100k was max life, they needed constant
>>>tinkering, they leaked, the soft top was poor design, gauges often
>>>failed, and god help you in a crash just to name a few.
>>>
>>>Today's jeeps are made of galvanized steel and last for many years with
>>>out rusting, they do not require the intensive maintenance the older ones
>>>did, the engines last beyond 300k, the new sail cloth tops are quieter,
>>>stronger, and last for may more years, the liberty is the only SUV on the
>>>market with a clean burn diesel, they are far superior in crash tests
>>>than older Jeeps, today's jeep engines are cleaner burning that the past
>>>and tougher than ever.
>>>
>>>Since you say older ones were pretty good compaired to today's Jeeps may
>>>I ask how many jeeps you have owned?
>>>
>>
>>
>>How about 4 so far and currently two and the AMC engines where far better
>>than the Chysler mills. I have a 79 J20 that I have had for about 20 years
>>now. It started life in farm service then when I got it it towed horse
>>trailers for many years and plowed snow too and it STILL runs good and
>>tranny works like new too. It has had a extremely hard life. AMC/Jeed used
>>to use a heaiver D44 than anybody else did in the front of full size
>>vehicles (thicker axle tubes) and mine has never broken any driveline
>>parts even pushing snow with 2000lbs in the bed up a drifted lane with 4
>>chained tires spining. Dodge did not hurt it too much but Dalhmer is
>>really kinda clueless as to what a Jeep is and stands for as the Liberty
>>proves.
>>--
>>
>>-----------------
>>www.thesnoman.com
>
>
> I agree about the AMC engines but over all the Wranglers are better today
> are better than they were a Rubicon is the altimate 4x4. As far as the
> Liberty, it is a grocery getter with minor 4x4 capability. The Cherokee and
> the unlimited are becoming the high $$ vehicles to comptet with Land Rover
> and Lexus. However, taken what they are I would own a Jeep before any other
> 4x4 SUV.
>
> I go to a place in PA that is an off road park called Paragon and overall
> the Jeep line kicks off road butt compaired to all others. Last week end I
> was in WV and we had a Ford explorer, a Chevy Trailblazer and a Dodge
> Dakota. Well, guess who kept getting stuck and bogged down it wasn't the
> JeepWranglers or the two Cherokees.
Thats because Dalhmer has not redesign the Wrangler yet and it still
goes back to its AMC roots with minor changes. Give them time and
Dalhmer will screw that one up too.
--
-----------------
www.thesnoman.com
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #530553 ] |
Fri, 25 November 2005 20:31 |
|
On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 19:12:05 GMT, TheSnoMan <admin [at] snoman.com> wrote:
>Thats because Dalhmer has not redesign the Wrangler yet and it still
>goes back to its AMC roots with minor changes. Give them time and
>Dalhmer will screw that one up too.
You mean Daimler, maybe? (Dahlmer was a clown who raped, killed, and ate people,
IIRC).
--
Charlie...
http://www.chocphoto.com
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #530555 ] |
Fri, 25 November 2005 21:31 |
|
Charlie Choc wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 19:12:05 GMT, TheSnoMan <admin [at] snoman.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Thats because Dalhmer has not redesign the Wrangler yet and it still
>>goes back to its AMC roots with minor changes. Give them time and
>>Dalhmer will screw that one up too.
>
>
> You mean Daimler, maybe? (Dahlmer was a clown who raped, killed, and ate people,
> IIRC).
A Typo, no big deal
--
-----------------
www.thesnoman.com
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #530556 ] |
Fri, 25 November 2005 22:09 |
|
no, that was Dahmer
"Charlie Choc" <charlie.choc [at] gmail.com.invalid> wrote in message news:tepeo1p09tqmhei0qadg7m96mak2nrd4up [at] 4ax.com...
: On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 19:12:05 GMT, TheSnoMan <admin [at] snoman.com> wrote:
:
: >Thats because Dalhmer has not redesign the Wrangler yet and it still
: >goes back to its AMC roots with minor changes. Give them time and
: >Dalhmer will screw that one up too.
:
: You mean Daimler, maybe? (Dahlmer was a clown who raped, killed, and ate people,
: IIRC).
: --
: Charlie...
: http://www.chocphoto.com
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #530557 ] |
Fri, 25 November 2005 22:34 |
|
I reinterate the conversation was on Jeeps reguardless of if it is a 4x4
forum and there was no mention of a POS rover in the entire conversation.
Take a long walk off a short pier or learn to follow the conversation JAFDH.
--
Coasty
Remove The SPOOGE To Reply
"Lon" <lon.stowell [at] comcast.net> wrote in message
news:obGdnUxmEbJpzhreRVn-jg [at] comcast.com...
