Petrol VS diesel?

[davros]

Ok...
So I know the advantages and disadvantages of a petrol vs diesel engine. But.
Recently returning from Finland, my brother in law had got a hold of a diesel Volkswagen very cheaply from Sweden. “You are not even allowed to drive a diesel car into places in Stockholm now”. So, many areas of Europe are going hybrid or petrol only. And to use a diesel is also taxed to the max. Anti-pollution devices are also at ‘max technology’ with ad-blue etc. So diesel is dying in the big markets.
For us, surely this means that the market for diesel cars will soon be in decline here through lack of availability, leaving us with only outdated diesel tech (as no one will be making ‘new’ diesel engines for cars/4x4)s.
At what point do you think it will be impossible or unwise to buy a diesel vehicle? We already see some Toyos in ‘petrol only’...
Our local Caltex owner looked ****ed when I asked him where an e-car could charge in town! In Finland, you plug in at the car park and I think use an app to pay whilst you go shopping!
Crazy to think that in our lifetime, we may see not only no diesel, but no service stations!

[Slunnie]

Anti-pollution devices are definately not at "Max Technology". There are still significant gains they have technology for with reducing diesel pollution that are not yet on cars.

Bosch details its diesel emissions technology - ETI Magazine (https://www.enginetechnologyinternational.com/features/bosch-rde-tech.html)

[scarry]

Finland is a completely different market to Australia,no comparison at all.

Diesel will be here for many years to come,heavy vehicles and machinery will need it even if usage in smallish vehicles drops off.

And as Slunnie has said,new diesel technology is still appearing.

[DiscoMick]

I think Finland has special tax arrangements to favour EVs.

[PhilipA]

AFAIK diesel light commercials and cars are banned in Saudi Arabia, which is Toyota's biggest market for Land Cruiser and Hilux. They have been banned forever ,at least back as far as 1980.

Yet diesel versions are still sold in Australia.

There are many many world markets where diesels are not and will not be banned.

And I must say that I doubt that diesels will end up banned in Europe. I read a while ago that VW predict that EVs will be between 5-10% of car sales by AFAIR 2025.
Regards PhilipA

[davros]

Anti-pollution devices are definately not at "Max Technology". There are still significant gains they have technology for with reducing diesel pollution that are not yet on cars.

Bosch details its diesel emissions technology - ETI Magazine (https://www.enginetechnologyinternational.com/features/bosch-rde-tech.html)

Well, I agree - I meant max ‘economic’ tech - as in, will anyone invest in more diesel tech?

[goingbush]

I'll certainly never buy another diesel engined vehicle, and if the F1C in my Iveco blows up I'll be replacing it with a Petrol Engine , Either a 3.8L Commodore or a LS (Auto) . The amount of pollution crap on a Diesel now has taken the shine off them and they are now less reliable than petrol engines. Petrol engines have developed to a state where there is minimal bolted on pollution crap as their ECU looks after the emissions. (well until there PPF is mandated here) .

[davros]

It’s interesting times - whether the remaining diesel markets like ours will be enough to support their development? Or whether they will fade out, with limited parts and service available.
I’d go electric in a heartbeat if it could do 1000km and recharge in 30mins!
The comment RE tax on diesels is right. In fact in most of Scandinavia the tax on diesels is high. I think Norway? is aiming for all hybrids and EV ASAP.

[Eevo]

AFAIK diesel light commercials and cars are banned in Saudi Arabia,

whats the reason behind this?

[Slunnie]

Well, I agree - I meant max ‘economic’ tech - as in, will anyone invest in more diesel tech?

I do think so. Engine component manufacturers like Bosch etc will still be developing this technology for the heavy diesel industry which isn't going anywhere at this stage.

Diesel engine tech has generally been a long way ahead of Petrol though.

[davros]

I do think so. Engine component manufacturers like Bosch etc will still be developing this technology for the heavy diesel industry which isn't going anywhere at this stage.

Diesel engine tech has generally been a long way ahead of Petrol though.

And I guess the military will still use diesel for at least the foreseeable future. A few electric experiments around but none that would stand up to the punishment of conflict like a diesel. Diesel is such a cool fuel in so many ways, compared to explosive fuels like petrol.

[DiscoMick]

Diesels can meet pollution laws, it was just that VW cheated to try to get better performance by turning off the pollution gear except during exhaust testing.
If diesels get a decent highway run regularly the DPFs and EGRs should operate as designed. AdBlue just requires topping up.
I really don't see why this is so hard.

[Eevo]

I really don't see why this is so hard.
its more about lack of reliability of these pollution systems

[DoubleChevron]

What is this pollution .... I can't see any pollution ..... At least not until the smoke clears and I can see the sun again after starting my old diesel tractor when its 6 degrees outside [bighmmm]

I can't see petrol making a difference while diesel fuel economy and torque characteristics can't be matched by anything (other than electric of course. If they released a Hi-undi I30 priced vehicle that could do a couple of hundred clicks a day .... and recharge overnight ..... society will change ... simply because 90% of people only do short trips each day).

[DiscoMick]

The harmful emissions are invisible - you can't see them. Smoke is not the problem.

[DiscoMick]

What is this pollution .... I can't see any pollution ..... At least not until the smoke clears and I can see the sun again after starting my old diesel tractor when its 6 degrees outside [bighmmm]

I can't see petrol making a difference while diesel fuel economy and torque characteristics can't be matched by anything (other than electric of course. If they released a Hi-undi I30 priced vehicle that could do a couple of hundred clicks a day .... and recharge overnight ..... society will change ... simply because 90% of people only do short trips each day).Hyundai has already released those vehicles, the Ioniq and Kona.

[DoubleChevron]

Hyundai has already released those vehicles, the Ioniq and Kona.

But for the same cost as an I30 ...................................... ? Cost is all that matters unless you are wealthy enough to care about image :) .... And if your that wealthy you would simply buy a Tesla ( I would!).

[Tombie]

The harmful emissions are invisible - you can't see them. Smoke is not the problem.

Yes, like Benzene that wonderful carcinogen from Petrol... [bigsmile]

[Slunnie]

Yes, like Benzene that wonderful carcinogen from Petrol... [bigsmile]

Yep, actually it is the exhaust fumes from unleaded fuel that my University chemistry lecturer really was worried about. Way way back, it was unleaded fuels rather than racing fuels that people handled very very carefully also.

[Homestar]

But for the same cost as an I30 ...................................... ? Cost is all that matters unless you are wealthy enough to care about image :) .... And if your that wealthy you would simply buy a Tesla ( I would!).

Agreed. Until EV's are cheaper than ICE vehicles it's all just a pipe dream. The masses can't afford to buy an EV, pure and simple. Until they can, they'll be no improvement in vehicle pollution levels. It is decades away from changing in this County.

[Homestar]

Yes, like Benzene that wonderful carcinogen from Petrol... [bigsmile]

Yep, I sometimes wonder how many people are dying because of this and other similar things. Not sure if any research is being done but you have to wonder why cancer rates are skyrocketing... [emoji853]

[DiscoMick]

Agreed. Until EV's are cheaper than ICE vehicles it's all just a pipe dream. The masses can't afford to buy an EV, pure and simple. Until they can, they'll be no improvement in vehicle pollution levels. It is decades away from changing in this County.$50k is not an excessive price for an EV.

[AK83]

$50k is not an excessive price for an EV.

Until you realise that the equivalent type and specced vehicle in ICE form is about 20K.
Then comes the cost of operation over the long haul .. ie. battery replacement cost!

[Homestar]

$50k is not an excessive price for an EV.

Agree with AK83 - it’s a huge outlay for a family of they can get an equivalent for under half the price. I’ve never spent anything close to $50K on a vehicle in my life - if you don’t think that’s expensive your bank balance must look very different from what mine ever has.

Ask any family who’s running a budget that doesn’t include being able to save any money if they’d pay twice the price for a car than they need to.

It’s wishful thinking to say they aren’t expensive when you actually look at how the majority live and what they can afford. EV’s are a luxury item, plain and simple, not a replacement for ICE vehicle in this country at this time - not by a long shot.

[DiscoMick]

The Hyundai Ioniq, which comes in several versions, is only $4k more for the EV than the hybrid and about $10k more than the base model.
2019 Hyundai Ioniq pricing and specs | CarAdvice (https://www.caradvice.com.au/706363/2019-hyundai-ioniq-pricing-specs/)
It's not hard to spend $50k on a new vehicle nowadays.

[V8Ian]

$50k is not an excessive price for an EV.
Tell that to the unemployed, under-employed and those trying to support a family while earning $25 an hour, or less. You can't be that far out of touch, Mike.
Do you think that those who drive VT Commodores with bald tyres could afford to chuck $50,000 at any type of car?

[DiscoMick]

Yep, I sometimes wonder how many people are dying because of this and other similar things. Not sure if any research is being done but you have to wonder why cancer rates are skyrocketing... [emoji853]Said to have been 1715 deaths in Australia in 2015.
NSW road toll should include deaths from poisonous vehicle emissions: report (https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/road-death-toll-should-include-victims-of-vehicle-emissions-report-20190628-p522a8.html)

That's more than the 1137 road deaths in 2018.
Safety Statistics (https://www.bitre.gov.au/statistics/safety/)

So, vehicle emissions kill more Australians than road crashes.
So, why aren't the authorities concentrating on vehicle emissions if they want to make our roads safer?

[DiscoMick]

Tell that to the unemployed, under-employed and those trying to support a family while earning $25 an hour, or less. You can't be that far out of touch, Mike.
Do you think that those who drive VT Commodores with bald tyres could afford to chuck $50,000 at any type of car?Fact remains, $50k is about middle of the pack for new vehicles today.
Doesn't mean I'm buying one for that price, it's just a fact of life.

[Vern]

I can't see petrol making a difference while diesel fuel economy and torque characteristics can't be matched.

Modern petrols are quite economical. For example, my diesel landy uses approx 2L/100 less than my petrol 4x4, it also weighs approx 500kg less, and has approx 200kw less power too. The petrol 4by stacks up pretty darn good in my opinion.

[AK83]

The Hyundai Ioniq, which comes in several versions, is only $4k more for the EV than the hybrid and about $10k more than the base model.
2019 Hyundai Ioniq pricing and specs | CarAdvice (https://www.caradvice.com.au/706363/2019-hyundai-ioniq-pricing-specs/)
It's not hard to spend $50k on a new vehicle nowadays.

about 50K for the primary family vehicle seems to be about the norm.
The Ioniq is basically an i30(same size .. dunno about the actual genetics of the ioniq) .. so Ioniq to i30 is a reasonable comparison.

Weight is where the EV version falls a little, in that it's kerb weight is ~100kg's heavier than the ICE i30's(near on 200kg compared to the base model i30's).
That includes the CRD(and DCT 7speeders too).
So on average the weight carrying ability of the Ioniq is hampered by near on 100kg compared to an i30.
Those CRDs use very little fuel, so in terms of overall cost, over the lifetime of the car, will be very low if you do high mileage.

Compare the fuel consumption of the hybrid Ioniq to the CRD i30 .. it makes no sense(basically the same).
What I don't get(and cost is what it's primarily about) .. why don't they use a small CRD hybrid, instead of a petrol motor for them?

cheapo(non base) model CRD is in the 28-29K price range, and I think goes up to about 39K for the top spec diesel.
10K buys a lot of diesel and services.
And in terms of quoted CO2 outputs, the hybrids aren't all that lower than the CRD models .... 79-82 g/klm(hybrid) vs 119-124 g/klm(CRD) ... petrol model i30's are in the 170g/km range by comparison.
So the hybrids really make less sense compared to the CRD models in terms of overall ... everything ... other than the caché of announcing to your friends that you own a hybrid! [bighmmm]

As has been reiterated over and over .. in this country EVs make very little economic sense, and it's not the fault of the design types .. you expect that new gen tech is going to cost.
The fault lies squarely with the Govt!(and this is not political, just the way it is).
Until the Govt do rebates for EV uptake, like many countries in Europe do, EVs will lag behind in terms of potential sales growth.
If the price difference between EV and ICE was more along the lines of a petrol-diesel price difference .. say $3K-$5K, as has been common for generations .. EVs sales would probably skyrocket, especially if it's a smaller 'second' family runabout and not required to do the family holiday/long distance runs.

[DoubleChevron]

Modern petrols are quite economical. For example, my diesel landy uses approx 2L/100 less than my petrol 4x4, it also weighs approx 500kg less, and has approx 200kw less power too. The petrol 4by stacks up pretty darn good in my opinion.

Like the new patrol .... that apparently gets about 35L/100 towing ( v8 petrol ) rather than the ~ 15L/100 most diesels return towing .... If petrols were even remotely .... anywhere in this world close to the economy of a diesel..... diesel would be dead and gone in passenger cars and 4wds.

seeya,
Shane l.

[AK83]

Like the new patrol .... that apparently gets about 35L/100 towing ( v8 petrol ) rather than the ~ 15L/100 most diesels return towing .... If petrols were even remotely .... anywhere in this world close to the economy of a diesel..... diesel would be dead and gone in passenger cars and 4wds.

seeya,
Shane l.

Funny you mention that Shane.
Brother's first 4WD was a GU Patrol 4.5l .. against my recommendation.
After a year of getting roughly 30l/100, and more like 35l/100 when loaded for a camp trip .. and also it's overheating issues .. he sold it and later bought his D2 Td5.
D2 has cost him a bit(in repairs) due to negligent and not so professional service and repairs by previous owners, but I reckon he's saved about that amount just in fuel costs(in updating to the D2)

[DoubleChevron]

Funny you mention that Shane.
Brother's first 4WD was a GU Patrol 4.5l .. against my recommendation.
After a year of getting roughly 30l/100, and more like 35l/100 when loaded for a camp trip .. and also it's overheating issues .. he sold it and later bought his D2 Td5.
D2 has cost him a bit(in repairs) due to negligent and not so professional service and repairs by previous owners, but I reckon he's saved about that amount just in fuel costs(in updating to the D2)

Oh, don't get me wrong. I'm not criticising the patrol. I'm betting its an absolutely phenomenal vehicle .... I was just trying to say why I think diesels are still very prevalent and will continue to be for a very long time yet! At least in Australia and America where we drive larger vehicles and a lot of us like towing stupidly "big things" :D

seeya,
Shane L.

[Homestar]

I’ll stick with my $700 Camry - that falls within my budget, I’ll never spend $50K on a car and a lot of people I know wouldn’t and couldn’t even if they wanted to.

Do you really believe that every family in the country can afford that? Seriously...

[DoubleChevron]

I’ll stick with my $700 Camry - that falls within my budget, I’ll never spend $50K on a car and a lot of people I know wouldn’t and couldn’t even if they wanted to.

Do you really believe that every family in the country can afford that? Seriously...

well I bought a poogoe 407 for my wife 7 years ago .... $16K ... the most I have ever in my entire life spent on a car. Its actually been good to have a modern car I don't need to work on all the time. Its now basically worthless. My ****boxes.... well the ****box range rover I bought a few years back now seems to be worth about 3 times the amount I paid for it. the old Citroen D's seem to be worth about 15 times what I paid for them a decade ago ... my Citroen CX turbo ..... well ... who knows, its either worth nothing ..... (if no-one is looking to buy one) or something if two people in Australia are looking to buy one at this time.

I just spotted a lovely old 2.5l v8 diamler jump up on facebook for $10k .... it looks bloody lovely in the photos .... if I was forced to buy a "new" car I'd be heading over there to look at it now :roflmao: It would be the 2nd most expensive car I've ever purchased ... but they sure don't make anything like that anymore.

$50K on a new car? Like you there's not a hope in hell.... I've a young family to raise and a house to pay off on a single income. I can't think of anything stupider than spending huge amounts of money leasing a new car ... that is a massively depreciating asset.... Not asset... the word I'm looking for is "liability".

