Good morning! For the second installment in what I think is going to be a week of project cars, we’re going to look at a couple of four-wheel-drive SUVs. They’re both iconic, they’re both very capable off-road, and they’re both currently in pieces.
The result of yesterday’s engine swaps didn’t surprise me; the rough-and-ready Pontiac beat the pants off the even-rougher-and-who-knows-how-ready-it-really-is Datsun. Yeah, LS swaps are starting to get a bit common, but they’re also predictable, and that goes a long way. I get the feeling that the Datsun was a swap of opportunity: someone had a wrecked or rusted-out 300ZX, found a 510 shell for sale, and just kinda made it work. Or maybe didn’t. We don’t really know.
I’m firmly (but gingerly; I’m still healing) throwing my weight behind the Pontiac here. I love the styling of ’60s Pontiacs, and even if that crazy paint job is covering up more rust than we know of, it’s not a forever car anyway. For four grand, it’s something to have fun with for a while and look back on fondly when you move it along. And there’s a lot to be said for that.
Classic 4x4s are big right now. Everybody seems to want a Bronco or a Scout or a Land Cruiser, and apparently they’re willing to pay handsomely for them. Prices for originals are through the roof, and plenty of companies offer restomod versions of classic off-roaders all decked out with modern conveniences. But what if you want to join in on the fun, and can’t afford a six-figure price tag? Well, you can work in smaller scale, like I do, or you can find a basket case, like one of these, and do the work yourself.
1956 Land Rover Series I – $3,500
Engine/drivetrain: 2.0 liter OHV inline 4, four-speed manual, 4WD
Location: North Bend, WA
Odometer reading: 26,000 miles
Operational status: “Not currently running”
The World War II Army Jeep, preferred method of light transportation during the war by American troops, left quite an impression all over the world. As soon as peacetime production started getting back underway, it seemed like everyone wanted their own little utilitarian 4×4 like the Jeep. In Great Britain, where some supplies were severely rationed and others practically lying around for the taking, Rover engineers developed an ingenious four-wheel-drive utility vehicle designed around the constraints of the day, and created a legend that still endures: the Land Rover.
This is a Series I Land Rover, with a 2.0-liter engine that powers not only both front and rear axles through a transfer case, but also a power take-off shaft that runs out through a hole in the rear bumper. The PTO was originally intended to power farm equipment, but for many years at the All-British Field Meet in Portland, I saw one used for a tastier function: spinning an ice-cream maker. This one is a long way away from such crowd-pleasing antics; the seller says it “currently” does not run, and from the looks of it, that current period spans at least a couple Presidents. Luckily, the ecosystem around these things is huge, and anything you need to revive one is still available, if you know where to look.
It’s a sad sight inside: the whole interior has been gutted, the front floorboards are missing, and there’s no dash or seats at all. The seller says all those parts, and a bunch of extras, are included, and have been kept in “dry storage.” It appears, however, that in some cases, that just means “chucked in the back out of the rain.” But again, it’s all available. If you have a title and a serial number tag, I’m not sure there is such a thing as a lost cause Land Rover.
Land Rover bodies are aluminum because Britain had a surplus of it after the war, so there’s no worries about rust on the main body panels. But the frame, cowl/firewall, and other structural components are steel, and that’s where I fear for this one. It looks like it has been sitting in this patch of weeds for a very long time, and there’s a good chance that the chassis is about as rigid as a paper towel core. But when I say everything is available for these, I mean everything – though shipping won’t be cheap.
1985 Toyota Land Cruiser – $5,000
Engine/drivetrain: 4.0-liter OHV inline 6, five-speed manual, 4WD
Location: Bremerton, WA
Odometer reading: unknown
Operational status: Drivetrain is completely disassembled
If you want to fix up an old car, it makes sense to look for two rough examples and mix and match parts to make one good car. A buddy of mine in high school did it with Firebirds, another friend combined a pair of Scouts into one beautiful example, and we all know about those crazy guys who spent a month in Australia mashing two basket-case utes into one absolute hero. Some time ago, someone near Seattle bought two beige FJ60 Land Cruisers with the intent of making one good one. They got as far as dismantling one and mostly disassembling the other, then sold the whole mess on to the current owner, who has gotten exactly nowhere with it. Now, it’s all up for sale again.
