Kano
Active Member
- Posts
- 238
- Location
- East Africa
Yesterday I added some figures regarding my main vehicles. And got to a saddening conclusion.
Land Rover: used on 6 full Safaris (2000+ km each, 30-40% of it off-road across the bush)
Total approx. 13,000 km from March 2010 (1986 built, unknown mileage on 200TDi bought used from the UK)
Total break-downs: 8 (I'm only counting faults that resulted in the immobilisation of the vehicle for immediate repair)
- Right front shock turret ripped off
- Gear selector broke
- Front end bushings went to tatters in the field
- Fuel pump died
- Left front shock turret ripped off
- Front radius arm bushings went to tatters in the field
- Coolant hose passing along valve cover popped out in the field (caught it immediately because of the steamy smell, but if it had been one of my drivers, the engine was toast)
- Pick-up bed broke in the field - the side walls are just resting on flimsy aluminium brackets pop-riveted under the flat bottom... And this is supposed to be a Mil-Specs vehicle! (Ex-MOD Rapier 127")
Landcruiser: used on 12 full Safaris, plus all sorts of professional trips to the bush
Total approx. 50,000 km from June 2008 (1997 model HZJ77, 160,000 km on the clock)
Total break-downs: Zero.
I still prefer the Landy for a bush ride, more comfortable in the rough, and better off-roader.
But it's a shame that the Solihull engineers never went around building a quality vehicle. They simply built a brilliant off-roader that is easy to fix, and made sure that you would need the "easy to fix" bit - and learn more about field repairs than you ever suspected there was to know about.
I also have a deep grudge against today's Land Rover Co because, although they built their brand image on a go-anywhere 4x4 that more or less conquered Africa and other places, they've completely forgotten their origins and today are not producing a single model that is bush-worthy.
When I mean bush-worthy, I mean a car that you can actually take to the African bush under African condition, and work with in the field when your livelyhood depends on it - not a shiny rig on which you can spend umpteenth thousands of pounds in order to prepare it for one expedition.
Maybe one day they'll realise that if they've been selling lots of 4x4 to city guys, it's because of the hardened bush-guy image in the background, and that if they lose that image people may start looking for other reasons to buy a car, like for example quality... And that would be bad news.
Land Rover: used on 6 full Safaris (2000+ km each, 30-40% of it off-road across the bush)
Total approx. 13,000 km from March 2010 (1986 built, unknown mileage on 200TDi bought used from the UK)
Total break-downs: 8 (I'm only counting faults that resulted in the immobilisation of the vehicle for immediate repair)
- Right front shock turret ripped off
- Gear selector broke
- Front end bushings went to tatters in the field
- Fuel pump died
- Left front shock turret ripped off
- Front radius arm bushings went to tatters in the field
- Coolant hose passing along valve cover popped out in the field (caught it immediately because of the steamy smell, but if it had been one of my drivers, the engine was toast)
- Pick-up bed broke in the field - the side walls are just resting on flimsy aluminium brackets pop-riveted under the flat bottom... And this is supposed to be a Mil-Specs vehicle! (Ex-MOD Rapier 127")
Landcruiser: used on 12 full Safaris, plus all sorts of professional trips to the bush
Total approx. 50,000 km from June 2008 (1997 model HZJ77, 160,000 km on the clock)
Total break-downs: Zero.
I still prefer the Landy for a bush ride, more comfortable in the rough, and better off-roader.
But it's a shame that the Solihull engineers never went around building a quality vehicle. They simply built a brilliant off-roader that is easy to fix, and made sure that you would need the "easy to fix" bit - and learn more about field repairs than you ever suspected there was to know about.
I also have a deep grudge against today's Land Rover Co because, although they built their brand image on a go-anywhere 4x4 that more or less conquered Africa and other places, they've completely forgotten their origins and today are not producing a single model that is bush-worthy.
When I mean bush-worthy, I mean a car that you can actually take to the African bush under African condition, and work with in the field when your livelyhood depends on it - not a shiny rig on which you can spend umpteenth thousands of pounds in order to prepare it for one expedition.
Maybe one day they'll realise that if they've been selling lots of 4x4 to city guys, it's because of the hardened bush-guy image in the background, and that if they lose that image people may start looking for other reasons to buy a car, like for example quality... And that would be bad news.
Last edited: