Which one would you pick?

[TerryS]

Originally Posted by rmuller

Or save some money.. buy a Series III 109" with a crappy frame [$1-3k].. then buy an ECR coil-sprung replacement chassis for $3900.. then swap out some body parts with a defender.

Ryan, I can't disagree more.
For starters, have you personally inspected any 109 wagons for sale in the $1-3K range. They are totally wasted. 109 frames are so reasonable now that any trucks that are simply in need of a frame, have had them done. There is so much that quite literally turns to shit, on a 109, when they get to be that price, they are just parts trucks. Keep in mind, when the frame has deteriorated to the point it needs changing, so too have the doors (All 5 of them) sills, B pilars and the bulkhead too.
If one just fell in your lap, you're still MANY thousands from driving away. NAS 110 frames are under $3K, but EVERY piece of suspension, including both axles must be changed. Much of the steering componants also need to be replaced or modified.
I am intimately familiar with both series truck and Defenders, from the very skeleton to the finished truck. Unless you have actually done this kind of work, you can't begin to fathom the work, money and time required.

[rmuller]

You're right.. I really have no idea.. just from what I've seen and read online.. It was just a suggestion of something that he could start to research further to see if it is feasible. Probably less expensive/legal than trying to bring a crew cab over.

[01001010]

I think im going to stick to the 110 Wagon-to-Crew Cab idea until I or anyone else comes up with a more efficient plan of attack.

In the case that I dont find 110 Wagon, I guess I can fall back to the 90 Wagon. My main concern is having enough space to eveny distribute weight and avoid cramming everything onto a roof rack making me top-heavy and limiting the wheelin capability.

[rmuller]

Check out Michael Slades 145 crew cab build page: http://www.tawayama.com/gear/crewcab/crewcab.html .. he's actually selling the truck also.. I think he's asking 65k for it.

[01001010]

Yeah I've been eyein it out for a few days now. Sweet set-up indeed! I really like the overhead AC touch.

[TerryS]

JC, do yourself a huge favor and go buy the newest copy of Land Rover Owners International
They do a comparison on the 110 SW and 110CC. You may rethink the CC idea after you read the artical. I have to admit, they do look nicer than the garden variety 110SW, but wholey impractical unless your in agriculture or muddy pets. The CG difference between the two is hardly worth considering, and you can't get a roof rack worth a shit on top of a CC, not to mention getting at it. Visability sucks, worse yet when it rains (no wiper on the back window of a CC, and the windows on the canvas top distort everything except daylight. Keep in mind, the box on the back of a CC is smaller yet than the back of a SW, so don't plan oncarrying anything longer than about 4'
The rear passengers just love banging their heads on the rounded roof on the CC.
Lenny will tell you straight out, the one he has can not be registered. He's figuring on unloading it to some Texas rancher who don't need no stinking plates.

[01001010]

I emailed Lenny this morning and he replied with just that. He kept emphasizing how it cant be on the road.

You've presented some points I failed to look upon! I do drive with my rear view mirror so not having that will CERTAINLY make me feel uneasy, specially somewhere new to me.

Like I said before, I'm simply gonna have to show up at Lenny's place and inspect what he has and get a feel for the different configs.

[WineryRover]

Originally Posted by TerryS

Ryan, I can't disagree more.
For starters, have you personally inspected any 109 wagons for sale in the $1-3K range. They are totally wasted. 109 frames are so reasonable now that any trucks that are simply in need of a frame, have had them done. There is so much that quite literally turns to shit, on a 109, when they get to be that price, they are just parts trucks. Keep in mind, when the frame has deteriorated to the point it needs changing, so too have the doors (All 5 of them) sills, B pilars and the bulkhead too.
If one just fell in your lap, you're still MANY thousands from driving away. NAS 110 frames are under $3K, but EVERY piece of suspension, including both axles must be changed. Much of the steering componants also need to be replaced or modified.
I am intimately familiar with both series truck and Defenders, from the very skeleton to the finished truck. Unless you have actually done this kind of work, you can't begin to fathom the work, money and time required.

I am not familar with restoring a 109 specifically, but you can go a LONG way with an 88 series for what it's going to cost you in a defender. Perhaps one difference is on the west coast the price of a defender is as high as anywhere, but the rust on a series (if it spent its life in CA) is not as bad as the east coast. During the time I was looking for a series, there were some good base vehicles under 5k. Given most defenders are going for 20k+, that gives the do-it-yourselfer a fairly nice budget to make a very trail worthy truck.

[jozg44]

I was about to bring up the LROI article about Station Wagon v. Dual Cab, but TerryS beat me to it- he (and the article) are absolutley correct- unless you NEED the ability to carry 6 people in rather cramped conditions AND something muddy, a Station Wagon is a far more flexible, user-friendly bodystyle- just think of the load capacity of a 110SW with the rear seats folded forward (not much less than a 110 Hard Top) compared to the capacity of a D/C load bay (less than a 90, and they're really too small for serious load lugging).

A very popular conversion here in the UK (and one that Land Rover Special Vehicles will do for you if you ask nicely and furnish them with the appropriate £££) is to take a 110SW, take out the rearmost inward-facing seats and replace the rear side panels (the ones with the sliding windows) with cut-down 90 Hard Top side panels (with no windows) and then fit a panel or dog-guard behind the 2nd-row seats. The result is the same as a Double Cab (6 seats plus load bay), but it's all under a solid roof and you can put a full-length roof rack on. The AA used to have quite a large fleet of such Landys, and the electricity and water companies still use them as well.

For a DIY conversion you can either cut some 90 Hard Top sides to fit, or the much simpler method is to find some Series 88 Hard Top sides, which bolt straight on (I think).

Jack

[300bhp/ton]

Originally Posted by SCSL

A met a guy at MAR who did this w/ a D1 -- forgot his name. Rig looked outstanding

They really are very good, most go for a pick up shell.

Some friends had one a while back and used to use it to layout competition trials, they had to stop though, because the trials where too difficult and the 90's and 88 inchers couldn't get round,

Although for serious competition nowadays a Range Rover chopped to 80" is the mosy common with a Series 1 shell. This is the most nimble with the best turing radius and Series 1's are also narrower. But they are often a little more unstable due to such a short wheel base.

Sadly the 101" 90 isn't permitted by the ALRC, nor are Bobtail Range Rovers and Discovery's. These can also be very capable and will often go where a 90 won't, but they still suffer the large front overhang, which a 101" 90 wouldn't.

[01001010]

After more and more reading, It seems like the Disco is a good enough platform for an overland vehicle, like some of you have already mentioned. While a 110 is sweet, I'll simply have to pack efficiently and not overstock on spare parts. Looks like I'll ACTUALLY be making use of one of these board polls!

After the 90 is acquired, it'll be the DD and wheeler while the disco gets freshened up (engine rebuild & drivetrain upgrades)

[130CC]

That photo is of a 1300cc you can tell by the tub at the back how it is wider than the body the 110 tub is the same width as the body. (normaly)

[300bhp/ton]

Originally Posted by 130CC

That photo is of a 1300cc you can tell by the tub at the back how it is wider than the body the 110 tub is the same width as the body. (normaly)

That's because it has a Hi-cap (high capcity) pick up bed, you can have the same thing on a 110 if you want, but not a 90.

BTW a 127 looks very similar to a 130, as it has a 127 inch wheelbase compared to a 130 inch.

However, as the pic of the vehicle was showing a UK registration plate as 'D' reg, meaning which would mean 1986 or 1987. The 130 didn't exist back then. There is the possibility that the registration plate is not correct for the vehicle however.

[antichrist]

Well...I voted for the 130 because I already have a 90. In fact, my plan is to put a 130 or 145 frame under my 90. I have more use for a long range expedition type vehicle.

[WCURoverD90]

If you want some information on the 130 go over the www.d-90.com and talk to KellyMoe. Hes got a 130 if i remember right.