Fossicker
Hi all
I currently own a '95 Jeep XJ cherokee which has 310k km and is getting a little tired. I currently do almost 800km a week which is taking its toll on the old girl. A friend at work has offered me his '88 Range Rover (unreg/no roadworthy) for only $600. His wife is making him reduce his car collection from 5 to 2. It is a 5 speed manual (orig an auto but converted over at some point), hi line (or was it called a vogue at that point?) with dual fuel (snorkel tanks underneath installed in 2007). It looks to be overall very clean, with no visible rust and excellent paint. The interior is also very clean. The engine bay is also very clean with no leaks. It has at least 230k on it (the speedo stopped working for an amount of time- i'd need to follow up on that). I haven't been able to drive it , but I did detect a 'ticking' noise from underneath the left hand rocker cover. i thought it may be a stuck lifter. The engine oil is clean and underneath the rocker cover is also clean. It started up from cold immediately on gas. Apparently it is close to roadworthy condition, it needs new tyres and some front suspension bushes and little else (that I know of- bear in mind I haven't driven it yet). It hasn't been driven since at least 2007. My thought at this point is that I could buy this rangie and get it up to roadworthy condition and then get rid of my jeep when my commute to work is a lot shorter (approx 6 months+). I am currently building a house, and as such my budget is tight. I am reasonably mechanically literate. I have always wanted a classic shaped Range Rover, and I fell in love driving my fathers old '84 hi line (before it was destroyed in the Black Saturday bushfires). In terms of being a reliable daily driver, does this sound like a practical idea to you guys? Is there anything especially I should be checking, or anything that should warn me away? What sort of fuel consumption could I expect on gas? I know Land Rovers have a poor reputation in terms of reliability, but so do Jeeps- and my Cherokee has served me very faithfully. Any help/comments would be greatly appreciated
Dave
Wizard
Overall, it's down to personal choice. I've had an 89 RRC on gas, and it was good - however I did have to do some work to it. If you do some research and figure on some things going wrong - and requiring funds to fix - then it should be a decent buy. My 89 got 23-24 l/100k. Even though the RRC is a close relation to the Jeep, you'll need a WSM to get you up to speed on how the Brits do things. Sometimes it can be really different to the Yanks.
YarnMaster
SubscriberIf the 800km/week is to/from work and you just do highway miles, find a second hand tojo sedan or aussi 6 /v8 ... keep the $several hundred 4wd of whatever marq for a hobby /restoration to be driven to work on special occasions!!
MY99 RR P38 HSE 4.6 (Thor) gone (to Tasmania)
2020 Subaru Impreza S ('SWMBO's Express' )
2023 Ineos Grenadier Trialmaster (diesel)
Fossicker
Yeah it's all highway miles at the moment. If I got this rangie I wouldn't put those sort of miles on it- it's just a waste. The jeep has 310k and is essentially worthless, so I don't mind piling on the miles. When my house is finished I will only be about 25 min away from work instead of over an hour. The economy of the Range Rover is a bit of a worry, though. My jeep uses between 17-20 l/100km (on straight gas with a fairly light foot) and I think that's a lot. Essentially, I was thinking I could get this rangie on the road for not too much and have a Range Rover, which I adore. I love the driving position and the soft suspension and the overall personality of them. But I do admit I don't really want to spend every weekend under my cars wrenching anymore.
ForumSage
- Then buy a boringly reliable Oriental car , (and keep the Rangie for Special Expeditions.)Originally Posted by davesta
Swaggie
The answer is you will gett similar economy with the rangie
Fossicker
Well I had thought about getting something super boring like a Camry for about 4k. Which would make me want to wear a paper bag over my head. But if I could get the Rangie on the road for 4k (I could do it over an extended period of time, i don't need another vehicle anytime soon) I would much rather do that.
Another question; will these run on gas without the MAF meter? I have read about backfiring on gas damaging the MAF meter (which I believe has happened to this one- it doesnt run well on petrol). Could I just remove the maf meter and run it only on gas?
Fossicker
I would hope that a 5 speed manual 3.5 litre Range Rover wouldn't use more fuel then a 4 speed auto 4 litre Jeep. I know the Rangie is a fair bit bigger and heavier, though. As it is, my parents 80 series Landcruiser (manual) uses less gas then my Jeep
ChatterBox
SupporterI sold my 1988 HiLine a couple of years ago. It had 460,000km on it. 5 Speed manual. The 88 was the last of the 3.5's and came in just before the viscous transfer case, so it was a very mechanically proven vehicle. The output gear on the gearbox, still hadn't been cross drilled at that stage, resulting in mainshaft wear. I had to rebuild my box at 406,000km.
It was a very reliable and comfortable vehicle, with the LPG being the most unreliable part of it.
Apart from the g/box, other repairs only included maintenance stuff (1 x clutch, brake pads, alternator brushes, spark plugs etc). Other repairs were - I was sold the wrong coil which burnt out the ignition module type of farce. In the end an engine noise convinced me to buy a Diesel 7 seater, it took me 3 days to diagnose it was a sticky spring in the oil pressure relief valve, by which time, I'd talked myself into spending money on the TD5 D2a
The 88 still had the Lucas EFI system, the Bosch system which came out in 89 could be leaned for better economy. The fuel mixture / richness on the factory car being set for the lowest possible denominator.
Economy was varied - averages from memory listed below
Petrol - Urban : 22 litres per 100
Petrol - Highway : 14 litres per 100 (@120kph! - outback)
LPG - Urban : 30 litres per 100
LPG - Highway : 22 litres per 100
ForumSage
Some 3.5's might give financially viable economy, but don't count on it. - They were NOT designed with fuel-efficiency in mind. The only saving grace is their lack of weight, doubly so compared with the power produced at lower RPM's, highly desirable for off-road etc..
For example, the old P76 had a cast iron 2.6 litre/6 cylinder which was heavier than the V8 option.
It would be nice if just dropping a 3.8/V6 Holden engine would solve the problem, but I don't think it does. Pity.
You're only real hope is to make yours as good as possible, on LPG - pick Bee-Utey's brains - skinny 'road' tyres and glue some prickly clover etc on the accelerator.
Drive in bare feet.
Posting Permissions
| Search AULRO.com ONLY! |
Search All the Web! |
|---|
|
|
|
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks