scrover said:This one time, at Sherman Peak, I almost had to take the easy cutoff to get around the SWB that was spinning more wheels than Pat Sajak
Once in a while, I come across a trail that has been hammered by SWB vehicles. The LWB has the advantage of getting in and out of the SWB holes without sitting in them with both axles.
SC
LOL!
Just cause you had some lame driver in front of you is no reflection on the vehicle!
Last edited:
GregH said:And now, for something completely different...
Steve just takes the easy cutoffs when offroad so he doesn't notice the difference...
hmmm Steve, who'd think, we need to watch you there
as far as turning goes, Greg, both suck big time - my kid's driving my 89, so I'm back to driving the yellow jeep. Guess what, with 80" sidewall-to-sidewall width, and 109" wheelbase, its turning diameter is full 4 feet shorter than SWB.
Ron, I may have the bladders out before the end of the week. If you ping on me, I'll let you know. It is kinda sad - I intended to keep the LWB completely stock; apparently, the bags are okay, it's the computer fucked up. Somehow, it decided to put the suspension in the "transport" mode, and lock itself out, so it cannot be overridden manually. Any of EAS gurus there?
Be aware that the 3.9/4.0L engines are the same...
The 3.9 was rebadged to 4.0 as a marketing ploy to combat Jeeps 4.0 litre engine as LR
didnt want to be seen having a lesser engine than Jeep!!!!!
This applies to Discos and RRs untill the introduction of the THOR engine as these are an evolution of the previous V8 engines, that give better economy and have Bosch electronics...
The 3.9 was rebadged to 4.0 as a marketing ploy to combat Jeeps 4.0 litre engine as LR
didnt want to be seen having a lesser engine than Jeep!!!!!
This applies to Discos and RRs untill the introduction of the THOR engine as these are an evolution of the previous V8 engines, that give better economy and have Bosch electronics...
3.9 vs 4.0 mostly refers to OBD-1 Lucas 13/14CU engine management vs OBD-2 GEMS. (the obvious mechanical difference is the provision for the distributor in 3.9/4.2 engines).
I don't believe Bosch engine management is significantly different and offers noticeable advantages over GEMS - other than the difference in the intake.
I don't believe Bosch engine management is significantly different and offers noticeable advantages over GEMS - other than the difference in the intake.
R
Random
Guest
Try using your eyes, and of course, do some research.Ron said:
There were 5 95 LWB's sold on ebay in the last 2 weeks Average price $8571
There were 3 94 LWB's sold on ebay in the last 2 weeks Average price $3562
There were no 93 LWB's sold on ebay in the last 2 weeks.
using www.autotrader.com
117 1995 Range Rovers found (mix of Classics and P38A's) (Can't be avoided with Autotraders crappy search tools)
Highest price: $18235
Average price: $9618
55 93's and 94''s Range Rovers found
Highest price: $15777
Average price: $6668
I'll leave it up to you to do the math.
Random said:
sheeeeet...
Bought the 89 SWB three and a half years ago for $6k...
Bought the 95 LWB a year and a half ago for $7k, and was beaten to near death by fellow rover owners for having paid too much... Turned out that at the same time, there were two '93 LWBs for sale, one for $3500 and another - for $2500. All of those - Southern California vehicles.
so much for the premium...
Ever considered eBay prices being victims of proxy bidding?
I paid 6K for my 95 LWB w/ 81,000 miles about two years ago. I thought I overpaid too. Found it on ebay as well..
Body was mint but it needed basically everything mechanically.
Now the body looks like hell, but at least its mechnically sound now
Body was mint but it needed basically everything mechanically.
Now the body looks like hell, but at least its mechnically sound now
R
Random
Guest
sven95lwb said:
If you paid that prices 2 years ago, for an unsound vehicle, I would have said you overpaid as well.
You may claim ebay is because of proxy bidding, but what about autotrader? How about the prices folks are asking on RangeRover.net? Again...do some research. Look around. For the same mileage/condition, the 95's go for $3K-$5K more than a 93-94. Again, IMHO, not worth the extra money. Nice, but not worth the extra $$$$.
Don't get me wrong, with judicious searching, you CAN find a deal on a 95 (or any vehicle for that matter). IF You can find a 95 for the same/similar price in the same similar condition/mileage, yeah, you'd be silly not to buy it!
R
Random
Guest
You obviously have no reading comprehension skills, or a reading attention span of 5-8 words. Stick to the books with all pictures and 3 to 5 word sentences. They're at your skill level.p m said:
Last edited:
Ron said:
Random said:
p m said:
sven95lwb said:
Random said:
Random said:
Random, you're fucking funny.
K
Kyle
Guest
Random , how bout you shut the fuck up with your bullshit ? Yes I know its 11 words but you have no idea who you are talking to. A smart man makes himself aware of his surroundings before he opens his mouth... What does that make you ?
R
Random
Guest
p m said:
I've given CURRENT Data I've named 3 sources with MULITPLE vehicles listed. You've come up with 2 vehicles sold 2+ years ago.
You make a persuasive argument for living in the past, but for folks living in the HERE and NOW you've proven you haven't done ANY research, and your data is 2 years old.
If you would like me to stop by Kinko's and do up some visial aids for you, let me know. Pictures might get through to you, numbers seem to be beyond your ability. Don't worry, you'll get to numbers someday.
R
Random
Guest
Kyle said:
Hi kyle, I wondered what that smell was. THis thread affects you HOW?
Try taking your own advice. Who called for you? Who asked you?
K
Kyle
Guest
Random (love the name, btw) - I've sold many vehicles by simply putting a sign in the window and parking them on the street, and bought both of my range rovers the same way. Posting vehicles for sale on BBSs, auto trader, and local newspaper rendered no results. How does it go with the concept of research?
K