I'm certainly glad people out there do buy all these new cars though .................... Otherwise in 30years time there would be nothing around for me to drive [bigrolf] [bighmmm]

seeya,
Shane L.

[DiscoMick]

I’ll stick with my $700 Camry - that falls within my budget, I’ll never spend $50K on a car and a lot of people I know wouldn’t and couldn’t even if they wanted to.

Do you really believe that every family in the country can afford that? Seriously...I didn't say that, so why are you even asking?
Just look at sales of new vehicles and their prices. Plenty of $50k vehicles around. You priced a Hilux lately?

[Homestar]

Agreed there are plenty of $50K vehicles around, my point was there won’t be an uptake of EV’s when the cheapest is $50K - it just won’t happen. As for the Hilux, I wouldn’t buy one of those either, nor any of its competitors when I could buy an old banger for around $10K that would keep me out of trouble for years, what second hand EV options are there for those that can’t - or simply won’t (like me) buy a new vehicle?

[DiscoMick]

Me either, but 1.1 million new vehicles were sold in Australia last year, and plenty cost more than $50k.
It's interesting to stand in any car park and total up the millions of dollars in vehicles there.

[scarry]

Like the new patrol .... that apparently gets about 35L/100 towing ( v8 petrol ) rather than the ~ 15L/100 most diesels return towing .... If petrols were even remotely .... anywhere in this world close to the economy of a diesel..... diesel would be dead and gone in passenger cars and 4wds.

seeya,
Shane l.

Have a look on some of the Tojo forums,and see what sort of economy the later diesel LC's get towing large 3T plus vans.
If they get less than 21l/100k,they are doing well
Around town not towing they are generally getting 14's.

Other vehicles such as the D4 may use slightly less,but not much less.Mine is lucky to get less than 12.5 to 13.5l/100 around town.
On a run loaded,around 10.5 to 11.5,empty around 9.5L/100.Towing around 2.6T,which is the heaviest van i have towed,around 15 to 18l/100 depending on the wind.

Sure the very latest Patrol with the updated enginel will use slightly more,as an example,but its the issues with the diesels that off set the slightly worse economy.
Injectors,DPF's,EGRs,Turbos,etc,etc.
And the mods that are fitted,catch cans,larger fuel filters,etc,etc.

[scarry]

Me either, but 1.1 million new vehicles were sold in Australia last year, and plenty cost more than $50k.
It's interesting to stand in any car park and total up the millions of dollars in vehicles there.

It would be interesting to find out how many have been bought privately with borrowed money.

Quite a few would also be leased company cars.


I would never borrow for a vehicle,but many do.
My theory,which is probably old school,is if we don't have the cash for it,we won't be getting it.

[DiscoMick]

It's possible to spend $38k on a Mazda 3, so it's surprising what some common vehicles cost.

[Tombie]

I work on the theory I won’t spend more than a years salary on a vehicle.

The only EV that currently can meet our use is a Tesla, and it sits right on that limit.

And I won’t be grabbing one anytime soon.

[Homestar]

I must be a tight arse then as I wouldn't spend more than about a quarter of a years wage on a vehicle and that would be a stretch - but I do have a company vehicle so that's probably a big influence on that - I have no need for anything new and flash - all my older cars suit my weekend needs well no matter what I want to do. If I ever ended up in a job where I needed my own transport I'd happily drive my $700 Camry to and from work every day - it's quiet and comfortable.

[DiscoMick]

Is it better to finance or pay cash? Vehicles are terrible investments which rapidly depreciate.
Let's say someone has $50,000 cash and wants to buy a $50,000 Hilux or whatever.
If they pay $50,000 cash then depreciation means the vehicle might only be worth say $20,000 in five years, so they have lost about $30,000.
If they finance $50,000 at say 10% over five years, then the interest cost is about $13,000 and they pay about $63,000.
So they would actually be about $17,000 better off to finance the vehicle and keep their savings in the bank or use it for appreciating assets. That assumes they can afford repayments of $245 a week, of course.
So paying cash is not always the best choice.

[DoubleChevron]

Have a look on some of the Tojo forums,and see what sort of economy the later diesel LC's get towing large 3T plus vans.
If they get less than 21l/100k,they are doing well
Around town not towing they are generally getting 14's.

Other vehicles such as the D4 may use slightly less,but not much less.Mine is lucky to get less than 12.5 to 13.5l/100 around town.
On a run loaded,around 10.5 to 11.5,empty around 9.5L/100.Towing around 2.6T,which is the heaviest van i have towed,around 15 to 18l/100 depending on the wind.

Sure the very latest Patrol with the updated enginel will use slightly more,as an example,but its the issues with the diesels that off set the slightly worse economy.
Injectors,DPF's,EGRs,Turbos,etc,etc.
And the mods that are fitted,catch cans,larger fuel filters,etc,etc.

My fathers purchased some new twin cab thing... navara?? I dunno they all look equally as tediously boring to me (though I could be swayed by a defender.... that should be hideous enough for me to own). He's averaging about 15L/100 towing his 24' twin axle aussie built (so heavy) bailey caravan. His territory diesel AWD was returning about hte same towing.

seeya
Shane L.

[Homestar]

My Hilux does about the same towing my old twin axle Viscount (1,600Kg) at 90KPH.

[Tombie]

Is it better to finance or pay cash? Vehicles are terrible investments which rapidly depreciate.
Let's say someone has $50,000 cash and wants to buy a $50,000 Hilux or whatever.
If they pay $50,000 cash then depreciation means the vehicle might only be worth say $20,000 in five years, so they have lost about $30,000.
If they finance $50,000 at say 10% over five years, then the interest cost is about $13,000 and they pay about $63,000.
So they would actually be about $17,000 better off to finance the vehicle and keep their savings in the bank or use it for appreciating assets. That assumes they can afford repayments of $245 a week, of course.
So paying cash is not always the best choice.

And then there’s Leasing, I get a nice tax break doing that!

[scarry]

Is it better to finance or pay cash? Vehicles are terrible investments which rapidly depreciate.
Let's say someone has $50,000 cash and wants to buy a $50,000 Hilux or whatever.
If they pay $50,000 cash then depreciation means the vehicle might only be worth say $20,000 in five years, so they have lost about $30,000.
If they finance $50,000 at say 10% over five years, then the interest cost is about $13,000 and they pay about $63,000.
So they would actually be about $17,000 better off to finance the vehicle and keep their savings in the bank or use it for appreciating assets. That assumes they can afford repayments of $245 a week, of course.
So paying cash is not always the best choice.

Lots of variables here,everyone is different.

For a start,many wouldn't have the $50K in the bank to start with.

Some can write the interest off,as with leasing as Tombie has said,although you need to be able to afford pay the money,before you get it back.Depending how it is set up,there is also a balloon payment at the end.

[PhilipA]

The factor seemingly forgotten is that a 50K ICE car is quite a big thing like say a Mazda 6 , Subaru Outback/liberty or one of the many SUVs, whereas an Ioniq is a tiny thing.
So lets compare apples with apples.
The great unwashed like we pensioners could no more afford a 50K car than fly. We cannot borrow much we cannot lease.
I just bought our runabout car for the next 10 years or until my wife or I cannot drive anymore due to our 2006 Jazz being written off with hail damage.

It's an 11 month old Honda Jazz Vti manual with 12KK and it cost $12950. It gets about 5Lper100 on the highway and about 6.2 combined
so has pretty low emissions. Wonderful car that sounds like a mini Ferrari inside anyway, and has all the mod cons .

Regards PhilipA
For long range work and towing I have my trusty? 2002 D2 . probably horrendous emissions but seeing it rarely goes into town and idles, probably not too many dead that I have seen anyway. BTW the stats on deaths from micro emissions are highly debatable and I understand based on forcing rats to breathe many times the concentration of Nox and whatever . Some died! Nox emission control is mainly because of SMOG as Nox causes smog, not breathability problems.

[DiscoMick]

The factor seemingly forgotten is that a 50K ICE car is quite a big thing like say a Mazda 6 , Subaru Outback/liberty or one of the many SUVs, whereas an Ioniq is a tiny thing.
So lets compare apples with apples.
The great unwashed like we pensioners could no more afford a 50K car than fly. We cannot borrow much we cannot lease.
I just bought our runabout car for the next 10 years or until my wife or I cannot drive anymore due to our 2006 Jazz being written off with hail damage.

It's an 11 month old Honda Jazz Vti manual with 12KK and it cost $12950. It gets about 5Lper100 on the highway and about 6.2 combined
so has pretty low emissions. Wonderful car that sounds like a mini Ferrari inside anyway, and has all the mod cons .

Regards PhilipA
For long range work and towing I have my trusty? 2002 D2 . probably horrendous emissions but seeing it rarely goes into town and idles, probably not too many dead that I have seen anyway. BTW the stats on deaths from micro emissions are highly debatable and I understand based on forcing rats to breathe many times the concentration of Nox and whatever . Some died! Nox emission control is mainly because of SMOG as Nox causes smog, not breathability problems.
We are similar. A great Mazda 2 for running around and the Defender for touring and towing.
A Hyundai Kona EV is a possible compromise for similar money, but it probably couldn't tow our camper comfortably.

[Homestar]

We are similar. A great Mazda 2 for running around and the Defender for touring and towing.
A Hyundai Kona EV is a possible compromise for similar money, but it probably couldn't tow our camper comfortably.

Hyundai's official line is 'Towing with the Kona EV is not recommended' - probably due to range issues and customers complaining when they stop after 100KM.... Max towing capacity of the ICE version is 1,300Kg.

Edit - there's some talk around that the regen braking has issues when being 'pushed' by the extra weight of a trailer but that sounds like a bit of BS to me.

[Vern]

Like the new patrol .... that apparently gets about 35L/100 towing ( v8 petrol ) rather than the ~ 15L/100 most diesels return towing .... If petrols were even remotely .... anywhere in this world close to the economy of a diesel..... diesel would be dead and gone in passenger cars and 4wds.

seeya,
Shane l.The vehicle I was comparing my diesel landy with is the new patrol, my petrol 4wd, which when towing say a 3t van, is compatible if not better fuel wise than a diesel 200 series, do some research and you will be surprised.

[101RRS]

For sure, there is a move away from diesel to petrol/ev particularly in Europe - but while large cargo carriers like semis and B doubles stay with diesel in places like Australia and China, then diesel will still remain the main fuel available overall.

[DoubleChevron]

The vehicle I was comparing my diesel landy with is the new patrol, my petrol 4wd, which when towing say a 3t van, is compatible if not better fuel wise than a diesel 200 series, do some research and you will be surprised.

What sort of fuel economy are we talking. The patrol owner I was chatting to a while back said he was returning ~35L/100 towing his big caravan (the patrol being a V8 petrol).

seeya,
Shane L.

[Vern]

What sort of fuel economy are we talking. The patrol owner I was chatting to a while back said he was returning ~35L/100 towing his big caravan (the patrol being a V8 petrol).

seeya,
Shane L.20-25l tops, that's towing 3.5t van, series 3 and 4 y62 patrol which has vvet. Mine currently returns 13L average with all general driving, 11L on the highway, 15L towing the camper with tinny on top, none of that sitting 10kph below the limit either like the 200 guys do[emoji6]

[DoubleChevron]

20-25l tops, that's towing 3.5t van, series 3 and 4 y62 patrol which has vvet. Mine currently returns 13L average with all general driving, 11L on the highway, 15L towing the camper with tinny on top, none of that sitting 10kph below the limit either like the 200 guys do[emoji6]

20-25 is a big range. I'm guessing 25L/100.... which is about right I would imagine for any modern petrol engine. The modern diesels seem to be returning ~ 15L/100 under similar conditions (unless you compare to the most inefficient deisels ... eg: the V8 cruiser diesel).

I'm not bagging the petrol, I'd rather a V8 petrol anyday myself. But while they use 30->50% more fuel than a diesel they will still be around.

I'm always amused us petrol owners always claim the best possible fuel economy. Its like the Range Rover Classic owners claiming they can get 14-16L/100 out of there classics. This maybe possible on a gentle highway run... not towing. I have NEVER done this sort of driving .... ever ... in the 5years I've probably been running one. its either lots of cold starts around town, offroad work .... or towing big chunky things along they highway. I'm guessing I average 30L/100 around town and much more towing on the highway. A diesel doing the same work would be half of that ( the cold starts don't effect diesels economy much, and when they are working hard, they don't drink like a drunk :D ).

If you do a lot of highway cruising not towing without the cold starts. The modern petrol motors can return great fuel economy ... This certainly doesn't match my use though :(

[scarry]

Not many,if any modern diesels will do 15l/100km pulling 3.5T, on the speed limit.

Thats definitely a pipe dream.

[Homestar]

Not many,if any modern diesels will do 15l/100km pulling 3.5T, on the speed limit.

Thats definitely a pipe dream.

Yep, I have towed 3.0 tonnes once with the Hilux - one of our larger trailer mounted gensets. At 80kph (max allowed by work for these loads) I glanced once or twice at the fuel usage - around 22 IIRC. [emoji16]. At 100 if you were silly enough it would be quite a bit more.

[DiscoMick]

Our Defender did 11.5 towing about 2 tonnes Sydney-Brisbane recently.

Sent from my A1601 using AULRO mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=78345)

[gavinwibrow]

D4 2.7 with economy remap.
At 80 kmph towing a high 3.5T brick on the "flat" - about 17-18 L/100
At 100 kmph - scary on ES roads - about 23L/100 km - will have more definitive results as we continue our trip.

[Vern]

20-25 is a big range. I'm guessing 25L/100.... which is about right I would imagine for any modern petrol engine. The modern diesels seem to be returning ~ 15L/100 under similar conditions (unless you compare to the most inefficient deisels ... eg: the V8 cruiser diesel).

I'm not bagging the petrol, I'd rather a V8 petrol anyday myself. But while they use 30->50% more fuel than a diesel they will still be around.

I'm always amused us petrol owners always claim the best possible fuel economy. Its like the Range Rover Classic owners claiming they can get 14-16L/100 out of there classics. This maybe possible on a gentle highway run... not towing. I have NEVER done this sort of driving .... ever ... in the 5years I've probably been running one. its either lots of cold starts around town, offroad work .... or towing big chunky things along they highway. I'm guessing I average 30L/100 around town and much more towing on the highway. A diesel doing the same work would be half of that ( the cold starts don't effect diesels economy much, and when they are working hard, they don't drink like a drunk :D ).

If you do a lot of highway cruising not towing without the cold starts. The modern petrol motors can return great fuel economy ... This certainly doesn't match my use though :(Majority are 21-23, I was just rounding down and up[emoji6]. Best I could get from our diesel amarok was 14L towing the same camper, but without the boat, and wouldn't sit on the speed limit anywhere as easy as the patrol does.

[jonesfam]

I don't care.
I like driving diesels & will continue to do so until I drop off this mortal coil!
Jonesfam

[DoubleChevron]

Not many,if any modern diesels will do 15l/100km pulling 3.5T, on the speed limit.

Thats definitely a pipe dream.

Who on earth would be insane enough to tow at the speed limit. I travel at 80->90km/h depend on prevailing conditions. Travelling at 90km/h would be a very rare event. the only people I ever see towing at the speed limit are the grey nomads with there jacked up ridiculous 3.5+ton monstrosities .... I'd say to the boss women "Here comes another bloody nomad". I lift off the accellerator and start applying the caravan brakes at the controller and move over as far as I can ................ And they come bloody hurtling past. Almost always without fail .... they get about level with my drivers door and you can see there caravan starting to walk ......... by the time they are past me there all over the bloody road .... barley in control of the bastard (how most of them don't die I have no idea). Sometime they panic and slam the brakes on it front of you ..... and next thing your up there arse doing 80km.h when previously you were travelling at 85->90km/h. don't worry though, within 5minutes they have forgotten they nearly died ... and there off again at 100km/h to try and take out the next person. We struck this again and again. I honestly don't think they understood how close to the absolute outside of there safety envelope they were travelling.

I'm never amazed when I see another news story where they are sweeping up the remains of another 'van from the side of the road.

seeya,
Shane l.

[DoubleChevron]

I don't care.
I like driving diesels & will continue to do so until I drop off this mortal coil!
Jonesfam

I prefer big petrol ... or turbo petrol motors ..... WWWWWWWWWhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee ...... it sucks having to feed them though :(

[Tombie]

Shane, I tow at the speed limit.
My combination is perfectly stable well above posted speeds in most conditions.

I reduce speed only if road surface or atmospheric conditions are impacting stability.

A well balanced combination will safely tow at 100km/h

If it can’t be, it isn’t a good combination and shouldn’t be running on the road.

[goingbush]

Who on earth would be insane enough to tow at the speed limit. I travel at 80->90km/h depend on prevailing conditions. Travelling at 90km/h would be a very rare event. the only people I ever see towing at the speed limit are the grey nomads with there jacked up ridiculous 3.5+ton monstrosities .... I'd say to the boss women "Here comes another bloody nomad". I lift off the accellerator and start applying the caravan brakes at the controller and move over as far as I can ................ And they come bloody hurtling past. Almost always without fail .... they get about level with my drivers door and you can see there caravan starting to walk ......... by the time they are past me there all over the bloody road .... barley in control of the bastard (how most of them don't die I have no idea). Sometime they panic and slam the brakes on it front of you ..... and next thing your up there arse doing 80km.h when previously you were travelling at 85->90km/h. don't worry though, within 5minutes they have forgotten they nearly died ... and there off again at 100km/h to try and take out the next person. We struck this again and again. I honestly don't think they understood how close to the absolute outside of there safety envelope they were travelling.

I'm never amazed when I see another news story where they are sweeping up the remains of another 'van from the side of the road.

seeya,
Shane l.

I also regularly tow at the speed limit, if the road conditions allow, that goes without saying 110kph on the freeway. Be it towing the car trailer or the caravan. And also worry about the grey nomad thing.

If you don't go beyond 80-90 kmh for fear of uncontrolled sway then you should not be towing at all. Its about correct loading and weight distribution, and tug / trailer mass ratio. .

The problem is the unregulated caravan industry, lack of driver training and ridiculous overweight top heavy caravans being towed by ridiculous undersize vehicles that should never be tow plated at 3500kg.

[Homestar]

I tow at speeds safe for the conditions. While my 50 year old van tows fine at any speed up to 100KPH and has its weight distributed well and doesn't sway or even feel like it wants to, I do drop the speed off on some secondary roads or roads that aren't in great condition - this is more to do with looking after a flimsy 50 year old chassis that I want to make last quite a bit longer. It's not in bad condition, just build very light weight compared to modern monstrosities so my lower speeds are due to looking after my gear than for fear of it slinging me off the road.

[scarry]

Who on earth would be insane enough to tow at the speed limit. I travel at 80->90km/h depend on prevailing conditions. Travelling at 90km/h would be a very rare event. the only people I ever see towing at the speed limit are the grey nomads with there jacked up ridiculous 3.5+ton monstrosities .... I'd say to the boss women "Here comes another bloody nomad". I lift off the accellerator and start applying the caravan brakes at the controller and move over as far as I can ................ And they come bloody hurtling past. Almost always without fail .... they get about level with my drivers door and you can see there caravan starting to walk ......... by the time they are past me there all over the bloody road .... barley in control of the bastard (how most of them don't die I have no idea). Sometime they panic and slam the brakes on it front of you ..... and next thing your up there arse doing 80km.h when previously you were travelling at 85->90km/h. don't worry though, within 5minutes they have forgotten they nearly died ... and there off again at 100km/h to try and take out the next person. We struck this again and again. I honestly don't think they understood how close to the absolute outside of there safety envelope they were travelling.

I'm never amazed when I see another news story where they are sweeping up the remains of another 'van from the side of the road.

seeya,
Shane l.

Where i can,i tow at the speed limit.

i am not going to hold people up,where there is no reason not to tow at the speed limit.

Fuel economy doesn't worry me,if it costs $3.00 an hour more to get somewhere,who really cares?

[DoubleChevron]

Its good to know I'm still pretty much always wrong .....

https://www.carsales.com.au/editorial/details/nissan-patrol-ti-l-2018-review-112390/


Surprisingly light on fuel


The surprise came when towing the Jayco on a 100km/h freeway and highway loop, including a hill climb and clearing some traffic to get out of the suburbs. The average was 20.8L/100km after tank-to-tank fills. Nissan appears to have done something to the Patrol’s tuning to peg back fuel consumption.
Surprisingly light on fuel


How on earth does does a petrol V8 towing a silverline (really heavy things they are) return that sort of fuel economy :eek:

[scarry]

Its good to know I'm still pretty much always wrong .....

https://www.carsales.com.au/editorial/details/nissan-patrol-ti-l-2018-review-112390/


Surprisingly light on fuel


The surprise came when towing the Jayco on a 100km/h freeway and highway loop, including a hill climb and clearing some traffic to get out of the suburbs. The average was 20.8L/100km after tank-to-tank fills. Nissan appears to have done something to the Patrol’s tuning to peg back fuel consumption.
Surprisingly light on fuel


How on earth does does a petrol V8 towing a silverline (really heavy things they are) return that sort of fuel economy :eek:


Good engineering i suppose.

The D3/4 petrol V8's were also pretty good on fuel,but there are not many around,and most if not all were HSE.

[prelude]

Sorry to get back to the original topic and kinda skipping the towing part :)

I happen to live in europe so I might be able to provide some perspective.

In Sweden (my dad lives there) diesel and petrol vehicles pay equal amounts of road tax and the fuels costs about the same. I am not current on the situation in finland but I am with norway. Fuel there is REALLY expensive, much more so than in the rest of europe even the netherlands were fuel is taxed up to 80%. We pay about as much at the pump, corrected for currency, as you would... at the bililuna station on the csr. And that's at a cheap in town bowzer, not on the highway. Yes, norway is even more expensive... So is denmark btw. Norway is also in love with tesla and EV's although they don't really work that well there. Most norwegians don't believe in hydrogen vehicles because the exhaust gas is water vapor which in an icy country covers the roads with a nice thin layer of fresh ice when they pass :)

Yes, in europe diesel has/is pretty much received/is receiving the death blow. A lot of city's are outright starting to ban the older diesels and there is no reason to believe they will up those limits soon. On a side note; since cities are projected to house up to 70% of the worlds population within a generations time they will get more and more power, like the city states of yesteryears and I can even imagine them trying to exert their influence in the surrounding country side. To give you a example: the greens in Amsterdam (which pretty much run the city) decided they wanted to ban al motor vehicles by the year 2030. The national government blocked that idea but just to show you how far gone we are, in my opinion...

In any case, diesel trucks (the big 18 wheelers) are no exception. We have euro 6 at the moment and although most cities require you to have such a modern diesel to be able to enter, SOME cities have woken up and figured out that making diesel particulate filters ever more efficient only exacerbates the problem; the particles you are left with are so small, they cause more trouble than the big particles since they can get way deeper into your lungs etc. There was a talk of at least one city who wanted to go the other way around and ban euro 5 and 6 trucks for that reason.

Now, on to EV's via hybrids. Some 15 years ago I believe it was the dutch government who thought that subsidizing hybrid vehicles was a good idea to renew the country's fleet of cars. You see, when you drive a company car down here and use it privately a certain percentage of the vehicles value (including taxes) is added to your income. Since we use different tax rates for more or less income (ie the more money you make, the more tax you pay) the value of the company car ALWAYS comes over the top of your income and thus almost always in the highest tax bracket. For a normal vehicle, ie. one that is not exempt due to some environmental tax break the rate is 22% at this time and back then it was 25% IIRC.

What happened is that the honda civic hybrid and the toyota prius, the only two hybrids available at that time, became very popular vehicles. When I was driving around in my not so economical honda legend :) people would overtake me with breakneck speeds in their hybrids, pushing the 1.3 or 1.5 to its limits to get some performance from them. The end result was hybrid vehicles which should do 5L/100 with ease started using 8+L/100.

When after a few years the tax break on these vehicles was lifted though and people had to pay full rate, guess what, they started buying normal cars again. Whilst the government had though of that and kept the scheme in place long enough to theoretically replace the entire dutch fleet (30% or more of new cars sold in this country are leased company cars, so keep a scheme like this in place for 5 years or so and you will have replaced a LOT of old cars) what actually happened was that somewhere in the former eastern block countries some politician decided that people should get a tax break on hybrids as well. So; virtually ALL hybrids in this country were bought up by traders and exported OUT of the country leaving us dutchies with the dirty old cars where we started of with. Sure, the 2008/9 financial crisis did not help but that's life. In any case, hybrids are rare on our roads today.

Leaves us the EV's and to be clear, down here the EV is just one brand: tesla. There are other brands and models but tesla's are everywhere. There is a simple reason for that: see above! The only two countries in europe that I have traveled through that have a lot of EV's (tesla's) are the netherlands and norway. The tax break on those vehicles is the primary reason that this is the case. From next year on the law is going to change here and I predict that the people in the market for upper-scale vehicles (like the model s which costs a whopping 200K AUD over here) will simply buy themselves an AUDI Q7 or beamer 7 series again since there is no reason to buy a limited EV again. When driving through germany I've seen 2 tesla's, one at BMW in munich (I used to work for them) as a test vehicle and one dutch guy who was brave enough to take his EV over the border. In norway there are plenty but the only tesla I saw in sweden was a norwegian plate :) Also, in norway hundreds of tesla's are rotting away at a dealer since there are no spare parts to fix them (google or youtube it)

Finally, in my opinion, EV's do have their uses in a very densly populated country like the netherlands. The theoretical 400K range, which you don't get when it's hot 'cause aircon, or when it's cold 'cause the batteries have less capacity etc., is plenty since the largest distance you can drive here is actually slightly larger than the largest cattle station in australia [wink11]
What most people seem to be forgetting is the pollution an EV produces. Those batteries are not very recyclable compared to lead acid which has a 99%+ recyclability for instance and the amount of resources needed to actually produce them forces us to dig up frigging afrika. My money is on hydrogen but hey, in the past most crap solutions won over the better alternative :) (vhs vs beta comes to mind) Also, do not forget that a tesla model S weighs MORE than a friggin range rover loaded up to gvm!

So, in the diesel vs petrol discussion: I think diesels in densely populated area's will have a harder and harder time to survive but they will probably survive in all country area's. The fear that investment in diesel technology would be hurt is justified I believe since honda used to produce diesels, specifically for those thick europeans and they stopped doing that (at least announced it), volvo has also announced to quit the diesel game, mercedes runs mostly renault diesels since they can't meet regulations otherwise, JLR sales have taken a huge hit which is probably due to thier mostly diesel line-up has taken a beating, etc. etc.

Perhaps this is good news. The world will stop caring about trying to "improve" the diesel engine, aka kill it even further with more restrictions, and just let it be in the area's where it is needed. Availability of fuel could become an issue though.

I know one thing and that is that I am pushing towards making my dream trip(s) as soon as I possibly can since I am not getting any younger and before I know it, I can't even visit them anymore because of the environment. Luckily I stubbornly chose a P38 with a rover V8 petrol, hopefully that'll get me into most places before I am done :)

Cheers,
-P

PS most of this is less relevant to australia I guess but I would only hope that the lessons we have already learned down here are useful for your government not to make those same mistakes, but that might be too much to hope for.

[DoubleChevron]

Sorry to get back to the original topic and kinda skipping the towing part :)

I happen to live in europe so I might be able to provide some perspective.

In Sweden (my dad lives there) diesel and petrol vehicles pay equal amounts of road tax and the fuels costs about the same. I am not current on the situation in finland but I am with norway. Fuel there is REALLY expensive, much more so than in the rest of europe even the netherlands were fuel is taxed up to 80%. We pay about as much at the pump, corrected for currency, as you would... at the bililuna station on the csr. And that's at a cheap in town bowzer, not on the highway. Yes, norway is even more expensive... So is denmark btw. Norway is also in love with tesla and EV's although they don't really work that well there. Most norwegians don't believe in hydrogen vehicles because the exhaust gas is water vapor which in an icy country covers the roads with a nice thin layer of fresh ice when they pass :)

Yes, in europe diesel has/is pretty much received/is receiving the death blow. A lot of city's are outright starting to ban the older diesels and there is no reason to believe they will up those limits soon. On a side note; since cities are projected to house up to 70% of the worlds population within a generations time they will get more and more power, like the city states of yesteryears and I can even imagine them trying to exert their influence in the surrounding country side. To give you a example: the greens in Amsterdam (which pretty much run the city) decided they wanted to ban al motor vehicles by the year 2030. The national government blocked that idea but just to show you how far gone we are, in my opinion...

In any case, diesel trucks (the big 18 wheelers) are no exception. We have euro 6 at the moment and although most cities require you to have such a modern diesel to be able to enter, SOME cities have woken up and figured out that making diesel particulate filters ever more efficient only exacerbates the problem; the particles you are left with are so small, they cause more trouble than the big particles since they can get way deeper into your lungs etc. There was a talk of at least one city who wanted to go the other way around and ban euro 5 and 6 trucks for that reason.

Now, on to EV's via hybrids. Some 15 years ago I believe it was the dutch government who thought that subsidizing hybrid vehicles was a good idea to renew the country's fleet of cars. You see, when you drive a company car down here and use it privately a certain percentage of the vehicles value (including taxes) is added to your income. Since we use different tax rates for more or less income (ie the more money you make, the more tax you pay) the value of the company car ALWAYS comes over the top of your income and thus almost always in the highest tax bracket. For a normal vehicle, ie. one that is not exempt due to some environmental tax break the rate is 22% at this time and back then it was 25% IIRC.

What happened is that the honda civic hybrid and the toyota prius, the only two hybrids available at that time, became very popular vehicles. When I was driving around in my not so economical honda legend :) people would overtake me with breakneck speeds in their hybrids, pushing the 1.3 or 1.5 to its limits to get some performance from them. The end result was hybrid vehicles which should do 5L/100 with ease started using 8+L/100.

When after a few years the tax break on these vehicles was lifted though and people had to pay full rate, guess what, they started buying normal cars again. Whilst the government had though of that and kept the scheme in place long enough to theoretically replace the entire dutch fleet (30% or more of new cars sold in this country are leased company cars, so keep a scheme like this in place for 5 years or so and you will have replaced a LOT of old cars) what actually happened was that somewhere in the former eastern block countries some politician decided that people should get a tax break on hybrids as well. So; virtually ALL hybrids in this country were bought up by traders and exported OUT of the country leaving us dutchies with the dirty old cars where we started of with. Sure, the 2008/9 financial crisis did not help but that's life. In any case, hybrids are rare on our roads today.

