90 or 110 For Touring

I can fit my sons mountain bike in the back but it takes a bit of jiggling to get it in there.. and whatever you do don't slam the door on it and crack the rear door lining as my son did to make it fit.. :(

As for touring I'm in the process of setting mine up to tour next year as I'm doing the Canning Stock Route and I've found that so far fuel is a real issue with the 90's.. the existing tanks are small (55 litres but I'm never gotten more than 49 in a tank.. takes you about 500kms max).. 'long range' tanks are only about 45 and 42 litres.. you can get two of them - at $1700 each.. packing has to be well planned..

I would say that for the fuel tanks alone I would be looking at a 110 if you can.. :)

Whilst the 'shorty' will be suitable for extended touring with clever packing the 110 will offer better access and packing options with the rear seats removed and 5 door access.
More importantly the longer the wheelbase the better the ride on the rough and corrugated roads you'll encounter in your outback travels.
A 130 dual cab (or single cab if you're short) would be the 'ducks nuts' for outback touring but pretty impractical for urban driving wheras a 90 would be comparitively 'choppy' and uncomfortable on corrugated roads but great for urban driving. The 110 sits in the middle and is a good choice for load space, accessability and comfort. :)
Another benefit of the 110 vs the 90 is that a roof rack can be more easily avoided which is a definite plus.


Deano :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by justinc

.........I'm sure Murray could make a bike carrier attachment.................

JC :)

---

Funny you should say that JC, I've done a couple of these recently :D
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/im...012/11/741.jpg
>> More pics here. <<

Also done a couple of these for 90 owners wanting to squeeze some more packing space out of a shorty............
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/im...012/10/788.jpg
More pics here.


Cheers, Murray

A 90 will be great for just the pair of you but my gut feeling is that the 110 might give a slightly better ride on the corrugations. Whatever you go for, pack light. The temptation with the bigger car is to take too much. Pack what you need then take half of it out & leave it behind!!

FWIW - The only 'mods' I'd do to a 90 are:

• Long range fuel tanks (get a tank fitted under the drivers seat).
• Steering & diff guards.
• Raised air intake.

M

IV had a few of both in my time...

The 90 will do, but the 110 is definitely better suited to touring.

The 90 will give you compromises in many regards, extended fuel tanks, space etc. I can't think of 1 with the 110.

I currently use my overland prepped 110 as both a city car and a tourer and the only problem I have with it is height (40mm lift, roofrack & roof tent) - you'd obviously have this problem on a 90 too.

HTH
Jon

Sent using Forum Runner

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeanoH

Whilst the 'shorty' will be suitable for extended touring with clever packing the 110 will offer better access and packing options with the rear seats removed and 5 door access.
More importantly the longer the wheelbase the better the ride on the rough and corrugated roads you'll encounter in your outback travels.
A 130 dual cab (or single cab if you're short) would be the 'ducks nuts' for outback touring but pretty impractical for urban driving wheras a 90 would be comparitively 'choppy' and uncomfortable on corrugated roads but great for urban driving. The 110 sits in the middle and is a good choice for load space, accessability and comfort. :)
Another benefit of the 110 vs the 90 is that a roof rack can be more easily avoided which is a definite plus.


Deano :)

---

I think you would be very surprised how well the 90 rides. I have just got a 90 after driving a GU Patrol with Pedders Foam Cell Suspension for 8 years and I fell no need to change the 90. I love it. I have owned short wheel base LC 40 series in the past and that was a choppy ride. Put a bulbar on a 90 with a winch, a couple of Jerries on the back with one of Murray's carriers and I love the ride. If you don't believe me and you live near Melbourne you are welcome to try it.

A couple of jerry cans are a lot cheaper than a long range tank. I just use cans.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Psimpson7

A couple of jerry cans are a lot cheaper than a long range tank. I just use cans.

---

Which is great if you only need a few.. I would be worried about putting the amount I need on the roof - due to the weight up so high.. have opted to fit a 240 litre tank in the back of the 90 itself.. at least it will keep the weight lower.. :)

Understandable - i certainly wouldnt put any on the roof. The only time I have taken a lot was for the Simpson crossing. I put them inside under a flase floor on which the fridge sat.

I took 7 which gave me 200 l in total with the main tank.

The internal tank is a good idea. Will that just have a transfer pump and hose to fill the main tank?

cheers
Pete

Can't comment on other treks, but the Cape in an 88 for two was great.
No roof rack, couple of jerrys for fuel ...