> Coasty proclaimed:
>
>> A little OT we were talking about Jeeps not POS over priced rovers.
>>
> The newsgroup is rec.autos.4x4, not limited to jeeps.
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #530558 ] |
Fri, 25 November 2005 22:46 |
|
"TheSnoMan" <admin [at] snoman.com> wrote in message
news:9mJhf.3469$aA2.1131 [at] newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> Coasty wrote:
>> "TheSnoMan" <admin [at] snoman.com> wrote in message
>> news:l1phf.3216$aA2.1020 [at] newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>>
>>>Coasty wrote:
>>>
>>>>"TheSnoMan" <admin [at] snoman.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:7Aihf.3059$aA2.2855 [at] newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Coasty wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>"Peter" <peter [at] greatnowhere.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>news:dm3vo9$ngg$1 [at] news1.greatnowhere.com...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>What is considered the most reliable SUV out there (AND with decent
>>>>>>>handling!)? I have very good experience with Isuzu Trooper (and
>>>>>>>mediocre with Dodge), and would consider another Trooper but am
>>>>>>>unsure how their diesel engines perform (want turbo diesel this
>>>>>>>time)...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Also, I hear Toyota Lancruisers are very reliable but they're one of
>>>>>>>the most expensive ones...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>TIA,
>>>>>>>Peter
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>That is like asking which lake has the best fishing, read and fend for
>>>>>>yourself but since you asked any of the Jeep line.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Older jeeps were pretty good until Dahlmer got their hand in them
>>>>>
>>>>>--
>>>>>
>>>>>-----------------
>>>>>www.thesnoman.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Hate to break it to you but, today's Jeeps are far superior to
>>>>pre-Chrysler-AMC-Jeep. Older ones rusted out as they drove off the lot,
>>>>engines were very dirty burning, 100k was max life, they needed constant
>>>>tinkering, they leaked, the soft top was poor design, gauges often
>>>>failed, and god help you in a crash just to name a few.
>>>>
>>>>Today's jeeps are made of galvanized steel and last for many years with
>>>>out rusting, they do not require the intensive maintenance the older
>>>>ones did, the engines last beyond 300k, the new sail cloth tops are
>>>>quieter, stronger, and last for may more years, the liberty is the only
>>>>SUV on the market with a clean burn diesel, they are far superior in
>>>>crash tests than older Jeeps, today's jeep engines are cleaner burning
>>>>that the past and tougher than ever.
>>>>
>>>>Since you say older ones were pretty good compaired to today's Jeeps may
>>>>I ask how many jeeps you have owned?
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>How about 4 so far and currently two and the AMC engines where far better
>>>than the Chysler mills. I have a 79 J20 that I have had for about 20
>>>years now. It started life in farm service then when I got it it towed
>>>horse trailers for many years and plowed snow too and it STILL runs good
>>>and tranny works like new too. It has had a extremely hard life. AMC/Jeed
>>>used to use a heaiver D44 than anybody else did in the front of full size
>>>vehicles (thicker axle tubes) and mine has never broken any driveline
>>>parts even pushing snow with 2000lbs in the bed up a drifted lane with 4
>>>chained tires spining. Dodge did not hurt it too much but Dalhmer is
>>>really kinda clueless as to what a Jeep is and stands for as the Liberty
>>>proves.
>>>--
>>>
>>>-----------------
>>>www.thesnoman.com
>>
>>
>> I agree about the AMC engines but over all the Wranglers are better today
>> are better than they were a Rubicon is the altimate 4x4. As far as the
>> Liberty, it is a grocery getter with minor 4x4 capability. The Cherokee
>> and the unlimited are becoming the high $$ vehicles to comptet with Land
>> Rover and Lexus. However, taken what they are I would own a Jeep before
>> any other 4x4 SUV.
>>
>> I go to a place in PA that is an off road park called Paragon and overall
>> the Jeep line kicks off road butt compaired to all others. Last week end
>> I was in WV and we had a Ford explorer, a Chevy Trailblazer and a Dodge
>> Dakota. Well, guess who kept getting stuck and bogged down it wasn't the
>> JeepWranglers or the two Cherokees.
>
> Thats because Dalhmer has not redesign the Wrangler yet and it still goes
> back to its AMC roots with minor changes. Give them time and Dalhmer will
> screw that one up too.
>
> --
>
> -----------------
> www.thesnoman.com
Yep, it is only a matter of time. Like many good things they disappear.
2004 was the year they put the I-6 in the Cherokees. Now they come with the
V-6 same HP and torque and sucky gas milage. Thank goodness they have not
done it to the Wrangler yet.
--
Coasty
Remove The SPOOGE To Reply
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #530559 ] |
Fri, 25 November 2005 23:23 |
|
"Coasty" <uscg_retSPOOGE [at] comcast.net> wrote in message
news:y5ydnf8EYeTtHhrenZ2dnUVZ_s-dnZ2d [at] comcast.com...
>I reinterate the conversation was on Jeeps reguardless of if it is a 4x4
>forum and there was no mention of a POS rover in the entire conversation.
>Take a long walk off a short pier or learn to follow the conversation
>JAFDH.
>
> --
> Coasty
> Remove The SPOOGE To Reply
> "Lon" <lon.stowell [at] comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:obGdnUxmEbJpzhreRVn-jg [at] comcast.com...
>> Coasty proclaimed:
>>
>>> A little OT we were talking about Jeeps not POS over priced rovers.
>>>
>> The newsgroup is rec.autos.4x4, not limited to jeeps.
>
>
The original poster asked about SUVs and didn't limit it to JEEPS.
I drive a Jeep but have used Discos and 110s in Nepal and they are much
better than Jeeps there but I agree very pricey - If I could afford one, I
would walk away - no make that run away - from DC products - nothing but
trouble generally but great 4x4
Bill
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #530562 ] |
Sat, 26 November 2005 02:26 |
|
Coasty proclaimed:
> I reinterate the conversation was on Jeeps reguardless of if it is a 4x4
> forum and there was no mention of a POS rover in the entire conversation.
> Take a long walk off a short pier or learn to follow the conversation JAFDH.
>
Ahh, sorry, didn't recognize that I was daring to correct one so
intelligent, informed, and erudite. Now get off the computer before I
tell your big sister on you and she makes you wear those girlie pants to
kindergarten again.
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #530563 ] |
Sat, 26 November 2005 02:45 |
|
Been happy w/ my ML430, 112k miles now and going strong. A bid of a
gashog though ;<)
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #530575 ] |
Sun, 27 November 2005 06:16 |
|
On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 11:05:06 +0200, "Peter" <peter [at] greatnowhere.com>
wrote:
>What is considered the most reliable SUV out there (AND with decent
>handling!)? I have very good experience with Isuzu Trooper (and mediocre
>with Dodge), and would consider another Trooper but am unsure how their
>diesel engines perform (want turbo diesel this time)...
>
>Also, I hear Toyota Lancruisers are very reliable but they're one of the
>most expensive ones...
>
>TIA,
>Peter
>
something with the Toyota brand name...
---
elbert.clarke [at] **adelphia.net
remove ** to email
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #530582 ] |
Sun, 27 November 2005 22:57 |
|
"Elbert" <elbert.clarke [at] **adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:r7gio1p5mteqatd3nnsbh2n0pe41sm54rv [at] 4ax.com...
> On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 11:05:06 +0200, "Peter" <peter [at] greatnowhere.com>
> wrote:
>
> >What is considered the most reliable SUV out there (AND with decent
> >handling!)? I have very good experience with Isuzu Trooper (and mediocre
> >with Dodge), and would consider another Trooper but am unsure how their
> >diesel engines perform (want turbo diesel this time)...
> >
> >Also, I hear Toyota Lancruisers are very reliable but they're one of the
> >most expensive ones...
> >
> >TIA,
> >Peter
> >
>
>
> something with the Toyota brand name...
I was looking for a used 4x4 SUV and started with the 4Runner because I was
expecting quality and reliability. After doing a google search using
"4runner problem" I learned about a lot of blown head gaskets, cracked
heads, very lousy gas mileage, and lack of power. I bought another Ford
Explorer instead. The early Explorers also had problems with blown head and
intake manifold gaskets but at least it they have some power and get better
than 11 mpg. I have 3 and I use them mainly on dirt roads. I do not do
any rock crawling or offroad racing with them. I have driven through 2 feet
of snow, 2 feet of mud, on very icy, slippery roads and have never gone off
the road or gotten stuck. So, does OP want transportation or recreation?
>
> ---
> elbert.clarke [at] **adelphia.net
> remove ** to email
>
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #530583 ] |
Mon, 28 November 2005 01:48 |
|
An Exploder over a 4Runner? You have to be kidding! They're not even in the same league. Guess you need to learn how to refine
your internet searching abilities.