Leaves us the EV's and to be clear, down here the EV is just one brand: tesla. There are other brands and models but tesla's are everywhere. There is a simple reason for that: see above! The only two countries in europe that I have traveled through that have a lot of EV's (tesla's) are the netherlands and norway. The tax break on those vehicles is the primary reason that this is the case. From next year on the law is going to change here and I predict that the people in the market for upper-scale vehicles (like the model s which costs a whopping 200K AUD over here) will simply buy themselves an AUDI Q7 or beamer 7 series again since there is no reason to buy a limited EV again. When driving through germany I've seen 2 tesla's, one at BMW in munich (I used to work for them) as a test vehicle and one dutch guy who was brave enough to take his EV over the border. In norway there are plenty but the only tesla I saw in sweden was a norwegian plate :) Also, in norway hundreds of tesla's are rotting away at a dealer since there are no spare parts to fix them (google or youtube it)

Finally, in my opinion, EV's do have their uses in a very densly populated country like the netherlands. The theoretical 400K range, which you don't get when it's hot 'cause aircon, or when it's cold 'cause the batteries have less capacity etc., is plenty since the largest distance you can drive here is actually slightly larger than the largest cattle station in australia [wink11]
What most people seem to be forgetting is the pollution an EV produces. Those batteries are not very recyclable compared to lead acid which has a 99%+ recyclability for instance and the amount of resources needed to actually produce them forces us to dig up frigging afrika. My money is on hydrogen but hey, in the past most crap solutions won over the better alternative :) (vhs vs beta comes to mind) Also, do not forget that a tesla model S weighs MORE than a friggin range rover loaded up to gvm!

So, in the diesel vs petrol discussion: I think diesels in densely populated area's will have a harder and harder time to survive but they will probably survive in all country area's. The fear that investment in diesel technology would be hurt is justified I believe since honda used to produce diesels, specifically for those thick europeans and they stopped doing that (at least announced it), volvo has also announced to quit the diesel game, mercedes runs mostly renault diesels since they can't meet regulations otherwise, JLR sales have taken a huge hit which is probably due to thier mostly diesel line-up has taken a beating, etc. etc.

Perhaps this is good news. The world will stop caring about trying to "improve" the diesel engine, aka kill it even further with more restrictions, and just let it be in the area's where it is needed. Availability of fuel could become an issue though.

I know one thing and that is that I am pushing towards making my dream trip(s) as soon as I possibly can since I am not getting any younger and before I know it, I can't even visit them anymore because of the environment. Luckily I stubbornly chose a P38 with a rover V8 petrol, hopefully that'll get me into most places before I am done :)

Cheers,
-P

PS most of this is less relevant to australia I guess but I would only hope that the lessons we have already learned down here are useful for your government not to make those same mistakes, but that might be too much to hope for.

Australia doesn't even need to bother with car "green" standards any longer. We are not a vehicle manufacturer so have no local market to protect.... And almost every car sold in the world these days would easily pass any existing pollution standards. Our population is very spread out (unless you crazy enough to live in the middle of one of the capital cities). When diesel dies world wide due the pollution rules of other countries ... the vehicles will simply no longer become available here (due to the economics of making cars that don't suite all markets).

The nutty greenies here come up with enough loony ideas to fill every mental home left in the country. So I could only imagine how bad they are with large populations crammed into small areas.

I'm pretty sure diesel being used as a heating oil is a big user as well. Australia has some of the world largest reserves of natural gas. If our government cared about the enviroment we would all be driving LNG vehicles and filling them for basically free from our home.

[Grumbles]

For the last 3 months my RR LSE [V8] has not been on the highway but spent its time in town – 50kmh zone – plus crawling around on local mountainous bush tracks. Always in the lower [auto] gears but in high range 4wd. Log book says – rounded to the nearest decimal point – 20 litres per hundred km – 14 mpg.

[Bigbjorn]

You mob of pussies whinging about fuel usage. I had a 1970 Dodge Challenger Hemi 426 that did 12 mpg driven gently and 8 mpg when I went street racing with it. Mind you, 600+ horses take a good bit of tucker. If you are not fed then you won't work either.

[DoubleChevron]

For the last 3 months my RR LSE [V8] has not been on the highway but spent its time in town – 50kmh zone – plus crawling around on local mountainous bush tracks. Always in the lower [auto] gears but in high range 4wd. Log book says – rounded to the nearest decimal point – 20 litres per hundred km – 14 mpg.

Well here is some perspective. My parents have just returned home from up north towing a big australian Bailey with a slide in it with there modern twin cab ute.... Get this.... they averaged 13.5L/100 towing that bohemeth. I would have used far more driving the old range rover with just me in it :o .... not towing!

that us a staggering 21mpg towing what is probably 3tons behind it.

seeya,
Shane L.

[Slunnie]

For sure, there is a move away from diesel to petrol/ev particularly in Europe - but while large cargo carriers like semis and B doubles stay with diesel in places like Australia and China, then diesel will still remain the main fuel available overall.

Our guide was saying the same in Jordan in the Middle East. Cars soon to electric. Trucking to remain on diesel. I really don't think EV is suitable for long haul.

Mind you, trucking is done differently there.

http://slunnie.com/coppermine/albums/userpics/10001/P7161317resize.jpg

[1nando]

Well here is some perspective. My parents have just returned home from up north towing a big australian Bailey with a slide in it with there modern twin cab ute.... Get this.... they averaged 13.5L/100 towing that bohemeth. I would have used far more driving the old range rover with just me in it :o .... not towing!

that us a staggering 21mpg towing what is probably 3tons behind it.

seeya,
Shane L.I'm sorry but towing a 3ton van and 13.5L/100kms[emoji848]

What dual cab ute is it?

Highly doubt that's at the highway posted speed limit, I'd guess much lower.

Sorry but I'm going to go out on a limb here and call BS!

[DoubleChevron]

I'm sorry but towing a 3ton van and 13.5L/100kms[emoji848]

What dual cab ute is it?

Highly doubt that's at the highway posted speed limit, I'd guess much lower.

Sorry but I'm going to go out on a limb here and call BS!

2wd twin cab navara. he travels at 90->100km/h usually. But is never in a hurry when towing. The territory used to use 15L/100 towing a smaller caravan. He's always checked fuel economy forever .......... So I believe.

seeya,
Shane L.

[1nando]

2wd twin cab navara. he travels at 90->100km/h usually. But is never in a hurry when towing. The territory used to use 15L/100 towing a smaller caravan. He's always checked fuel economy forever .......... So I believe.

seeya,
Shane L.Thanks for confirming, like I said BS!

[DoubleChevron]

Thanks for confirming, like I said BS!

You sound like me. It is what it is.

[PhilipA]

Well I have a friend who has a 2WD Mux which I recommended to him, although I didn't know at the time you could get 2Wd.
He has a 18 foot older Jayco on road which I think has a tare of about 1400Kg.
He tows at about 80-90Kmh.
He said to me that his fuel economy goes up and down and really goes up on hills.
I replied yes that is the instantaneous but what is the average?
He said 9.3 L per 100Km.

I have another friend who has a Colorado who reckons he gets in the 7s when not towing.

These are really amazing fuel economies, and I can't think of any comparable petrol car that could come within a Bull's Roar.
Regards PhilipA

[AK83]

Dunno .. driven sensibly, I can't see why you couldn't get that kind of economy.
Of course the lay of the land will dictate the economy.

Last time I towed anything substantial was a car from south of Sydney back to Melb.
My old Rodeo 3.2 V6 dual cab.
Me and brother.
Some place near Wollongong, I remember a very steep climb north to hit the freeway, then freeway home.
Averaged ~8km/l (high 7's) on petrol .. was the week before I had it converted to LPG.
Brother had a drive from Albury. We had a quick stop, in the days pre the bypass, then hit the freeway ... at some point just after the start of the freeway south to Melb, he must have put it in 4th.
Was at about Glenrowan somewhere near the servos that I then noticed he's still in 4th.
He drove over an hour in 4th .. still got ~8km/lt.

Rover 3500SE weighs about 1500kgs or so, trailer roughly 500-750kgs .. so about 2000kgs.

~8km/lt = ~12.5l/100

[1nando]

Well I have a friend who has a 2WD Mux which I recommended to him, although I didn't know at the time you could get 2Wd.
He has a 18 foot older Jayco on road which I think has a tare of about 1400Kg.
He tows at about 80-90Kmh.
He said to me that his fuel economy goes up and down and really goes up on hills.
I replied yes that is the instantaneous but what is the average?
He said 9.3 L per 100Km.

I have another friend who has a Colorado who reckons he gets in the 7s when not towing.

These are really amazing fuel economies, and I can't think of any comparable petrol car that could come within a Bull's Roar.
Regards PhilipAFigures aside, modern diesels are frugal, I have no problem with this argument. Modern diesels are also highly tuned, complicated, and require extremely clean diesel fuel to operate. When having this debate regarding petrol v diesel I think of it like this; there's old school diesels which can run on pretty much any diesel quality fuel, there's modern diesels which are a headache waiting to happen and then there's petrol.

I work with heavy vehicles so I love a good diesel, these modern trucks run all day and allow the modern diesel emissions equipment to operate properly... most of the time. Mum and dads who drive these same modern diesels in city stop start traffic are kidding themselves if they think they're reliable compared to old school diesel engines. I can't be bothered ranting further on this particular subject.

I drive a y62 patrol, a petrol guzzling v8 is what most of you think of it as. Yes it drinks double what a modern dual cab drinks but it also has twice the HP, considerably more torque than most and far less s#it hanging of it. There is no egr, dpf, ridiculous high pressure rail system, intercooler, turbo, etc. Around town I'm doing 18-20 and on the highway 11.5-13 depending on hills, wind, vehcile load etc.

I'd put my mortgage on the fact that my NA v8 pertol is twice as relaible as a modern diesel, cheaper to service, and ultimately cheaper to run over 150,000kms. In those kms a good majority of modern diesels will either have egr, dpf, turbo, intercooler, fuel rail issues etc.... and god forbid they actually go remote and get s#it fuel.....then you don't care about liters per hundred but dollars per engine replacement!

Moral of the story, new diesels are not old school diesels and therefore petrol wins due to its simplicity!

[PhilipA]

simplicity!
Wow , you reckon that direct port injection, dual variable camshafts, cat converters, EGR and on the latest petrols PPFs are Simple? Some also have cylinder deactivation, which I think yours has.
I reckon a gutful of water would cost the same on yours as on a diesel.

But I agree for in town use a petrol is better, but it's not the fuel economy per se that I like , its the ability to go 1400-1500Km with my long range tank and a couple of jerries. It enables me to cross the Nullabor and deviate down to Esperence via the southern coast , or up to Broome without paying a kings ransom for fuel at roadhouses.

My son bought a Subaru Diesel Outback and has done a DPF because of a loose turbo hose, and then apparently another hose blocked up, I assume it may be the EGR. His "cheap" Subaru ended up being not so cheap.
I will stick with my old fashioned TD5.

Regards PhilipA

[1nando]

Wow , you reckon that direct port injection, dual variable camshafts, cat converters, EGR and on the latest petrols PPFs are Simple? Some also have cylinder deactivation, which I think yours has.
I reckon a gutful of water would cost the same on yours as on a diesel.

But I agree for in town use a petrol is better, but it's not the fuel economy per se that I like , its the ability to go 1400-1500Km with my long range tank and a couple of jerries. It enables me to cross the Nullabor and deviate down to Esperence via the southern coast , or up to Broome without paying a kings ransom for fuel at roadhouses.

My son bought a Subaru Diesel Outback and has done a DPF because of a loose turbo hose, and then apparently another hose blocked up, I assume it may be the EGR. His "cheap" Subaru ended up being not so cheap.
I will stick with my old fashioned TD5.

Regards PhilipANo cylinder deactivation, yes DIG, yes cat converters, yes VVEL. Thats it.

Y62 has been around for over 10 years and is rock solid. Early ones had timing chain issues and this was sorted post 2012. It is a very reliable motor. VVEL and DIG is miles more reliable than anything on a modern diesel. Honda has had vtec for decades now, and DIG is not exactly new tech any more. I know vtec is different to vvel but it's cam manipulation so to speak to optimise power.

My y62 prefers premium fuel but according to the manual will run on 91 if needed, engine timing retards to reduce power. Fairly confident it would be more forgiving than any modern diesel.

And yes your td5 is a simpler engine design compared to diesel engines today

[AK83]

.....

Moral of the story, new diesels are not old school diesels and therefore petrol wins due to its simplicity!

Philip has the right idea!

Modern petrol engines are far from simple!

You don't even need a 'gut full of water' ... an idiot tanker driver dumping diesel into the petrol tanks at the servo! .. all it takes it one, and my mate who's a tanker driver has told me stories of dumb nuts that have done it, not taken measures to counter it and lost their jobs once found out!
I can't imagine a modern direct port injected petrol system taking too kindly to a diesel mix.

Also should be noted how many klms are going to be covered during the term of ownership of the vehicle too.
years ago I used to work as a courier, doing 90-100K klms a year.
For a vehicle that covers that many klms and does 18-20 lt/100 in such usage is going to cost far more in fuel bills than an engine rebuild would cost every 5-7 years if it were a modern 'susceptible' diesel using half as much. (at todays prices)

$1.50 x 18lt/100km x 600K klm = $50K(petrol cost for 600K klms)
$1.50 x 9lt/100klm x 600K klm = $25K(modern diesel cost for 600K klms)

$25,000 buys a lot of motor rebuilding .. and you then have the motor back to new spec! .. the petrol motor OTOH is now stuck in it's 600K klms state. You either need to buy a new car again, or still spend huge $s to rebuild the petrol motor ..

Either way .. the petrol motor still doesn't make 'economical' sense.

It's not like I haven't been there .. been there for a good many years(as a courier) .. and the one and only newish car I did buy(the Rodeo) for use as a courier vehicle lost me more money in it's life than any of the $1000 bombs I used to use prior to that.
It was cheaper to buy a bomb, spend minimal $s to get it RWC, and when it failed catastrophically .. get a new bomb again.

Then take into account the normal users usage numbers. Say 20K klms /year.
They'll probably update the vehicle every 5 years.
Petrol vehicles will lose far more value(trade in, and or second hand buyer price point). The drop in value of the petrol vehicle is going to be roughly the cost of an engine rebuild compared to the retained value of the diesel vehicle.
Classic example of this is in the 4WD market. Look at prices of V8 D2's vs TD5 D2's. TD5s are a minimum of 2x the entry price(for a given condition).

[Bigbjorn]

Then there is the venerable and venerated 4BD1 in my 1986 County. Dead simple in-line four cylinder pushrod engine, mechanical injection. Done 450,000 k's, uses virtually no oil, starts instantly hot or cold. Pulls like a steam locomotive. 9-10 l/100k around town and with 750 kg's in the back and the camp trailer on behind uses 11-12 l/100k up the highway going to and from swap meets. No electronics, no high pressure common rail **** to fail or to service. You could drive Perth to Brisbane with no electrics as long as you drive in daylight and park overnight on a hill.

[1nando]

Philip has the right idea!

Modern petrol engines are far from simple!

You don't even need a 'gut full of water' ... an idiot tanker driver dumping diesel into the petrol tanks at the servo! .. all it takes it one, and my mate who's a tanker driver has told me stories of dumb nuts that have done it, not taken measures to counter it and lost their jobs once found out!
I can't imagine a modern direct port injected petrol system taking too kindly to a diesel mix.

Also should be noted how many klms are going to be covered during the term of ownership of the vehicle too.
years ago I used to work as a courier, doing 90-100K klms a year.
For a vehicle that covers that many klms and does 18-20 lt/100 in such usage is going to cost far more in fuel bills than an engine rebuild would cost every 5-7 years if it were a modern 'susceptible' diesel using half as much. (at todays prices)

$1.50 x 18lt/100km x 600K klm = $50K(petrol cost for 600K klms)
$1.50 x 9lt/100klm x 600K klm = $25K(modern diesel cost for 600K klms)

$25,000 buys a lot of motor rebuilding .. and you then have the motor back to new spec! .. the petrol motor OTOH is now stuck in it's 600K klms state. You either need to buy a new car again, or still spend huge $s to rebuild the petrol motor ..

Either way .. the petrol motor still doesn't make 'economical' sense.

It's not like I haven't been there .. been there for a good many years(as a courier) .. and the one and only newish car I did buy(the Rodeo) for use as a courier vehicle lost me more money in it's life than any of the $1000 bombs I used to use prior to that.
It was cheaper to buy a bomb, spend minimal $s to get it RWC, and when it failed catastrophically .. get a new bomb again.

