The wag in me says Everest? Haha... Although is there any reason the equivalent Nissan isn't on your radar? Options are good...
Main issue I have with the Landcrab in general is they are getting to be an older vehicle now, not only expensive to buy for what they are but expensive to stable feed and treat when things go wrong and tend to produce a lot of crap that you need to shovel which really appeases the greenies. Also with the expense of servicing some owners tended to take the Toyota rep and try extending service intervals which these did not like - but if that's the way you are keen to go the best option is pick the vehicle and buy on maintenance history, condition, price and known history rather than best wishes and long stories. Pay someone to inspect the vehicle before you buy it, and include the internal inspection around the turbo manifolds and systems so you know what you're looking at. In other words you want the cheapest you can get in the best condition you can get and hope like hell you don't have to do a full oil system rebuild or worse. Cruisers as you've noted seem to be marketed on age rather than condition, work and mileage - but one that's been used as a soccer bus vs one that's towed 3 tons of horseflesh for 500,000Km which would be the better pick?
Another comment I will make is that the Ranger is very much improved by a suspension upgrade, and internal comfort is fine in the front pews especially in the latest iterations. Rear seat with it's very upright back is an issue though. I don't really rate the landcruiser in it's factory form as vastly more comfortable than the ranger I have with aftermarket suspension in it, and vehicle for vehicle the cruiser is 20-35K more expensive. Cruiser is definitely noiser inside and a lot more hungry on diesel doing the same work for the ones I've experience of. Maintenance costs on a par with the Ranger, and for the slight increase in power they don't seem to be any quicker or better at towing.
Bookmarks