:
: I was looking for a used 4x4 SUV and started with the 4Runner because I was
: expecting quality and reliability. After doing a google search using
: "4runner problem" I learned about a lot of blown head gaskets, cracked
: heads, very lousy gas mileage, and lack of power. I bought another Ford
: Explorer instead. The early Explorers also had problems with blown head and
: intake manifold gaskets but at least it they have some power and get better
: than 11 mpg. I have 3 and I use them mainly on dirt roads. I do not do
: any rock crawling or offroad racing with them. I have driven through 2 feet
: of snow, 2 feet of mud, on very icy, slippery roads and have never gone off
: the road or gotten stuck. So, does OP want transportation or recreation?
:
: >
: > ---
: > elbert.clarke [at] **adelphia.net
: > remove ** to email
: >
:
:
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #530584 ] |
Mon, 28 November 2005 01:52 |
|
Karl Rove wrote:
> An Exploder over a 4Runner? You have to be kidding! They're not even in the same league. Guess you need to learn how to refine
> your internet searching abilities.
>
>
> :
> : I was looking for a used 4x4 SUV and started with the 4Runner because I was
> : expecting quality and reliability. After doing a google search using
> : "4runner problem" I learned about a lot of blown head gaskets, cracked
> : heads, very lousy gas mileage, and lack of power. I bought another Ford
> : Explorer instead. The early Explorers also had problems with blown head and
> : intake manifold gaskets but at least it they have some power and get better
> : than 11 mpg. I have 3 and I use them mainly on dirt roads. I do not do
> : any rock crawling or offroad racing with them. I have driven through 2 feet
> : of snow, 2 feet of mud, on very icy, slippery roads and have never gone off
> : the road or gotten stuck. So, does OP want transportation or recreation?
> :
> : >
> : > ---
> : > elbert.clarke [at] **adelphia.net
> : > remove ** to email
> : >
> :
> :
>
>
Yes, the explorer is not even worthy of the being compared to it. Heck I
drove through 2 feet of snow with 4x4 Subarus in the 80's and never got
stuck either and though smaller they were a lot tuffer built than any
explorer too.
--
-----------------
www.thesnoman.com
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #530585 ] |
Mon, 28 November 2005 02:30 |
|
Yes; I drove through 2' of snow with a 1966 Pontiac Tempest so what does that prove. The Exploder is nothing more than an urban
grocery getter.
:
:
: Yes, the explorer is not even worthy of the being compared to it. Heck I
: drove through 2 feet of snow with 4x4 Subarus in the 80's and never got
: stuck either and though smaller they were a lot tuffer built than any
: explorer too.
:
:
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #530589 ] |
Mon, 28 November 2005 04:43 |
|
On Sun, 27 Nov 2005 13:57:56 -0800, "Ulysses"
<therealulysses [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>"Elbert" <elbert.clarke [at] **adelphia.net> wrote in message
>news:r7gio1p5mteqatd3nnsbh2n0pe41sm54rv [at] 4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 11:05:06 +0200, "Peter" <peter [at] greatnowhere.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >What is considered the most reliable SUV out there (AND with decent
>> >handling!)? I have very good experience with Isuzu Trooper (and mediocre
>> >with Dodge), and would consider another Trooper but am unsure how their
>> >diesel engines perform (want turbo diesel this time)...
>> >
>> >Also, I hear Toyota Lancruisers are very reliable but they're one of the
>> >most expensive ones...
>> >
>> >TIA,
>> >Peter
>> >
>>
>>
>> something with the Toyota brand name...
>
>I was looking for a used 4x4 SUV and started with the 4Runner because I was
>expecting quality and reliability. After doing a google search using
>"4runner problem" I learned about a lot of blown head gaskets, cracked
>heads, very lousy gas mileage, and lack of power. I bought another Ford
>Explorer instead. The early Explorers also had problems with blown head and
>intake manifold gaskets but at least it they have some power and get better
>than 11 mpg. I have 3 and I use them mainly on dirt roads. I do not do
>any rock crawling or offroad racing with them. I have driven through 2 feet
>of snow, 2 feet of mud, on very icy, slippery roads and have never gone off
>the road or gotten stuck. So, does OP want transportation or recreation?
************************************************************ *********************
>> something with the Toyota brand name...
Well I still say the Toyota (you pick the model) is a better choice.
Seems like quality and reliability should apply on-road as well as
off-road.
---
elbert.clarke [at] **adelphia.net
remove ** to email
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #534574 ] |
Mon, 28 November 2005 17:14 |
|
Coasty,
You are only showing your own ignorance here, in the thread name and
your lack of knowledge in off roaders....
1st, the thread is named most reliable SUV. Jeep did not invent the
SUV. Sorry. (moron!!)
2nd, Saying that a Rover is a POS really shows your lack of experience
off road. I guess to guy that has never really been off road a Wrangler
is the best thing since sliced cheese (Moab shops rent em all day).
However, if you had real experience you would have already seen what
Rovers can do and how invaluable they can be.