Then take into account the normal users usage numbers. Say 20K klms /year.
They'll probably update the vehicle every 5 years.
Petrol vehicles will lose far more value(trade in, and or second hand buyer price point). The drop in value of the petrol vehicle is going to be roughly the cost of an engine rebuild compared to the retained value of the diesel vehicle.
Classic example of this is in the 4WD market. Look at prices of V8 D2's vs TD5 D2's. TD5s are a minimum of 2x the entry price(for a given condition)."Mum and dads who drive these same modern diesels in city stop start traffic are kidding themselves if they think they're reliable compared to old school diesel engines."

I made this comment earlier, your courier example would not represent any significant percentage of use compared to the general population who aren't couriers.

Economy is a small price to pay for reliable motoring. I get your cost analysis for a working vehicle, is what I do for a living only with trucks. The majority of modern diesels spend they're time in stop start traffic clogging up. The fuel rail pressure in a diesel is roughly 5-6 times that of a petrol, the tiniest amount of water and it's $$$$. I can add octane booster to what I suspect might be s#it fuel and have a much better chance than a modern diesel fuel rail.

Go on the ranger forum, bt50, 200 series, prado etc pages and you can read all about bad fuel and the results. Not so common in a petrol.

As for resale, not all vehicles are the same. As an example a y62 holds its value very well, and a i30 Hyundai petrol does not.

Again I love a working vehicle with a diesel engine but the op isn't referring to working vehicles. So that argument is irrelevant to the ops point.

[101RRS]

My experience is 400,000km with two different modern diesels - used in commuting plus the occasional trip - 100% reliable, cheaper to maintain that petrols - nothing wrong with petrol engines as most are reliable too but I do not agree with your assertion that modern diesels are unreliable.

garry

[Tombie]

Never had a dirty fuel problem.... except in Petrol. [emoji41]

Doesn’t mean either isn’t prone to issues and I’ve had a couple of petrols over the years suffer this.
I have had “weak diesel” where power was way down on normal - was adulterated fuel from a cheap servo.


Quality filters and water traps are all it takes to solve this issue.


Entertainingly, our newly ordered Defender is a Petrol. Why? Simply why not! 400bhp means a bit of fun and fuel is the cheapest part of owning any vehicle.

[1nando]

Never had a dirty fuel problem.... except in Petrol. [emoji41]

Doesn’t mean either isn’t prone to issues and I’ve had a couple of petrols over the years suffer this.
I have had “weak diesel” where power was way down on normal - was adulterated fuel from a cheap servo.


Quality filters and water traps are all it takes to solve this issue.


Entertainingly, our newly ordered Defender is a Petrol. Why? Simply why not! 400bhp means a bit of fun and fuel is the cheapest part of owning any vehicle.My next 110 will also be the 6 cylinder petrol. After owning a 400hp beast I simply cannot go back to diesel.

For curiositys sake next time your at your mechanic ask them what they think is more relaible, modern pertol or modern diesel?

Ps: glad you're back on here mate. Last time I wad on here you'd gone away from Aulro

[prelude]

Modern diesels vs modern petrols is a tad bit different from older models. Although I agree that modern engines can have very good reliability and durability in general they are more prone to failure than their old counterparts.

One of my best mates runs a workshop and I have been helping him out since forever with complex electronics or computer related issues and from our experience there is a difference between old and new. Hell, there is even a significant difference between new as in 0 years old and "new" as in a couple of years back vs say 20+ years ago.

The diesels of yesteryear's are the ones that could do a million K's without a rebuild, the OM617 comes to mind. Those were 70's and 80's engines. Then came the 90's en 00's and some good engines were made, but crap among diesels started to pop up. The VW 2.0tdi's were everywhere by then, very good engine but it did have a few short comings. The same goes for petrol. I'll ignore pre injection engines. The mechanical injection engines were, in general, not that reliable in my experience. Like it's diesels cousins the pumps and what not would wear out but for some reason a lot faster. Then in the 90's we got catalytic converters and lean running engines which did have an effect till we sorted that out. The engines from this era I think are among the most reliable petrol engines in general.

Having said that, a modern diesel engine is chocked to death and although common rail is good for economy I have had to put so much force on stuck injectors that I bent cylinder heads to get them removed. I saw way more engines fail in the mid 200K's with common rail around the 00's then I did with the older diesels before. Especially mercedes. Onto the really new diesels with dpf's and what not, in comparison I see even more of those fail even earlier. Just last month a small ford van with 60K on the clock, failed. It was driven daily for reasonably long distances (courier work between cities, not local traffic)

The shocker for me however is modern petrol engines. They may not have the problem that diesel engines have with EGR and PCV but they have a similar problem. Because "environment" modern petrol engines have started to implement GDI or Gasoline Direct Injection. Since there is no longer clean fuel flowing past the intake valves they no longer get cleaned. The EGR and PCV problem of diesels is coming to petrol as well but not in the form of black goop but a brown-ish hard layer. This causes the intake valves to stick, not close properly and what not causing mayor headache. This year alone we have seen a dozen or so car's with that problem. All of them had done 100K at most. My mate bought a sort of sand blasting device that is filled with walnut shell grit to sandblast the intake port which cleans it without affecting the alluminium.

Also, to reduce internal friction the piston rings have become really loose, combine that with the water thin oil of today and even a few year old honda civic with 60K on the clock uses 1liter per 6k which is acceptable according to the manual but I am not used to honda's using ANY oil whatsoever within their service intervals. Even my 300K+ honda's don't do that. So I'm afraid that in the reliability category really modern petrol engines are not much better than diesels.

All in all the environmental concerns have pushed modern vehicles into the realms of questionable reliability or at least durability which in turn is very polluting since you need to buy a new engine or recycle your car sooner.

Just my experience and 2 cents ;)

Cheers,
-P

[Vern]

Figures aside, modern diesels are frugal, I have no problem with this argument. Modern diesels are also highly tuned, complicated, and require extremely clean diesel fuel to operate. When having this debate regarding petrol v diesel I think of it like this; there's old school diesels which can run on pretty much any diesel quality fuel, there's modern diesels which are a headache waiting to happen and then there's petrol.

I work with heavy vehicles so I love a good diesel, these modern trucks run all day and allow the modern diesel emissions equipment to operate properly... most of the time. Mum and dads who drive these same modern diesels in city stop start traffic are kidding themselves if they think they're reliable compared to old school diesel engines. I can't be bothered ranting further on this particular subject.

I drive a y62 patrol, a petrol guzzling v8 is what most of you think of it as. Yes it drinks double what a modern dual cab drinks but it also has twice the HP, considerably more torque than most and far less s#it hanging of it. There is no egr, dpf, ridiculous high pressure rail system, intercooler, turbo, etc. Around town I'm doing 18-20 and on the highway 11.5-13 depending on hills, wind, vehcile load etc.

I'd put my mortgage on the fact that my NA v8 pertol is twice as relaible as a modern diesel, cheaper to service, and ultimately cheaper to run over 150,000kms. In those kms a good majority of modern diesels will either have egr, dpf, turbo, intercooler, fuel rail issues etc.... and god forbid they actually go remote and get s#it fuel.....then you don't care about liters per hundred but dollars per engine replacement!

Moral of the story, new diesels are not old school diesels and therefore petrol wins due to its simplicity!Or lower than 11[emoji6]https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190921/23106f340135f4adf3aea9b22e87fec5.jpg

[ozscott]

Thanks for confirming, like I said BS!I'm a convert. I have always had big petrols. New MR Triton.GLS Premium (ie the heaviest stocker). Mann Hummel Provent 200 catch can is only mod. 5 adults on highway at 80kph yesterday in 6th and it's showing 4.2 litres per 100k...Given how low revs are I believe the gauge. About to do a long trip with the boat on so I will report back. I agree with you about complexity of modern diesels. The little 2.4 Mitsu motor is one of the best of them and puts up huge miles with a catch can to avoid carbon build up. The torque and power with the 6 speed and lighter vehicle means it's quicker than my 4.6 D2 manual. Quiet as a mouse on the highway. Really sweet vehicle. Very comfy seats (They have done a lot of work on this new model).

Cheers

[Tombie]

I'm a convert. I have always had big petrols. New MR Triton.GLS Premium (ie the heaviest stocker). Mann Hummel Provent 200 catch can is only mod. 5 adults on highway at 80kph yesterday in 6th and it's showing 4.2 litres per 100k...Given how low revs are I believe the gauge. About to do a long trip with the boat on so I will report back. I agree with you about complexity of modern diesels. The little 2.4 Mitsu motor is one of the best of them and puts up huge miles with a catch can to avoid carbon build up. The torque and power with the 6 speed and lighter vehicle means it's quicker than my 4.6 D2 manual. Quiet as a mouse on the highway. Really sweet vehicle. Very comfy seats (They have done a lot of work on this new model).

Cheers

Good to hear they finally did something about the planks they called seats. If they had been better 20 years ago I would have had a Triton back then.

Tried all iterations since, it had mates with them. And couldn’t handle the seats!

[ozscott]

For sure Mike. I agree. I didn't like any of the seats until the MQ and they are good but MR is a step up again. After an hour it still all feels good. I have 4 hours coming up soon so I will.report back.

Cheers

[trout1105]

I'm a convert. I have always had big petrols. New MR Triton.GLS Premium (ie the heaviest stocker). Mann Hummel Provent 200 catch can is only mod. 5 adults on highway at 80kph yesterday in 6th and it's showing 4.2 litres per 100k...Given how low revs are I believe the gauge. About to do a long trip with the boat on so I will report back. I agree with you about complexity of modern diesels. The little 2.4 Mitsu motor is one of the best of them and puts up huge miles with a catch can to avoid carbon build up. The torque and power with the 6 speed and lighter vehicle means it's quicker than my 4.6 D2 manual. Quiet as a mouse on the highway. Really sweet vehicle. Very comfy seats (They have done a lot of work on this new model).

Cheers

How big is your boat, It has been my experience that the small 2.5 diesels struggle on hills with large boats.

[ozscott]

Trout I agree. If I was still running the Seafarer Vagabond I would have thought twice but for the 750kg 4.5 side console tinny the 2.4 Tdi won't really feel it.

Cheers

[trout1105]

2wd twin cab navara. he travels at 90->100km/h usually. But is never in a hurry when towing. The territory used to use 15L/100 towing a smaller caravan. He's always checked fuel economy forever .......... So I believe.

seeya,
Shane L.

I have just come back from a 3000k trip in a twincab Navara 2.5l towing a 1.5t boat and I averaged about 15/16l per 100k's at 85-90kph.
My missus was towing a 2.5t 20' Jayco "Expanda" with a fully loaded 79 series 4.5l v8 and she was averaging the same 15/16l per 100k's.

We did a trip to the Gulf country last year about a 10,00k's round trip and I used my D2a V8 which used about 22/24l per 100k's towing the same boat and at the same speeds.

The big V8 diesel in the 79 series towed much easier than either of the 4WD's I used and the fuel economy was the same as the small Navara engine towing Much less weight and carrying Much less of a load on the tray.

[Vern]

Try all that at the speed limit and see how it goes.

[Bigbjorn]

Try all that at the speed limit and see how it goes.

I agree. If you can't tow at the speed limit where it is possible and safe to do so then either the driver or the rig needs changing to one that can.

[Tombie]

I agree. If you can't tow at the speed limit where it is possible and safe to do so then either the driver or the rig needs changing to one that can.

Absolutely. 100% agree.

The Bickie dippers talk of fatigue so drive slower, except that longer behind the wheel = fatigue.
They then counter with “it’s safer” - only if the combination being used is unsafe.

[1nando]

I agree. If you can't tow at the speed limit where it is possible and safe to do so then either the driver or the rig needs changing to one that can.In my opinion anyone towing 3-3.5 ton should not be doing it with mid size SUVS and dual cabs (unless it is a American dual cab). Regardless of fuel type.

[Tombie]

I agree. If you can't tow at the speed limit where it is possible and safe to do so then either the driver or the rig needs changing to one that can.

Absolutely. 100% agree.

The Bickie dippers talk of fatigue so drive slower, except that longer behind the wheel = fatigue.
They then counter with “it’s safer” - only if the combination being used is unsafe.

[Bigbjorn]

In my opinion anyone towing 3-3.5 ton should not be doing it with mid size SUVS and dual cabs (unless it is a American dual cab). Regardless of fuel type.

Get a tug with a minimum of 400 hp and at least 5 litres.

[Tombie]

Get a tug with a minimum of 400 hp and at least 5 litres.

Or a lighter van!

Amazes me how much “old school” (read heavy) materials are built into a modern Caravan just because most vehicles ‘can’ tow 3-3.5t

With composites, sandwich fibreglass etc a full size off-road van should be sub 2.5t

When I see vans at shows with stone bench tops, hard wood cupboards etc I just shake my head and move on.

[DoubleChevron]

this is one of the dumbest things I've read on this forum. I'd be for implementing a 80km/h speed limit on caravans unless they are 5th wheelers. Caravans are to big and light .... They are swaying uncontrollable bastard things unless your on your toes. There is nothing scarier on the roads than a grey nomad with there 3ton (loaded to 4ton) monstrosity hurtling down the roads with there cruise control set to 100km/h.

I wouldn't care if my car was fitted with a supercharged LS7 .......... I'd still likely be doing 85km/h ............... probably slower, as that is the safe speed to tow a large wind sail in. In gusty winds I've been down to 60km/h down around warnanbool in the past.

I'm honestly amazed not far more poeple die. You guys sound like the person that told me a few years ago.... modern truckies are assholes. They don't need to take the big swinging turns these days. It is just laziness as they have power steering in trucks these days (so why should he let them turn left from the right lane .... etc..). Yes I **** you not. Did you know the only reason a truck swing out wide is because it gives the driver a chance to turn the steering wheel enough [bighmmm]

[ozscott]

this is one of the dumbest things I've read on this forum. I'd be for implementing a 80km/h speed limit on caravans unless they are 5th wheelers. Caravans are to big and light .... They are swaying uncontrollable bastard things unless your on your toes. There is nothing scarier on the roads than a grey nomad with there 3ton (loaded to 4ton) monstrosity hurtling down the roads with there cruise control set to 100km/h.

I wouldn't care if my car was fitted with a supercharged LS7 .......... I'd still likely be doing 85km/h ............... probably slower, as that is the safe speed to tow a large wind sail in. In gusty winds I've been down to 60km/h down around warnanbool in the past.

I'm honestly amazed not far more poeple die. You guys sound like the person that told me a few years ago.... modern truckies are assholes. They don't need to take the big swinging turns these days. It is just laziness as they have power steering in trucks these days (so why should he let them turn left from the right lane .... etc..). Yes I **** you not. Did you know the only reason a truck swing out wide is because it gives the driver a chance to turn the steering wheel enough [bighmmm]The wide swing is to clear the obstacle as the trailer does not follow the same track as the prime mover...

Cheers

[PhilipA]

I was once passed on the M1 North of Sydney by a Statesman towing a big van at at least 140Kmh.

I marvelled at his/her chutzpah.

Regards PhilipA

[ozscott]

Photo the the sculpted leccy buckets and dash. It's a nice place to be. I like the front remodelling (rear is better too).

Cheershttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190922/26ffde697a9c3f269fa6a4039038720b.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190922/f648f83351a240da3a4e5ead803a9bfb.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190922/1fb5b0d42922141219ab64050e43a991.jpg

[ramblingboy42]

My friends I grew up with had a caravan Hire service.

They had 10-15 vans from 13' to 28'6".

They towed them everywhere ...at highway speeds with a 55hp petrol engined vehicle from 1956 until 1967 when they bought a powerful petrol engined vehicle.

