SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bentway who wrote (130397)8/7/2005 4:04:22 PM
From: JDN  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793955
 
I see, you feel my 15+ years of experience is not objective. haha. I have nothing against the Toyota Land Cruiser,though they are not the offroad vehicle they used to be. When I suggested the Grand Cherokee I was referring to the audience on this thread which I presume is more interested in on road comfort then off road prowness but still wanted a beefy vehicle. If you will go and look at the specs on the new 2005 and upcoming 2006 Grand Cherokee and compare them to the Toyota Land Cruiser you will find Cherokee has far more to offer and costs far less. As to durability, my Cherokee has 280,000 miles on it and STLL GOING STRONG. jdn



To: bentway who wrote (130397)8/7/2005 4:50:57 PM
From: Ish  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 793955
 
<<If I wanted the most serious combination of offroad capability and reliability, I'd buy a Toyota Land Cruiser,>>

One of the guys at the hunting club bought one of those. On the road, in town, pulling or not pulling a trailer ... 8 MPG. That puppy had an engine that belonged in a tractor. Way too heavy too, on soft ground it tended to sink in to the frame.


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News