You are a small minded shallow fool. Open your mind, look around at
what is available, attempt manuvers with those vehicles in ugly
situations and then make an assessment. Otherwise you show your own
ignorance in trying to bash what you have never been offroad in.
As to price, well, they are a bit pricey, but if you look around you
can find em for a decent price (theres a cherry 96 discovery down the
street from my house for $3500), however, I would rather pay a bit more
for the saftey they offer. Roll your wrangler or cherokee a few times,
see what happens to it, they collapse and you will die. period. Now
look at what a rover does when rollled. I've walked away from two roll
overs and went right out to buy another rover. The only other vehicle
that is as safe is the full size cruisers (80s?)
If you dont believe me take a look at my site, goldrushexpeditions.com,
go to the off road porn page and you will see the trucks we rolled.
Your random rant is the reminds me of trailer trash talking about how a
Ferrari is a POS and that a 77 T/A will out perform and out race any
Eur-o-peean POS. Stay in the Jeeps buddy, it keeps assholes like you
off the real trails.
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #534576 ] |
Mon, 28 November 2005 18:33 |
|
Corey Shuman wrote:
> If you dont believe me take a look at my site, goldrushexpeditions.com,
> go to the off road porn page and you will see the trucks we rolled.
http://www.goldrushexpeditions.com/off_road_porn.htm
....and the girl is really great !!!
The car is not bad either...
Kind regards,
Erik-Jan.
--
The Meeting Place for Photography http://www.fotograaf.com
Fotofestival Naarden Festival-OFF http://www.festival-off.nl
Rondvaart in Naarden-Vesting http://www.vestingvaart.nl
Erik-Jan Geniets. Phone: +31-(0)6.55.78.60.31
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #534577 ] |
Mon, 28 November 2005 19:09 |
|
> If you dont believe me take a look at my site, goldrushexpeditions.com,
> go to the off road porn page and you will see the trucks we rolled.
Interesting. How do you find the Freelander, both for transportation &
recreation?
Peter
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #534581 ] |
Mon, 28 November 2005 22:43 |
|
Freelander isnt too bad for what it is, it has excellect on road
handling and allows the covering of a lot of ground in a short amount
of time, it has suffered its mishaps, mostly struts which luckily have
been covered under warranty. We bought that for the "girl" who is my
wife now (hooray!!) and she loves it, its a dependable commuter that
can do okay in the snow and other crap that falls on the Utah roads.
As far as an offroader, it can take the small stuff okay, little ruts
and small rivers and creeks are no problem. I would probably work it
harder but it has the street tires on it and I fear popping them. The
bad is that it is all wheel drive and I have gotten it stuck in a few
places where real 4wd would have made all the difference. But it is
what it is, 24 mpg and it will take you on most dirt roads reliably.
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #534593 ] |
Thu, 01 December 2005 03:01 |
|
> The others Cherokee and such are yuppie SUVs with no real
> capability without extensive mods.
lol Oh wow. That's the silliest thing I've read today.
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #534594 ] |
Thu, 01 December 2005 03:02 |
|
> 2004 was the year they put the I-6 in the Cherokees.
I can't be reading that right. Cherokees have had the 4.0L since... well,
how long have the Cherokees been around?
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #534595 ] |
Thu, 01 December 2005 09:31 |
|
On Thu, 1 Dec 2005 02:02:47 UTC "SBlackfoot"
<trypticon [at] sympatico.remove.ca> wrote:
> > 2004 was the year they put the I-6 in the Cherokees.
>
> I can't be reading that right. Cherokees have had the 4.0L since... well,
> how long have the Cherokees been around?
Actually, it was 1987 when the first 4.0L I6 was used.
--
Will Honea
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #534596 ] |
Thu, 01 December 2005 18:07 |
|
"Karl Rove" <nospam [at] fuckbush.com> wrote in message
news:M1tif.10184$dv.2762 [at] fed1read02...
>
> Yes; I drove through 2' of snow with a 1966 Pontiac Tempest so what does
that prove. The Exploder is nothing more than an urban
> grocery getter.
I agree for the most part however it WILL get groceries no matter how bad
the dirt roads are (so far anyway ;-)
> :
> :
> : Yes, the explorer is not even worthy of the being compared to it. Heck I
> : drove through 2 feet of snow with 4x4 Subarus in the 80's and never got
> : stuck either and though smaller they were a lot tuffer built than any
> : explorer too.
> :
> :
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #534597 ] |
Thu, 01 December 2005 18:16 |
|
"TheSnoMan" <admin [at] snoman.com> wrote in message
news:6xsif.6616$aA2.4475 [at] newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> Karl Rove wrote:
> > An Exploder over a 4Runner? You have to be kidding! They're not even in
the same league. Guess you need to learn how to refine
> > your internet searching abilities.