The first one was an FJ ute , the second one was a HD X2 wagon....which I think had 100hp

The vans towed perfectly because they set them up properly with the centre lines of the towbar and the centre line of the hitch triangulated exactly to the wheels , and believe me in the 50/60/70's , torsion bars on the hitch.

They were probably ahead of everyone then , but how many people actually align their towbar/hitch/wheels?

Not very many...this why the vans start to sway, because they are actually off centre.

[Tombie]

And many are built to a floor plan the client wants rather than one that’s balanced and safe.

See plenty like that....

Kicker was one that had En-suite at rear with Granite benchtops. The kitchen area was stone benches and solid hardwood cabinets were everywhere. 3 water tanks on board and then every conceivable item in, under, on, throughout. All behind a 200 series with a GVM/GCM upgrade.

Owner told me they loved it but dare not go over 85km/h as it was easily shaken. No ****!

[DoubleChevron]

And many are built to a floor plan the client wants rather than one that’s balanced and safe.

See plenty like that....

Kicker was one that had En-suite at rear with Granite benchtops. The kitchen area was stone benches and solid hardwood cabinets were everywhere. 3 water tanks on board and then every conceivable item in, under, on, throughout. All behind a 200 series with a GVM/GCM upgrade.

Owner told me they loved it but dare not go over 85km/h as it was easily shaken. No ****!

Mines an 80's caravan. The kitchen and heavy stuff is over the axles. its setup perfectly as far as i can tell. Its a handful in gusty winds, particualy swirling side winds (the worst spot i've found is leaving Ballarat), the moutains to the side of the highway seems to create the "perfect storm" for winds that affect caravans. A couple of the mountain ranges up in Queensland were almost as bad. Some days with no winds you can tow it at 100km/h and it's bloody perfect. Other days your doing 80km/h .... and the bastard is walking you all over the place (you have one hand ready for the brake controller ..... as your waiting for it to take off.... the worst is a B double overtaking you without leaving enough room between you and them). Its never swayed badly on me, but as soon as I feel it moving .... I'm on the side of my seat, and put the brake controller on and knock 10km/h off the speed.

A lot of modern caravans have big grey water tanks to the back ... so if you free camp you end up with little nose weight. The craziest thing I've ever seen is the "toy hauler". Any heavy "toy" in the back of one of those things and it's a recipe for disaster.

Everything in industy either uses dog trailers or 5th/semi trailer configuration. Simply because there not nuts enough to use such a dangerous combination of "axles in the middle.... lets cross our fingers and hope its stable) type deal.

Interestingly if you investigate it the worst for safetly are the caravan that "never move". If you watch the bailey caravan videos these are the ones with the weight at the ends... eg: generator, battery system, LPG bottles and full front boot .... two big massive offroad spare wheels and water/fuel drums on the rear bumper. Its takes a lot to get them to start swaying and moving around ........................ But once they do, its all over, you can't "bring them back". The caravans with all the weight over the axles walk around a lot more, but can be recovered (and you probably have a lot more warning when it is about to go pear shaped).

YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFzrWHTG5e8)

the weights at the ends is your typical aussie caravan.

seeya,
Shane L

[scarry]

Thanks for confirming, like I said BS!

More like 80 to 85 km/hr holding everyone up[bigsad]

[JDNSW]

Might be worth a reminder that until about 20 years ago NSW limited the speed of all trailers over 750kg to 80kph - a nice little earner from interstate visitors! And NSW still has no problem with L and P drivers being restricted to 90, even on busy two lane roads with few overtaking opportunities and a speed of 110. So you are going to get a lot of vehicles travelling below the speed limit anyway, quite apart from those who just want to travel slower, and, of course, the ones that cannot travel anywhere near the speed limit, such as a lot of machinery, some overdimension loads, etc.

The speed limit is a limit, not a target.

[Eevo]

The speed limit is a limit, not a target.

i dont agree.

if you cant do 30kmh over the limit and weave in and out of traffic, then you shouldnt have a licence.

[Tombie]

Choosing to go 20km/h or more below the limit when capable of higher is a breach of the RTA and you can be fined.

Bit different to a vehicle never designed to reach such lofty heights.

P2s can do 100km/h btw....

We did this all as a safety analysis a few years ago. The simple fact remains - willingly holding up traffic or travelling at a pace significantly lower than the general flow of traffic - actually increases your risk.

It’s one of the prime reasons in the USA that vehicles on interstates etc all doing well over the posted limit won’t be booked if going with the flow - it’s about smooth safe traffic flow.

[Tombie]

i dont agree.

if you cant do 30kmh over the limit and weave in and out of traffic, then you shouldnt have a licence.

30? Have you slowed down?

[trout1105]

Choosing to go 20km/h or more below the limit when capable of higher is a breach of the RTA and you can be fined.

Bit different to a vehicle never designed to reach such lofty heights.

P2s can do 100km/h btw....

We did this all as a safety analysis a few years ago. The simple fact remains - willingly holding up traffic or travelling at a pace significantly lower than the general flow of traffic - actually increases your risk.

It’s one of the prime reasons in the USA that vehicles on interstates etc all doing well over the posted limit won’t be booked if going with the flow - it’s about smooth safe traffic flow.

We are Not living in the US (Thankfully) and once on the open highway you can travel at whatever speed you like without getting into strife with the constabulary (up to But Below) the posted limit Unless you are "Deliberately" impeding the flow of traffic.
In WA if you are towing ANYTHING, in a truck or a bus the speed limit is 100kph So even by your odd standards 80kph IS acceptable.

[Eevo]

30? Have you slowed down?


[bigwhistle]

[1nando]

Might be worth a reminder that until about 20 years ago NSW limited the speed of all trailers over 750kg to 80kph - a nice little earner from interstate visitors! And NSW still has no problem with L and P drivers being restricted to 90, even on busy two lane roads with few overtaking opportunities and a speed of 110. So you are going to get a lot of vehicles travelling below the speed limit anyway, quite apart from those who just want to travel slower, and, of course, the ones that cannot travel anywhere near the speed limit, such as a lot of machinery, some overdimension loads, etc.

The speed limit is a limit, not a target.I get the P platers being restricted, also get that trucks are speed limited to 100kmph.

No problem with both those 2 points, my problem however is that if you're doing 20kms below the posted limit because your scared that your vehcile is unstable towing 3 ton or more at 100kmph or the limit for that matter then you need to consider updating that mu-x, trition, prado, ranger, everest, dmax, etc and upgrade to a vehcile that can comfortably with no concern ie yank tank, y62, range rover, 200 series (assuming they've remapped the transmission to lock up the torque converter).

I'm of the belief that a light 2 ton dual cab or medium size SUV towing 3 ton or more is not only dangerous but stupid. To tow that sort of weight the tow vehicle should really weigh more than 2.5 ton or more. It's simple; the heavier the prime mover (tow vehicle) the safer it's going to be to pull a similar size load. E.g. a y62 will be a safer tow vehicle than a mux towing 3 ton!

[Tombie]

We are Not living in the US (Thankfully) and once on the open highway you can travel at whatever speed you like without getting into strife with the constabulary (up to But Below) the posted limit Unless you are "Deliberately" impeding the flow of traffic.
In WA if you are towing ANYTHING, in a truck or a bus the speed limit is 100kph So even by your odd standards 80kph IS acceptable.

My odd standards? I’ve been charged for impeding the flow of traffic - I was doing 125km/h at the time.

You’re missing the point that a large number of Wobblies are doing just that - deliberately travelling below the limit for no reasons better than “saving fuel” or “it’s only stable below x km/h”. I’ve even heard the bloody dangerous and ludicrous comment “we like to look around as we drive”.

Just because Wait Awhile has a 100km/h limit doesn’t mean all states do. And running slower than the large boys increases interactions and risk.

However, the safe logic of flowing with the majority of traffic (100km/h+) is sound.

Poor combinations are dangerous - full stop. Many Aussie designed vans are vulnerable to imbalance.

In fair conditions I can happily and with stability tow my van or my boat to well in excess of the speed limit, safely switch lanes, overtake, even take mild evasion manoeuvres with no ill effects.

That’s due to well sorted combinations.

It should be mandatory that all combinations on the road be tested at time of purchase for stability at 100km/h.
And IMO no LV should be allowed to tow heavier than itself.

[trout1105]

My odd standards? I’ve been charged for impeding the flow of traffic - I was doing 125km/h at the time.

You’re missing the point that a large number of Wobblies are doing just that - deliberately travelling below the limit for no reasons better than “saving fuel” or “it’s only stable below x km/h”. I’ve even heard the bloody dangerous and ludicrous comment “we like to look around as we drive”.

Just because Wait Awhile has a 100km/h limit doesn’t mean all states do. And running slower than the large boys increases interactions and risk.

However, the safe logic of flowing with the majority of traffic (100km/h+) is sound.

Poor combinations are dangerous - full stop. Many Aussie designed vans are vulnerable to imbalance.

In fair conditions I can happily and with stability tow my van or my boat to well in excess of the speed limit, safely switch lanes, overtake, even take mild evasion manoeuvres with no ill effects.

That’s due to well sorted combinations.

It should be mandatory that all combinations on the road be tested at time of purchase for stability at 100km/h.
And IMO no LV should be allowed to tow heavier than itself.

Travelling a bit slower DOES save fuel AND puts Far less strain on the tug AND the trailer, So I personally cant see a problem.
Also IF there is a problem (roo's/livestock a blowout) travelling a bit slower is by FAR the "Safer" option.
Speed KILLS, That is a Proven FACT So travelling a bit slower is NOT dangerous even though it May annoy you[bigwhistle]

[JDNSW]

As a footnote to this discussion I am reminded of an occasion in 1963, when I was heading south from Townsville in my Series 1 on the Bruce Hwy. travelling at about 50mph, as that was as fast as it was comfortable. I was passed, almost as if I was standing still by what was then very, very rare - a van about 30ft long. It was towed by a then quite new Rolls Royce Silver Cloud II, instantly recognisable by the ugly four headlights grafted onto the original design. I estimate that it was doing at least 75mph.

I'd like to be able to say that I passed it at the next petrol station, but that was the last I saw of it. Probably got to brisbane about the time I got to Rocky!

[1nando]

Travelling a bit slower DOES save fuel AND puts Far less strain on the tug AND the trailer, So I personally cant see a problem.
Also IF there is a problem (roo's/livestock a blowout) travelling a bit slower is by FAR the "Safer" option.
Speed KILLS, That is a Proven FACT So travelling a bit slower is NOT dangerous even though it May annoy you[bigwhistle]I think boredom kills more, IMHO.

What I don't get is why you "slow going" van haulers accelerate when there is finally a passing lane for everyone that's been patiently waiting to pass?

Is it because the extra lane allows your 2 ton dual cab (insert inappropriate tow vehicle here) towing 3 ton to lane swerve with more confidence? [emoji12][emoji2960]

[DoubleChevron]

I get the P platers being restricted, also get that trucks are speed limited to 100kmph.

No problem with both those 2 points, my problem however is that if you're doing 20kms below the posted limit because your scared that your vehcile is unstable towing 3 ton or more at 100kmph or the limit for that matter then you need to consider updating that mu-x, trition, prado, ranger, everest, dmax, etc and upgrade to a vehcile that can comfortably with no concern ie yank tank, y62, range rover, 200 series (assuming they've remapped the transmission to lock up the torque converter).

I'm of the belief that a light 2 ton dual cab or medium size SUV towing 3 ton or more is not only dangerous but stupid. To tow that sort of weight the tow vehicle should really weigh more than 2.5 ton or more. It's simple; the heavier the prime mover (tow vehicle) the safer it's going to be to pull a similar size load. E.g. a y62 will be a safer tow vehicle than a mux towing 3 ton!

You are living in a dream world. You're not safe towing at high speeds with a standard twin axle trailer that has massive wind sail area. Speed is exponential. Something that would have been a wiggle from the caravan at 80km/h .... is 'upside down on the side of the road' at 100km/h. If you want to travel safely at higher speeds, invest in a 5th wheeler setup.

There is no vehicles on the roads with the same setup as a caravan ... that travel at high speed as its simply not a safe way to setup a large vehicle. Sure if your an F350 that weigh 3tons empty towing a 1500kg caravan ... you will get away with a lot.

When we are travelling I'd say to my wife "he comes another nomad".... I'd be travelling at what I considered a safe speed. They obvoiusly had there cruise control set to 100km/h .... Everytime without fail that would get about level with my drivers door and there caravan would take off.... I would already be on the brakes giving them as much room as possible.... they'd be all over the bloody road by the time they past me and would panic and brake back to 80km/h ............... and suddenly I'm up there bloody arse ..... fast forward 5minutes and they have forgotten how close they came to loosing everything and they would set the cruise to 100km/h and be off again.

The impatient fools that think towed vehicles should be travelling at the speed limit need to develop some common sense. 30years ago cars had 1/10th of the pulling power even pulling the equivelant sized 'vans. Pretty much everyone travelled lazily along at around 80km/h ( MUCH slower up and down the hills.... just like the trucks did).

seeya,
Shane L.

seeya,
Shane L.

[DoubleChevron]

My odd standards? I’ve been charged for impeding the flow of traffic - I was doing 125km/h at the time.

You’re missing the point that a large number of Wobblies are doing just that - deliberately travelling below the limit for no reasons better than “saving fuel” or “it’s only stable below x km/h”. I’ve even heard the bloody dangerous and ludicrous comment “we like to look around as we drive”.

Just because Wait Awhile has a 100km/h limit doesn’t mean all states do. And running slower than the large boys increases interactions and risk.

However, the safe logic of flowing with the majority of traffic (100km/h+) is sound.

Poor combinations are dangerous - full stop. Many Aussie designed vans are vulnerable to imbalance.

In fair conditions I can happily and with stability tow my van or my boat to well in excess of the speed limit, safely switch lanes, overtake, even take mild evasion manoeuvres with no ill effects.

That’s due to well sorted combinations.

It should be mandatory that all combinations on the road be tested at time of purchase for stability at 100km/h.
And IMO no LV should be allowed to tow heavier than itself.

In my experiance the wind sail area is a HUGE issue. Like I have already said, I've been back to 60km/h travelling in heavy winds down warnanbool way. It is nothing to do with fuel economy. It is simple, pure common sense to travel at a safe speed.

You sound just like my brother ... he always claimed his rig was always dead stable at the speed limit (boat and caravan). We met him at halls gap a few years back. The day we were heading home home was gusty heavy winds. I picked 80km/h .... any faster was absolute insanity. He has never since stated he can tow at any speed. I expect him to cruise by the entire way home. When I asked him about it later, he went reallly quiet and finally admitted he sat on 80km/h and was blown all over the road.

He has also his car *change lanes" towing a big twin hull boat up the melbourne highway... gusty winds again, they must have got under the boat between the hulls and unloaded the ball.... It instantly jumped to the other lane. fortunately a duel carriage way road ... with no-one overtaking him. He had just towed the thing all the way from northern NSW without an issue.

until they mandate 5th wheel combinations (which is a million times better.... why do you think trucking uses it). People MUST travel to the conditions.

boats and trailers I've never really had an issue with ... but bloody caravans with there big wind sail area .....

[Tombie]

30 years ago my family and friends were towing with GTs [emoji41].

If your combo can’t do it safely that’s your issue to resolve. I will happily and confidently tow (in moderate conditions) up to the posted limit.

And yes Mr Trout - speed kills - no stationary object has every crashed into another stationary object. Congratulations you too have swallowed the Government scare campaign.

I’ll see if I can find the link to a proposal in the UK years ago, it was recognising modern vehicles as safer and able to go faster with less road incidents - a proposal to increase all speed limits was put forward, the government backed it, data supported it. Right up until the squealing minority kicked up. Then it became unpopular and was shelved.

