Yes, there's certainly a lot of logic in that argument, and it's been repeated often enough by people that have 'been there and done it' that I'm seriously considering that option.

On the flip side however, I'm also not averse in theory to newer 100/200 series. Yes, there is more to go wrong, but they're also newer and lower miles..... there are still plenty of people using them for overlanding without seemingly any major issues cropping up so far.

That's essentially the main decision really.

Which is the better option..... I see the arguments on both sides.

The main factor for me though is as close to bulletproof reliability as I can get.

Ease of fixing it in the wilderness is second to that, as although I'm pretty much mechanically illiterate (despite a fair bit of previous motorsport involvement) so would be reliant on getting it to a repair facility, I do see the argument that finding someone able to work on an 80 series might be easier than finding someone able to competently repair a newer one.

In a previous life I managed a big corporate's involvement in both a rally raid team and international group N campaign, and we never spent that much on preparing one. Although to be fair, we didn't expect them to last beyond a few races before rebuild either.

But you still see the ads.... Hence why I'm here and asking questions.


All good advice.

I'd be planning to try and get someone like Julian Voelcker to overhaul the truck completely. His reputation seems to be spot on and I see he's a mod on here as well, so hopefully he'll be along shortly to offer advice.

LOL

I don't mind toys if they help with comfort at my age....

Been there and done that on the bike front, and spent more than enough time sleeping in tents in the desert on raids and getting woken by the bikes at 5:00 am....

But it's not just me now, and the wife requires a certain level of creature comforts these days. Especially if we're living in it for a couple of years.

Absolutely.

My mantra is to keep the mechanicals as close to factory spec as possible, and rebuild anything needing it using only original Toyota parts.

Toyota spends hundreds of millions developing and testing these vehicles to try and keep their reputation for reliability and ability to go anywhere.... It's very unlikely many aftermarket suppliers can equal that.

Thanks, good advice.

Can't emphasise enough how mechanically ungifted I am though, so while I'm certainly happy to try and learn, I'll still be trying to buy reliability as a primary objective.

I have seen looms on older cars start to degrade after 30 years, especially if a little water gets in from a dozed windscreen seal etc.

You are talking about keeping the vehicle for a good few years, even if you buy a 5 year old LC today, it will still be 25 years old in 20 years time. Its at that point that the electrical gremlins will REALLY show their head.

Mercedes, Toyota and a few more were knocking out simple diesel engined cars/trucks that could comfortably do 500k miles in the 1970s, think mercedes OM617 engine, Toyota 2H etc. Then they realised their mistake and needed to start making cars less reliable in order to sell more new ones and make a bigger profit. Cue endless fiddly little gadgets, nonsense and this is where we are today.

I would never buy a common rail diesel engined anything, on simple principle; any engine failure has to be catastrophic and leave you stranded and in need of a new engine.

Totally get that line of argument, and there's a lot going for it.

On the other hand however, my real worry is not 30 years from now, it's the next 5 years and 50,000 miles.

And I've spent enough of my life in stripped down rally cars, on bikes, camping in deserts, etc, to appreciate a bit more comfort and civilised performance than perhaps a 20 year old vehicle can give. Albeit, I'm not willing to trade reliability for comfort either....

It'll be an interesting journey this I feel, trying to find the right tool for the job.

Thanks for your input.

I drove a brand new petrol Dacia Duster for 2000kms last year in Romania, top spec, was no nicer than my 1991 80 series, just shinier. I'd take the 80 over it anyday.

A 100 is a little less bumpy, and looks more up to date inside and out, but it isn't that much nicer. It also feels flimsier, not badly built, just not as rugged.

Drive a few of each, see which YOU prefer and why, remember mileage is like age, its only a number on these.

Fair enough.

I currently drive a 4 year old Audi diesel with 120K miles on it, and recently had to drive a brand new vauxhall hire car for a week.... it was horrible.... cheap, tinny, underpowered.

But I also suspect that had a lot to do with what I'm used to rather than the merits of the vehicle itself.

I suppose I'm wondering if a lot of the 60 vs 80 vs 100 vs 200 series arguments online have as much to do with the owners opinions as the actual performance of the vehicles?

Well, you may not be too far from the mark there, this is why I suggest trying them all. Long time since I drove a 60, but they are very agricultural!

An 80 or a 100 will feel very different to your Audi, but both feel more like a very big car, rather than a small truck. Both are very comfortable on a long drive (400/500 miles), you just sit back and relax and they eat up the miles.

As for enthusiasts, well....... There a those that would recommend a defender
Now thats like driving a tractor with all the wheels the same size.

Go with the one YOU like the best to drive, they are all capable trucks, just the 200 has shown more weaknesses, particularly in Oz!

I've never driven a 60, but have driven old Nissan Patrols from the same era, so can imagine 'agricultural' is a good description.

Yes, I've driven a few 80 and 100 series, but it was a very long time ago and they were all petrol versions. Can't remember much about how they drive other than "big car" rather than "small truck" is about right.

Thanks, do you know what it is about 200 series that are 'known issues' in Oz?