> >
> >
> > :
> > : I was looking for a used 4x4 SUV and started with the 4Runner because
I was
> > : expecting quality and reliability. After doing a google search using
> > : "4runner problem" I learned about a lot of blown head gaskets, cracked
> > : heads, very lousy gas mileage, and lack of power. I bought another
Ford
> > : Explorer instead. The early Explorers also had problems with blown
head and
> > : intake manifold gaskets but at least it they have some power and get
better
> > : than 11 mpg. I have 3 and I use them mainly on dirt roads. I do not
do
> > : any rock crawling or offroad racing with them. I have driven through
2 feet
> > : of snow, 2 feet of mud, on very icy, slippery roads and have never
gone off
> > : the road or gotten stuck. So, does OP want transportation or
recreation?
> > :
> > : >
> > : > ---
> > : > elbert.clarke [at] **adelphia.net
> > : > remove ** to email
> > : >
> > :
> > :
> >
> >
>
>
> Yes, the explorer is not even worthy of the being compared to it. Heck I
> drove through 2 feet of snow with 4x4 Subarus in the 80's and never got
> stuck either and though smaller they were a lot tuffer built than any
> explorer too.
Do the Suburus have a frame or are they unibodies? When I have looked at
alternative 4WD vehicles, especially any that might get "good" gas mileage,
most of them looked like they would break under the conditions I drive in.
I am completely open to suggestions for a better vehicle. Heck, I HATE
Fords. On the Exploders something is always breaking and they require a lot
of maintenance but so far they can always be repaired for a reasonable
amount and their engines (4.0 pushrod) last a long time and the bodies and
frames are solid.
>
> --
>
> -----------------
> www.thesnoman.com
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #539862 ] |
Fri, 02 December 2005 13:07 |
|
"Corey Shuman" <cshuman [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1133194473.915345.115050 [at] g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Coasty,
> You are only showing your own ignorance here, in the thread name and
> your lack of knowledge in off roaders....
> 1st, the thread is named most reliable SUV. Jeep did not invent the
> SUV. Sorry. (moron!!)
> 2nd, Saying that a Rover is a POS really shows your lack of experience
> off road. I guess to guy that has never really been off road a Wrangler
> is the best thing since sliced cheese (Moab shops rent em all day).
> However, if you had real experience you would have already seen what
> Rovers can do and how invaluable they can be.
> You are a small minded shallow fool. Open your mind, look around at
> what is available, attempt manuvers with those vehicles in ugly
> situations and then make an assessment. Otherwise you show your own
> ignorance in trying to bash what you have never been offroad in.
> As to price, well, they are a bit pricey, but if you look around you
> can find em for a decent price (theres a cherry 96 discovery down the
> street from my house for $3500), however, I would rather pay a bit more
> for the saftey they offer. Roll your wrangler or cherokee a few times,
> see what happens to it, they collapse and you will die. period. Now
> look at what a rover does when rollled. I've walked away from two roll
> overs and went right out to buy another rover. The only other vehicle
> that is as safe is the full size cruisers (80s?)
> If you dont believe me take a look at my site, goldrushexpeditions.com,
> go to the off road porn page and you will see the trucks we rolled.
>
> Your random rant is the reminds me of trailer trash talking about how a
> Ferrari is a POS and that a 77 T/A will out perform and out race any
> Eur-o-peean POS. Stay in the Jeeps buddy, it keeps assholes like you
> off the real trails.
>
Lets see a 60K$ Rover do this.
http://www.hv4w.org/movies/snorkelrun.mpg
You talk about my ignorance who is the pot is calling the kettle black.
You make assumptions which you have know knowledge of especially of my off
road experience who is ignorant now?
I have seen what Rovers can do my some owns one a 2004 Range Rover Sport
Don't get me wrong they are rather comfy, and have lots of amenities and
they do have off road capability for what they are.
I did not say anything about who invented the SUV but since you brought it
up, 1947 The beginning of land rover, 1941-1945: Jeep MB, JEEP CAME FIRST SO
THEY INVENTED THE SUV.
I actually have been in a rollover in a wrangler and it rolled 4 times we
just up righted it and kept going. I don't see Rovers rock climbing the
stock Rubicon will out perform any stock rover, yes they are noisy, they do
not have heated seats, a kick ass stereo, GPS and other luxury items.
We do not buy jeeps for their luxury, quietness, the good looks, it is a
jeep thing and you wouldn't understand that is obvious.
You may want to subscribe to Consumer Reports, the Jeep line as far as
capability came out on top of the Rover line for overall capability and that
is what I was talking about capability, not luxury or amenities. In fact
the Jeep Liberty was rated by consumer reports as the most reliable SUV.
Coasty
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #539864 ] |
Fri, 02 December 2005 17:09 |
|
HAHAHA.... that is one of the funniest things I have ever seen,
especially for an arguement against Rovers... look around, rovers have
been fitting snorkels for years and yes, a $60-70-80k rover could do
just what that jeep did, for that matter a freelander could do it too,
just fit a snorkel correctly. Its not rocket science.
But you are showing either ignorance or a flat out lie in your next
line, there is no 2004 Range Rover Sport. It wasnt released until just
a few months ago and its an 06. And the RRS while still capable, is a
"sport". Not meant for the offroading that the reg. Rangie can do, do a
little research and you will see also that the RRS doesnt share much at
all with the current Rangie. Even the body panels are all different.
Okay and back to the SUV...Jeep was first with an Offroad vehicle, this
is not a SPORT UTILITY VEHICLE (SUV). What bit of sport do you get out
of a 4cyl with less than 100hp.
IMHO, Rover showed jeep what to do in the matter of offroad capability.
but thats another story.
Land Rover on the other hand, went out on a limb in the early 70s and
decided to create a vehicle that was competent off road but also
assumed the interior stylings of a luxury vehicle.
Mercedes was next to follow with the G-Class and then Mitsubishi.
everyone else has just been playing catch up.
theres a good article here:
http://www.landroverclub.net/Club/HTML/Range_Rover_classic.h tm
I beg to differ about the Rubicon, not a bad vehicle, but not even in
the same class as the Rover, yet still a Discovery or Defender will out
wheel it stock, mud, rock or snow.
We eat jeeps all day, sorry but its true, you can even check out our
last outting... look at all the Jeeps, even heavily modified. That
couldnt keep up with the nearly stock crusier and the Rovers. The proof
is in the pudding, not just talk...
http://www.goldrushexpeditions.com/sheeprocks_-_hilltop_mine .htm
Oh and if you want to quote magaziones, 4x4 Magazine's '4x4 of the
Year 2006' was the RRS.
http://www.strategiy.com/inews.asp?id=20050818144144
So tell me this, if a magazine that evaluates 4x4 only, puts the least
competent Rover at the top of their list over the Rubicon, and any
other Jeep, how do you think the other rovers do??
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #539865 ] |
Fri, 02 December 2005 17:49 |
|
"Corey Shuman" <cshuman [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1133539790.099037.303250 [at] f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> HAHAHA.... that is one of the funniest things I have ever seen,
> especially for an arguement against Rovers... look around, rovers have
> been fitting snorkels for years and yes, a $60-70-80k rover could do
> just what that jeep did, for that matter a freelander could do it too,
> just fit a snorkel correctly. Its not rocket science.
>
> But you are showing either ignorance or a flat out lie in your next
> line, there is no 2004 Range Rover Sport. It wasnt released until just
> a few months ago and its an 06. And the RRS while still capable, is a
> "sport". Not meant for the offroading that the reg. Rangie can do, do a
> little research and you will see also that the RRS doesnt share much at
> all with the current Rangie. Even the body panels are all different.
> Okay and back to the SUV...Jeep was first with an Offroad vehicle, this
> is not a SPORT UTILITY VEHICLE (SUV). What bit of sport do you get out
> of a 4cyl with less than 100hp.
> IMHO, Rover showed jeep what to do in the matter of offroad capability.
> but thats another story.
> Land Rover on the other hand, went out on a limb in the early 70s and
> decided to create a vehicle that was competent off road but also
> assumed the interior stylings of a luxury vehicle.
> Mercedes was next to follow with the G-Class and then Mitsubishi.
> everyone else has just been playing catch up.
> theres a good article here:
> http://www.landroverclub.net/Club/HTML/Range_Rover_classic.h tm
>
> I beg to differ about the Rubicon, not a bad vehicle, but not even in
> the same class as the Rover, yet still a Discovery or Defender will out
> wheel it stock, mud, rock or snow.
>
> We eat jeeps all day, sorry but its true, you can even check out our
> last outting... look at all the Jeeps, even heavily modified. That
> couldnt keep up with the nearly stock crusier and the Rovers. The proof
> is in the pudding, not just talk...
>
> http://www.goldrushexpeditions.com/sheeprocks_-_hilltop_mine .htm
>
> Oh and if you want to quote magaziones, 4x4 Magazine's '4x4 of the
> Year 2006' was the RRS.
> http://www.strategiy.com/inews.asp?id=20050818144144
>
> So tell me this, if a magazine that evaluates 4x4 only, puts the least
> competent Rover at the top of their list over the Rubicon, and any
> other Jeep, how do you think the other rovers do??
>
I am not from Missouri but show me! Show me a new model Rover video doing
what a Jeep just did.
Also,you are calling an independent testing agency Consumer Reports a liar
or their facts are untrue.
Get your head screwed on right denial of your ignorance is a self fulfilling
prophecy.
Coasty
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #539866 ] |
Fri, 02 December 2005 18:08 |
|
"Corey Shuman" <cshuman [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1133539790.099037.303250 [at] f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> HAHAHA.... that is one of the funniest things I have ever seen,
> especially for an arguement against Rovers... look around, rovers have
> been fitting snorkels for years and yes, a $60-70-80k rover could do
> just what that jeep did, for that matter a freelander could do it too,
> just fit a snorkel correctly. Its not rocket science.
>
> But you are showing either ignorance or a flat out lie in your next
> line, there is no 2004 Range Rover Sport. It wasnt released until just
> a few months ago and its an 06. And the RRS while still capable, is a
> "sport". Not meant for the offroading that the reg. Rangie can do, do a
> little research and you will see also that the RRS doesnt share much at
> all with the current Rangie. Even the body panels are all different.
> Okay and back to the SUV...Jeep was first with an Offroad vehicle, this
> is not a SPORT UTILITY VEHICLE (SUV). What bit of sport do you get out
> of a 4cyl with less than 100hp.
> IMHO, Rover showed jeep what to do in the matter of offroad capability.
> but thats another story.
> Land Rover on the other hand, went out on a limb in the early 70s and
> decided to create a vehicle that was competent off road but also
> assumed the interior stylings of a luxury vehicle.
> Mercedes was next to follow with the G-Class and then Mitsubishi.
> everyone else has just been playing catch up.
> theres a good article here:
> http://www.landroverclub.net/Club/HTML/Range_Rover_classic.h tm
>
> I beg to differ about the Rubicon, not a bad vehicle, but not even in
> the same class as the Rover, yet still a Discovery or Defender will out
> wheel it stock, mud, rock or snow.
>
> We eat jeeps all day, sorry but its true, you can even check out our
> last outting... look at all the Jeeps, even heavily modified. That
> couldnt keep up with the nearly stock crusier and the Rovers. The proof
> is in the pudding, not just talk...
>
> http://www.goldrushexpeditions.com/sheeprocks_-_hilltop_mine .htm
>
> Oh and if you want to quote magaziones, 4x4 Magazine's '4x4 of the
> Year 2006' was the RRS.
> http://www.strategiy.com/inews.asp?id=20050818144144
>
> So tell me this, if a magazine that evaluates 4x4 only, puts the least
> competent Rover at the top of their list over the Rubicon, and any
> other Jeep, how do you think the other rovers do??
>
Oh by the way I called my son's Range Rover a sport sorry for the improper
nomenclature it had nothing to do with a particular model which I had no
idea there was a SPORT version any thing other than a Wrangler is a sport as
the word sport insinuates.
Coasty
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #539867 ] |
Fri, 02 December 2005 19:07 |
|
On 2 Dec 2005 08:09:50 -0800, "Corey Shuman" <cshuman [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>HAHAHA.... that is one of the funniest things I have ever seen,
>especially for an arguement against Rovers... look around, rovers have
>been fitting snorkels for years and yes, a $60-70-80k rover could do
>just what that jeep did, for that matter a freelander could do it too,
>just fit a snorkel correctly. Its not rocket science.
>
Maybe the diesel versions could, but the high voltage ignition on the US
gasoline models would short out.
I'd bet the Jeep in the video had more mods than just a snorkel.
--
Charlie...
http://www.chocphoto.com
|
|
|
| Re: Most reliable SUV [message #539869 ] |
Fri, 02 December 2005 23:32 |
|
Coasty,
I show you proof and still you whine... what do you want me to do, I'll
find you a video of a Rangie submerging and you still wont admit it.
Did you miss the pics of all the Jeeps stuck at the bottom of the
hill??
As to consumer reports, Im not calling them liars, just pointing to
facts, are you calling 4x4magazine a bunch of liars?? Does it matter??
Face facts, you are talking out of your butt about the jeeps, they
arent all that they are cracked up to be, I have shown you proof after
proof and if you need more I can send you more. I just dont think you
will ever grasp what the Rover is until you drive one.
And until that happens this arguement is pointless.
|
|
|
Gehe zu:
aktuelle Zeit: Fri Jan 9 03:23:09 CET 2009
Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0.24951 Sekunden |