Heck, the Hume was designed as a 130km/h corridor. To reduce travel time and fatigue. Biggest killer on that road - fatigue!

[Vern]

Travelling a bit slower DOES save fuel AND puts Far less strain on the tug AND the trailer, So I personally cant see a problem.
Also IF there is a problem (roo's/livestock a blowout) travelling a bit slower is by FAR the "Safer" option.
Speed KILLS, That is a Proven FACT So travelling a bit slower is NOT dangerous even though it May annoy you[bigwhistle]You were quoting how great your fuel economy is, but that is at 20kmh below the speed limit, vehicle is barely working. Now this thread is about petrol v diesel, not towing vans at below average speed limits. So most are quoting l/100 at highway speeds, so IF you towed etc..at highway speeds (100kmh) I would be guessing you would be adding 5l/100 to those figures or thereabouts would it not???

[1nando]

In my experiance the wind sail area is a HUGE issue. Like I have already said, I've been back to 60km/h travelling in heavy winds down warnanbool way. It is nothing to do with fuel economy. It is simple, pure common sense to travel at a safe speed.

You sound just like my brother ... he always claimed his rig was always dead stable at the speed limit (boat and caravan). We met him at halls gap a few years back. The day we were heading home home was gusty heavy winds. I picked 80km/h .... any faster was absolute insanity. He has never since stated he can tow at any speed. I expect him to cruise by the entire way home. When I asked him about it later, he went reallly quiet and finally admitted he sat on 80km/h and was blown all over the road.

He has also his car *change lanes" towing a big twin hull boat up the melbourne highway... gusty winds again, they must have got under the boat between the hulls and unloaded the ball.... It instantly jumped to the other lane. fortunately a duel carriage way road ... with no-one overtaking him. He had just towed the thing all the way from northern NSW without an issue.

until they mandate 5th wheel combinations (which is a million times better.... why do you think trucking uses it). People MUST travel to the conditions.

boats and trailers I've never really had an issue with ... but bloody caravans with there big wind sail area .....Shane; i agree with your wind point, it's a bit like drive to the conditions when it's raining. The ability to analise and be able to adapt to the conditions needs to be learned over time and if ignored can lead to potential accidents and death.
However, wheel track, wheel base, vehicle weight, vehcile suspension and chassis dynamics, and a properly setup van are more important than wind. High or excessive wind is not always a constant, poor vehcile choice and incorrectly loaded vehciles and vans are, I see it all the time. Typical example; nomads+ mux + bullbar+ roof rack+loaded car+ enormous van = stupid combination! Regardless of wind or any other variable the environment can throw up.

Then there's long up hills; where under powered small diesels slow to a snail's pace and every bloke and his dog behind it get frustrated.... then the down hill starts and they speed up and when you finally get a chance to try and pass them they're at the speed limit only for another up hill to start and that cycle repeat. Or they drive under the limit in a single lane carriage way and as soon as there is a passing lane speed up.....People need to learn about how to tow and do it safely and with consideration for other road users cause I couldn't give a f#%k about them or their van just like they don't give a hoots about me.

Luckily for me I blast past these idiots and it's a non event in my beast.

People die towing cause they're using inappropriate underpowered vehciles to tow massive loads not because they're driving their van like there in the Sydney to Hobart yatch race.[emoji2369]

[Bigbjorn]

Speed KILLS, That is a Proven FACT So travelling a bit slower is NOT dangerous even though it May annoy you[bigwhistle]

So you have fallen for the big lie that justifies revenue cameras. Speeding, as in exceeding the arbitrary speed limit set by politicians, bureaucrats, and police without regard to the prevailing circumstances, is almost never the sole cause of a motor vehicle incident. Our speed limits have not been increased other than metrication and a few miles of highway, since 1960. There have been exponential improvements in vehicles and roads since then and most major highways could stand an increase from 100 to 140.

[trout1105]

You were quoting how great your fuel economy is, but that is at 20kmh below the speed limit, vehicle is barely working. Now this thread is about petrol v diesel, not towing vans at below average speed limits. So most are quoting l/100 at highway speeds, so IF you towed etc..at highway speeds (100kmh) I would be guessing you would be adding 5l/100 to those figures or thereabouts would it not???

I tow at 85/90kph most times and Yes I get good fuel economy.
Towing a large boat or van is similar to cruising on a Boat, at mid/upper mid range on the revs ( I get 18/20kts at 4000rpm) I get good range from my 120l tank, If I travel flat out at 5600rpm and about 30/32kts I more than double my fuel consumption and I am flogging the guts out of my motor and boat.
So for more than twice the fuel usage and abusing my boat/motor (and my back) I gain a miserly 10/12kts in speed which is bloody senseless, The Same applies to my 4WD when towing or just driving.
IF I need to be somewhere at a certain time I leave early so I Don't have to SPEED like the other lunatics I see towing vans and boats "Wobbling" all over the road because they "Think" that they "Have" to be doing the speed limit or faster.

[Tombie]

The same doesn’t apply - there are no boats stuck behind your boat, restricted to where they can pass. Nor are they forced to slow down behind you.

Poor analogy.

Towing at the speed limit is hardly flogging a motor, same for an outboard - they’ll sing all day every day and you’ll throw the boat away before it wears them out.

I’ve always been a firm believer that “do what you want, as long as it doesn’t impact me”. Problem is all these behaviours DO impact me, my friends, my work colleagues and other road users trying to optimise their time for a multitude of reasons.

Half an hour spent waiting to pass a vehicle doing 80-85 adds significant time to many of my journeys. It equates to 20km lost for every 30 min delay.

[AK83]

.....

And yes Mr Trout - speed kills - no stationary object has every crashed into another stationary object. Congratulations you too have swallowed the Government scare campaign.

....




So you have fallen for the big lie that justifies revenue cameras. Speeding, as in exceeding the arbitrary speed limit set by politicians, bureaucrats, and police without regard to the prevailing circumstances, is almost never the sole cause of a motor vehicle incident. Our speed limits have not been increased other than metrication and a few miles of highway, since 1960. There have been exponential improvements in vehicles and roads since then and most major highways could stand an increase from 100 to 140.

LOL! so physics has nothing to do with it, and both Isaac Newton and Einstein were wrong(about their respective theories of energy and it's conservation.
Good to know.
Maybe they're were part of the government conspiracy too.
All just a ruse to make governments all that money from speeding fines.
LOL! they must have paid off the national debt by now considering all the income those speeding fines must be bringing in.



.... So most are quoting l/100 at highway speeds, so IF you towed etc..at highway speeds (100kmh) I would be guessing you would be adding 5l/100 to those figures or thereabouts would it not???

Sorry, but define 'highway speeds'.
Half the highways here in Vic have had their speeds reduced to the point that it's quicker to detour 30klms on a 30klm drive .. that is the 60klm drive is quicker than the 30klm route! [tonguewink]
Your assumption is that highway speeds are 100km/h .. which is just wrong.
I dunno where Woolgoolga is, but it's obviously not anywhere near Warnambool-Port Fairy in Vic.
You try maintaining 100km/h in this highway!(without a heap of demerit points and loss of license that is).
And the reason this 30km stretch of highway has it's speed limit set to 80k/h for 99.9% of it's length is that too many numpties with no respect for others, SPEEDing along it causing fatalities to the point that the conspiratorial managers of the state have decreased its speeds to what the flow really is.


It's hysterical how one topic turns to something else completely and onto reading the noble prize winning comments about speed and it's dangers.

[trout1105]

The same doesn’t apply - there are no boats stuck behind your boat, restricted to where they can pass. Nor are they forced to slow down behind you.

Poor analogy.

Towing at the speed limit is hardly flogging a motor, same for an outboard - they’ll sing all day every day and you’ll throw the boat away before it wears them out.

I’ve always been a firm believer that “do what you want, as long as it doesn’t impact me”. Problem is all these behaviours DO impact me, my friends, my work colleagues and other road users trying to optimise their time for a multitude of reasons.

Half an hour spent waiting to pass a vehicle doing 80-85 adds significant time to many of my journeys. It equates to 20km lost for every 30 min delay.

Oh Dear[bigwhistle]
ANY engine be it marine or car is NOT designed to be run flat chat all the time and IF you actually knew anything about boats you will know that the boat itself will always outlast its engine.
Like I have said before if you need to get somewhere at a certain time then leave earlier because believe it or not You do not own the road and other road users don't want/need to drive flat chat and you will simply just have to put up with it and allow a bit of extra time to get to your destination.

[Eevo]

Speed KILLS, That is a Proven FACT So travelling a bit slower is NOT dangerous even though it May annoy you[bigwhistle]

bad driving kills. not speed.

if speeding was dangerous, why would we allow our police to do it?

[Eevo]

Oh Dear[bigwhistle]
ANY engine be it marine or car is NOT designed to be run flat chat all the time


umm, the plane i fly, take off rpm and cruise rpm are the same. the engine is flat chat all the time.

[trout1105]

umm, the plane i fly, take off rpm and cruise rpm are the same. the engine is flat chat all the time.

Yes But the "Pitch" differs which means that the engine isn't working as hard cruising as it is on take off [bigwhistle]

[Eevo]

getting back to petrol for petrol vs diesel, imho it depends upon the application.


diesel as a sports car? no thanks.
petrol in a jet aircraft? no thanks

[Eevo]

Yes But the "Pitch" differs which means that the engine isn't working as hard cruising as it is on take off [bigwhistle]


no, its a fixed pitch prop.

[1nando]

getting back to petrol for petrol vs diesel, imho it depends upon the application.


diesel as a sports car? no thanks.
petrol in a jet aircraft? no thanks[emoji848] so tell me, in that case which is the better to tow with; diesel or petrol?

Ps: speed never killed anyone, driver error or inability did!

[JDNSW]

Most fixed pitch light aircraft piston engines simply have a red line maximum rpm, which can be used for continuous operation - but few owners approve of this.

However, many, if not all, more sophisticated aircraft piston engines have specific restrictions on the power that can be used, which usually specify a maximum power available for takeoff (specified by rpm and manifold pressure), which is usually limited to a short time, typically five minutes, and a separate, lower, power limit for contiuous operation.

[Tombie]

Oh Dear[bigwhistle]
ANY engine be it marine or car is NOT designed to be run flat chat all the time and IF you actually knew anything about boats you will know that the boat itself will always outlast its engine.
Like I have said before if you need to get somewhere at a certain time then leave earlier because believe it or not You do not own the road and other road users don't want/need to drive flat chat and you will simply just have to put up with it and allow a bit of extra time to get to your destination.

I meant you would often be sick of the boat long before the high rpm operation was detrimental to the engine. I’ve personally only seen engines replaced on hours, never due to wearing out (although I have spoken with another Shark Cat owner on his 17th set of motors).

A 4wd at 100km/h is far from redline. So hardly working it’s arse off.

No, I know nothing about boats - only served on her majesty’s ships and own an operate my Sharkcat.

Nope, I know nothing about being at sea [emoji41].


Btw, as a citizen and tax payer - I, like all other Australians - Do own the road [emoji41]

100km/h is not even remotely “flat chat”

[Tombie]

LOL! so physics has nothing to do with it, and both Isaac Newton and Einstein were wrong(about their respective theories of energy and it's conservation.
Good to know.
Maybe they're were part of the government conspiracy too.
All just a ruse to make governments all that money from speeding fines.
LOL! they must have paid off the national debt by now considering all the income those speeding fines must be bringing in.




Sorry, but define 'highway speeds'.
Half the highways here in Vic have had their speeds reduced to the point that it's quicker to detour 30klms on a 30klm drive .. that is the 60klm drive is quicker than the 30klm route! [tonguewink]
Your assumption is that highway speeds are 100km/h .. which is just wrong.
I dunno where Woolgoolga is, but it's obviously not anywhere near Warnambool-Port Fairy in Vic.
You try maintaining 100km/h in this highway!(without a heap of demerit points and loss of license that is).
And the reason this 30km stretch of highway has it's speed limit set to 80k/h for 99.9% of it's length is that too many numpties with no respect for others, SPEEDing along it causing fatalities to the point that the conspiratorial managers of the state have decreased its speeds to what the flow really is.


It's hysterical how one topic turns to something else completely and onto reading the noble prize winning comments about speed and it's dangers.

Hardly.... I know that section of road - Speed wasn’t the cause of those fatalities. It’s a symptom of stupidity or incompetence.

Speed alone is not a problem. Like guns - guns don’t kill people - neither does speed. Inappropriate application of it in unsuitable locations or conditions is the problem.

If you can’t see the root cause - steering wheel attendants - then you aren’t looking at the cause of the problem.

[1nando]

Hardly.... I know that section of road - Speed wasn’t the cause of those fatalities. It’s a symptom of stupidity or incompetence.

Speed alone is not a problem. Like guns - guns don’t kill people - neither does speed. Inappropriate application of it in unsuitable locations or conditions is the problem.

If you can’t see the root cause - steering wheel attendants - then you aren’t looking at the cause of the problem.But it's easier to blame the guns, the venues rather than the thugs that gave us the lockout laws, speed rather than the spastics driving....

[trout1105]

[emoji848] so tell me, in that case which is the better to tow with; diesel or petrol?

Ps: speed never killed anyone, driver error or inability did!

There is a Good reason why Tractors and trucks that tow pretty much 100% of the time are Diesel powered, Reliability, Durability and Economy [thumbsupbig]
Yes a modern petrol engine can do the same job BUT when they are asked to do the heavy work they chew the juice and don't like it much, A diesel engine "Thrives" on hard work[biggrin]

[1nando]

There is a Good reason why Tractors and trucks that tow pretty much 100% of the time are Diesel powered, Reliability, Durability and Economy [thumbsupbig]
Yes a modern petrol engine can do the same job BUT when they are asked to do the heavy work they chew the juice and don't like it much, A diesel engine "Thrives" on hard work[biggrin]Agree with nearly all that. In saying that I reckon my 5.6 liter v8 NA petrol would out work and outlast any modern day highly strung small capacity diesel $#tbox [emoji41][emoji6]

[shanegtr]

In regards to the speeds people travel at while towning - I couldn't really give a toss what speed people choose to use. If I catch up to someone travelling slower I get past when ever it is safe - no big deal. No point getting impatient to get past as that just leads to doing something dumb - just look at the monthly dash cam Australia youtube channel vids - 99% of the **** there is either inattention or impatience.

Back to the petrol vs diesel question. I personally wouldn't own a DPF equipped vehicle so if buying new I'd be getting a petrol. Otherwise I'd go diesel for a 4wd

[Bigbjorn]

Oh Dear[bigwhistle]
ANY engine be it marine or car is NOT designed to be run flat chat all the time .

Industrial/commercial diesel engines have a governed rpm and power rating. They are sold to be used at this speed and rating continuously. This applies to marine, stationary and mobile plant and heavy automotive engines. Ratings can vary according to the application The Detroit 8V92TA's in my Road Bosses were rated at 435 hp @ 2100 rpm. Same engine in marine dress was 545 @ 2300. Marine, gen set and pumping engines are often run at rated revs and output for days on end if not weeks. I would not use a small car diesel engine at full load and 4000 rpm for any time longer than short bursts. There would be legs out of bed and busted cranks.

[rick130]

So you have fallen for the big lie that justifies revenue cameras. Speeding, as in exceeding the arbitrary speed limit set by politicians, bureaucrats, and police without regard to the prevailing circumstances, is almost never the sole cause of a motor vehicle incident. Our speed limits have not been increased other than metrication and a few miles of highway, since 1960. There have been exponential improvements in vehicles and roads since then and most major highways could stand an increase from 100 to 140.I agree 100% Brian, except the average driver is incapable of driving safely at 100km/h.
I have to deal with them every day. [emoji17]

People are taught to pass a test in Australia, not drive and control a vehicle safely as they are in, say, Germany.