The heart of the Land Cruiser is a nearly indestructible inline six, displacing 4.0 liters and driving all four wheels through a five-speed manual and a dual-range transfer case. This package deal comes with two of everything – the long block above is still intact, while a bare engine block sits on a stand next to it. Two transmissions, two transfer cases, and an extra set of axles from the other truck are also included. Basically, you should have no trouble putting together a running Land Cruiser drivetrain from this lot. You’ll just need some time and a good set of tools.
The interior is currently being used as storage for other parts, but everything is there, and then some. It looks like the rest of the parts are stored in the garage loft, and there are two complete sets of seats, along with doors, door cards, window glass, and everything else you can think of. You can just take your pick of the best bits, and sell the rest to recoup some costs. Again, all it takes is time.
I’m guessing this is the less-rusty of the two main body shells. It still has some rust, but repairs are underway, and it doesn’t look terrible. If you don’t care how shiny it is, you could probably just build it back up as-is, and just enjoy it. The spare parts are all the same paint color, so again, just pick the best pieces. Or go the whole nine yards, do the bodywork, and get it repainted, if that’s your thing.
I know some of you are going to scream bloody murder about the prices for these piles of parts, but do you have any idea what a nice example of either one goes for these days? These are cheap. Which project would you rather tackle?
Since this is fake internet dollars (that aren’t even mine), the Land Cruiser at least resembles a complete and functional vehicle, even if it would have to be entirely disassembled and then reassembled. The Toyota is like buying someone’s used jigsaw puzzle.
I don’t really want either one, though.
On today’s episode of “Has this milk gone bad?”
Neither
This is just to taunt the Land Rover nutters in the comments, innit…
But yes, as much as the Toyota project might be further along, and has the potential for legendary Toyota reliability, I have too many reservations about taking on somebody’s project at this level of uncertain disassembly/reassembly.
The Land Rover is very much what it is — a derelict in a field. The frame and steel firewall/floor/inner structure are all definitely rotted out. But they’re all available and replaceable. Everything on it is rebuildable and replaceable, and since it’s a Series I, there will be buyers for it to recoup costs even if I don’t finish it. There’s also a good deal less to have to replace/refinish/fix to get it running again. It’s basically a tractor with a utility body on top; it’s dirt-simple compared to something just shy of 30 years newer.
So, daft Land Rover fandom wins again.
The pile-o-Cruiser parts here is the easy answer. They aren’t complicated. Being already disassembled isn’t an issue.
Also, 4.2 not 4.0
I’d take the Land Rover because I hate myself.
That Land Rover is outstanding in its field.
Oh gosh. No. Just no.
My thoughts exactly. There aren’t enough tetanus shots in the world…
The 60 series is just more complete. That Land Rover has been sitting in a field for who-knows-how-long and the frame is probably completely rotted away. Assembling parts is much easier and cheaper than trying to source a new chassis, axles, brake lines, brakes, pedal linkages, transmission, and pretty much anything that’s not a fender or door for an 80 year old British vehicle.
If neither isn’t an option, the Toyota looks interesting I guess.
Gotta go with that Land Rover based on the last image, right rear corner. That is an image of Elvis Presley. Some people see Jesus in their French toast, I clearly see Elvis in what is left of the paint on this rig.
Kidding, I voted for the Land Cruiser. It at least has what looks like a solid structure to take some of the sting out of the bonkers price tag. You’ll take a massive bath on it, but you will eventually have an intact and running classic truck.
If you see Jesus in the rust holes under the Land Rover’s hood however you might be able to charge people $10 to pray in front of it.
Elvis is everywhere / Elvis is everything / Elvis is everybody / Elvis is still The King
Hard no to both.
I’m going to buck (and surprise myself) the trend and go Land Rover.
Both are monumental projects but if I’m going to take on a project of that scale I’d rather start it from disassembly. I have no idea where bolts, parts, and pieces go or came from on that Land Cruiser and while I’m sure I could find the resources to do so, any hurdle like that on a project seems to delay it inevitably.
I suspect that’s why it’s still a jigsaw puzzle for the next person as the current owners can’t find a key bolt to attach the next piece and so it sits. Sadly, I think that Land Cruiser is doomed to be a source of parts for an already running one. It’ll be scooped up and hoarded for its parts.
I would rather perform and document the disassembly myself, yes.
I fortunately live minutes away from one of the world’s best Land Cruiser shops and the best Land Cruiser museum – I could certainly find some help and figure it out.
I’m very glad these are on the other side of the country. My wife would not pleased if I dragged one home. I went with the Land Cruiser because of the amount of parts that come with it, but I would be willing to try my luck at putting either one back together.
I do realize the Land Rover is probably a body shell and not much else at this point.
There’s a reason these projects either get passed over, or move from owner to owner to owner: It takes a lot of money and time to turn these into a presentable, reliable driver. The asking price for these is not the concern. The concern is the number of dollars required to finish one of them.
Land Rover’s gone – and I really wanted to check that out. Series 1s are rare.
It is just an aluminium shell now, and aluminum DOES corrode.
Picked the Land Rover only because I think I cold come closer to getting my money back in selling off the parts. Plus if I had to own either it would be the Land Rover.
Something is clearly wrong with me because got excited looking at that Land Cruiser project. So want!
I passed on a similar project years ago with a 66 Mustang fastback, 289 Hi Po, 4 speed, new floor pans, rust repaired, and still regret it. Big Mustang family had 3 or 4 other Mustang projects, super nice folks, moving south and couldn’t move it all, said the parts were all there (and probably were.) Was renting and didn’t have a decent garage for such a project. Should have bought it anyway and squirreled it away somewhere until the time was right.
If you value your own time at $0/hr and do not count the cost of replacement parts one of these may be a deal. If you count replacement parts and pay yourself $20/hr for your labor, it would probably be cheaper to buy a running version of either one of these.
For many the rebuilding of an old car IS the joy. I’ve known people to sell a project car a year or two after completion because they get bored driving it and attending shows.
I know, also, reading the comments on here and that other site, it seems to many it was just about resale values and saving money.
A lot of factors are in play, I enjoy working on cars, but also know I have not the space, skill, or time for a frame-off. I’m better buying a nice runner and slowly fixing/upgrading over time. Part of me would like a shot at reviving the Land Cruiser – just can’t be too picky about paint and body.
Nope.
The Landrover’s firewall is only held together by the rust. With the fenderwells having long since turned to fertilizer.
If, however, you got the engine running: just add some duct tape, and bailer twine and you’d fit in with Michigan’s finest denizens barreling down I94.
“Barreling” is a stretch. The Series 1 shared a top speed of 45 or so with the old army Jeeps that they emulated. You have to get a later Series 2 if you want to get to 55 miles an hour downhill.
I voted. But not happy about it.
“Basically, you should have no trouble putting together a running Land Cruiser drivetrain from this lot.”
HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
Clearly, at least two owners have not been able to do it.
I’ll take the Brit. At least it’s mostly assembled so I can see how to put it back together.
That was 100% my logic. If it was so easy to put back together they would have done it already as a running driving one is worth significantly more.
You Tube is your friend. I took my Land Rover apart for a frame replacement and put it back together with the laptop on the tool bench.
I feel like using wrenches and sockets and stuff would’ve been WAY easier than putting it back together with a laptop…. so kudos to you!
Definitely neither, but I suppose ‘yota if push came to shove.
That land Rover is gone how long has that been sitting? The frame will just be a pole of dust. The land cruiser on the other hand yeah sure someone’s else’s project but it is pretty much a blank slate at this point to do what ever the hell you want with even though at that price wouldn’t be the smartest decision.
NO on both. I am too old to spend $3500 on something sinking into the ground with plants growing through it, AND too sane to spend $5000 on a giant 3D metal puzzle with an unknown number of missing pieces.