Governments spend huge $$ on enforcement and not on teaching.
'Safety' campaigns are totally arse about, but I'm digressing....

[scarry]

Agree with nearly all that. In saying that I reckon my 5.6 liter v8 NA petrol would out work and outlast any modern day highly strung small capacity diesel $#tbox [emoji41][emoji6]

True,but i don't think that style of petrol engine will be around for years to come.

Many petrol engines are now highly complicated,with turbos and superchargers,so i bet they are highly strung as well.

A good example are the latest ingenium petrols from JLR.

[JDNSW]

Exactly. The pressures of legislation on emissions and fuel economy have made both diesel and petrol engines far more complex and has forced them to converge in most respects, making the choice more difficult. Diesel, in my view, retains the advantages of a less flammable fuel, which also has a greater energy content per litre, but will tend to be slightly heavier.

Both engines can have similar levels of driveability, reliability and durability - these depend on design and manufacture rather than whether they are petrol or diesel.

[trout1105]

Agree with nearly all that. In saying that I reckon my 5.6 liter v8 NA petrol would out work and outlast any modern day highly strung small capacity diesel $#tbox [emoji41][emoji6]

Most of the modern engines are "highly strung" and I doubt that they would last as long as most of their "lower tech" predecessors.
Do you think that your 5.6l V8 petrol would outwork/outlast the smaller 4.5l V8 Toyota diesel doing the same work?.
I have owned many V8's (Ford, Landrover, Toyota, Holden, Chrysler, Chev) simply because I Love them and all of them have been naturally asperated and all but one of them have been petrol engines.
Out of all of these V8 engines the Toyota 4.5l has been the least troublesome and the most economical of them all, It still has a ton of grunt that a V8 provides (which is why I Love them) But it does the job more reliably and cheaper than my other V8's have done.

[1nando]

Most of the modern engines are "highly strung" and I doubt that they would last as long as most of their "lower tech" predecessors.
Do you think that your 5.6l V8 petrol would outwork/outlast the smaller 4.5l V8 Toyota diesel doing the same work?.
I have owned many V8's (Ford, Landrover, Toyota, Holden, Chrysler, Chev) simply because I Love them and all of them have been naturally asperated and all but one of them have been petrol engines.
Out of all of these V8 engines the Toyota 4.5l has been the least troublesome and the most economical of them all, It still has a ton of grunt that a V8 provides (which is why I Love them) But it does the job more reliably and cheaper than my other V8's have done.Please tell me your kidding?? The tdv8 4.5 is the best boat anchor going around.
Injectors are common between 100-150,000kms, alternator in worst position ever, air box leaks dust, gearbox can't lock up towing heavy weight overt 90kph and over heats. They're good after you spend another $10k on top of your purchase price to get them sorted. All you need to do is gp on the FB and there's actually pages dedicated to dusted 200 motors and unhappy customers.

[Homestar]

Most of the modern engines are "highly strung" and I doubt that they would last as long as most of their "lower tech" predecessors.
Do you think that your 5.6l V8 petrol would outwork/outlast the smaller 4.5l V8 Toyota diesel doing the same work?.
I have owned many V8's (Ford, Landrover, Toyota, Holden, Chrysler, Chev) simply because I Love them and all of them have been naturally asperated and all but one of them have been petrol engines.
Out of all of these V8 engines the Toyota 4.5l has been the least troublesome and the most economical of them all, It still has a ton of grunt that a V8 provides (which is why I Love them) But it does the job more reliably and cheaper than my other V8's have done.

You must have got a good one - these engines are dogs, and neither in this one or in any alternate reality would I call them economical...

Put 'Toyota 4.5 V8' into google - the suggested search will bring up 'Toyota V8 Diesel problems' as one of the most searched - and the list is a looong one.

[trout1105]

Please tell me your kidding?? The tdv8 4.5 is the best boat anchor going around.

Compared to what? a 4l petrol Landrover engine, I don't think so.
My 79 series has done 336,000k's.
Yes it has had a new alternator, just like any other V8 or for that matter ANY engine would at that stage of its life, Alternators don't last forever.
I do agree that the alternator is in a stupid position though.
It has absolutely NO trouble "locking up" or gearbox overheating as it has a manual box.
I bought this when it had 215,000k's on it and I don't know its service history But after over 100,000k's of ownership and mainly used for towing and offroad work ALL I have had to replace is the alternator and give it regular servicing every 5,000k's.
Let me know how your 5.6l petrol engine is going after over 300,000k's [bigwhistle]

[101RRS]

The single turbo Toyota 4.5 TDV8 is a slug of an engine for its engine capacity - low power and low torque and high fuel consumption. The engine produces less torque than a 2.7TDV6 and only a few more kw but still less than a twin turbo 2.7TDV6 and guzzles a lot more fuel for the same workload.

Garry

[1nando]

Compared to what? a 4l petrol Landrover engine, I don't think so.
My 79 series has done 336,000k's.
Yes it has had a new alternator, just like any other V8 or for that matter ANY engine would at that stage of its life, Alternators don't last forever.
I do agree that the alternator is in a stupid position though.
It has absolutely NO trouble "locking up" or gearbox overheating as it has a manual box.
I bought this when it had 215,000k's on it and I don't know its service history But after over 100,000k's of ownership and mainly used for towing and offroad work ALL I have had to replace is the alternator and give it regular servicing every 5,000k's.
Let me know how your 5.6l petrol engine is going after over 300,000k's [bigwhistle]The 79 is more relaible than 200 cause it's down tuned and not an auto.

As for the y62 all you need do is look at them for sale in the middle East. Some with over 600,000kms and many with mid 400,000kms. They get abused dune bashing and driven hard, they are so reliable they're the number 1 selling vehicle in the middle East. "Reliable": isn't that a word Toyota somehow forgot about along the way?[emoji2960][emoji12]

[scarry]

You must have got a good one - these engines are dogs, and neither in this one or in any alternate reality would I call them economical...

Put 'Toyota 4.5 V8' into google - the suggested search will bring up 'Toyota V8 Diesel problems' as one of the most searched - and the list is a looong one.

Type Land Rover problems in google and you will find a huge list of issues as well.

Have a real good look through those Toyota forums and you find heaps of them are chipped,flogged,modified,and not serviced correctly.Why wouldn’t they have issues?

The number of them around is huge,so it would be interesting to know what percentage actually fail due to a manufacturing fault.

One article I read recently claimed over 250 000 have been sold just in Aus.

I know quite a few that have had them for years and never had an issue.

Many that get looked after do well over 300 to 400 000 k before needing any work at all.

Sure the alternator,and starter are in stupid places,but the alternator is very easily changed,if it fails.The auto in the 200 also doesn’t lock up at times,but the later models are better.

No vehicle is perfect,they are all a compromise.

[Tombie]

Most of the modern engines are "highly strung" and I doubt that they would last as long as most of their "lower tech" predecessors.
Do you think that your 5.6l V8 petrol would outwork/outlast the smaller 4.5l V8 Toyota diesel doing the same work?.
I have owned many V8's (Ford, Landrover, Toyota, Holden, Chrysler, Chev) simply because I Love them and all of them have been naturally asperated and all but one of them have been petrol engines.
Out of all of these V8 engines the Toyota 4.5l has been the least troublesome and the most economical of them all, It still has a ton of grunt that a V8 provides (which is why I Love them) But it does the job more reliably and cheaper than my other V8's have done.

Easily... the Toyo V8 has massive service requirements including complete injection system replacement on schedule at 160k

[trout1105]

I take it that ALL of the detractors of the tojo 4.5 V8 actually personally
own one or have owned one to be able to "Qualify" their comments[bigwhistle]

[101RRS]

I take it that ALL of the detractors of the tojo 4.5 V8 actually personally
own one or have owned one to be able to "Qualify" their comments[bigwhistle]


I can qualify my comments firstly on the basis of published power and torque figures and the fact that my brother purchased a new single cab GXL in 2010 and we have been away a bit together - for sure not my vehicle but a vehicle i know pretty well. Compared to my RRS always used more fuel in the same circumstances, my bro was unimpresssed with power and torque so had it chipped and a larger exhaust put on it - still unhappy at its lack of power (for the engine size) - (and this is the basis of most complaints - power and torque is poor for a 4.5 litre engine).

He had enough after 3 years and went to a 200 series TDV8 - same 4.5litres but mores reasonable power and torque for the engine size but still only around the same a a 3.0 SDV6.

The single turbo 4.5 TDV8 only has around the same power and torque as a 2.7 TDv6 - says a lot and the TDV6 is not an overstressed engine - yes it has issues but so does the TDV8.

[ozscott]

All I know is that I have been zipping along today on the M1 and 100 to 110kph and averaging in the high 6's l/100k in the Triton. 1650rpm at 100kph in 6th and quiet. I'm liking that. Engine hasn't freed up either yet. Only has 800ks on it. Cheers

[trout1105]

All I know is that I have been zipping along today on the M1 and 100 to 110kph and averaging in the high 6's l/100k in the Triton. 1650rpm at 100kph in 6th and quiet. I'm liking that. Engine hasn't freed up either yet. Only has 800ks on it. Cheers

My daughter bought a new Triton twincab a few months ago and she also says it runs on the smell of an oily rag, She Loves it.

[1nando]

All I know is that I have been zipping along today on the M1 and 100 to 110kph and averaging in the high 6's l/100k in the Triton. 1650rpm at 100kph in 6th and quiet. I'm liking that. Engine hasn't freed up either yet. Only has 800ks on it. CheersHonestly that's great economy and I'm glad your enjoying it. I think Mitsubishi is probably the most reliable diesel engine on the market, all you have to do is look at pajero and triton who have been 2 of the most reliable vehciles on the market.

In saying that it does nothing for me. I'd have power over economy any day of the week.

[scarry]

.

The single turbo 4.5 TDV8 only has around the same power and torque as a 2.7 TDv6 - says a lot and the TDV6 is not an overstressed engine - yes it has issues but so does the TDV8.

Power and torque figures are not everything.
A good look at the power and torque curves for those two engines,in stock form, will show that they are completely different.
Different design,different application,installed in completely different types of vehicles.

Actually its like comparing apples and oranges.

Even driving the two,as i have done, is completely different,very difficult to compare.
The basic difference,for a start,one is manual,and the other auto,and on it goes.

I haven't towed with the 4.5,but have extensively with the 2.7,and it is working pretty hard on the speed limit towing slightly over 3T.

[101RRS]

Power and torque figures are not everything.
A good look at the power and torque curves for those two engines,in stock form, will show that they are completely different.
Different design,different application,installed in completely different types of vehicles.

Actually its like comparing apples and oranges.

The basic difference,for a start,one is manual,and the other auto,and on it goes.


Yes they are different - the TDV6 develops at slightly higher revs - but it has a 6 speed gearbox vs a 5 speed so stays on "song" better - and remember the TDV6 also came in a 6 speed manual as well as 6 speed auto.

I have not towed 3t but in similar configurations the RRS out performed the Toyota on the road and gave a lot better fuel consumption and all the time my brother was bitchin about his lack of power from his ute.

If your experiences are different - fine - but I stand by my assertion that for a 4.5 litre V8, the single turbo version is pretty lame when the TDV6s paltry 2.7 litres is up there with it and that engine is now low powered compared to modern diesels.

Interestingly my brother is now towing 3+ tonne and says the 4.5 twin turbo 200 Sahara he now has is poor, so is upgrading to a HSV Chev Silverado.

Cheers

Garry

[1nando]

Power and torque figures are not everything.
A good look at the power and torque curves for those two engines,in stock form, will show that they are completely different.
Different design,different application,installed in completely different types of vehicles.

Actually its like comparing apples and oranges.

Even driving the two,as i have done, is completely different,very difficult to compare.
The basic difference,for a start,one is manual,and the other auto,and on it goes.

I haven't towed with the 4.5,but have extensively with the 2.7,and it is working pretty hard on the speed limit towing slightly over 3T.I agree. As a example my petrol v8 makes 500nm at 1600rpm and 560nm at 4400 rpm with 298kw. Mr trout your BIG v8 diesel 4.5 makes 430nm at 1200rpm and 151kw at 3400rpm...

There's only one big engine in this example, the other is simply a waste of 4 cylinders and 2 liters.

I also know which one would tow better, work harder, be more reliable and blow unsuspecting P platers away at a set of lights [emoji1787][emoji16][emoji476]

[scarry]

I agree. As a example my petrol v8 makes 500nm at 1600rpm and 560nm at 4400 rpm with 298kw. Mr trout your BIG v8 diesel 4.5 makes 430nm at 1200rpm and 151kw at 3400rpm...

There's only one big engine in this example, the other is simply a waste of 4 cylinders and 2 liters.

I also know which one would tow better, work harder, be more reliable and blow unsuspecting P platers away at a set of lights [emoji1787][emoji16][emoji476]


But we certainly know which one blows the other away into the weeds when it comes to sales,here in Aus[bigwhistle]

For whatever reason.[biggrin]

[1nando]

But we certainly know which one blows the other away into the weeds when it comes to sales,here in Aus[bigwhistle]

For whatever reason.[biggrin][emoji207] who can't do math, luckily the rest of the world can. Only market in the world. Eg the price difference between my 62 and a 200 diesel will allow me to drive 600,000kms before the extra cost made sense. John cadogan actually mentioned that recently comparing the patrol y62 to the diesel LC in a nissan rant about infinity etc. My liters per hundred are not that much worse, my overall average may be 2-3 liters per hundred more on a combined average since owning it.

Anyway I'll be in a new 6 cylinder petrol defender again in 2 years [emoji41]

[scarry]

Interestingly my brother is now towing 3+ tonne and says the 4.5 twin turbo 200 Sahara he now has is poor, so is upgrading to a HSV Chev Silverado.

Cheers

Garry

Those things are huge.

Sounds like he is having difficulty finding a vehicle he likes or suits him,for whatever reason.

As i have said before,every vehicle is a compromise,none are perfect for your needs,just like most things in life[biggrin]

[scarry]

[emoji207]
Anyway I'll be in a new 6 cylinder petrol defender again in 2 years [emoji41]


Like me you will have to wait for the 130,now you are used to the room in the y62.[biggrin]

The 110 will be too small,unless you pack less.[bigsad]

My D4 needs to go but there is nothing around i like ATM.(SWMBO thinks the Y62 is too big)

The new LC will be interesting as well.

[1nando]

Like me you will have to wait for the 130,now you are used to the room in the y62.[biggrin]

The 110 will be too small,unless you pack less.[bigsad]

My D4 needs to go but there is nothing around i like ATM.(SWMBO thinks the Y62 is too big)

The new LC will be interesting as well.Tbh my Mrs hates driving it around town as it's to big. On long trips though she's the first one in the car[emoji2369]

[trout1105]

I agree. As a example my petrol v8 makes 500nm at 1600rpm and 560nm at 4400 rpm with 298kw. Mr trout your BIG v8 diesel 4.5 makes 430nm at 1200rpm and 151kw at 3400rpm...

There's only one big engine in this example, the other is simply a waste of 4 cylinders and 2 liters.

I also know which one would tow better, work harder, be more reliable and blow unsuspecting P platers away at a set of lights [emoji1787][emoji16][emoji476]

A 1970 Windsor 351 ( which I have owned) has similar specs (515nm/223kw), Nissan hasn't advanced much past this in the last 40 odd years[bigwhistle]
4.5l isn't a BIG V8 in anyone's standards But it is a Diesel and these are built to work hard and have a Long life, Petrol V8's Not so much regardless of how BIG they are.
As for "Blowing away unsuspecting P platers at the lights" Well I grew out of that Phase decades ago[bigwhistle]

[1nando]

A 1970 Windsor 351 ( which I have owned) has similar specs (515nm/223kw), Nissan hasn't advanced much past this in the last 40 odd years[bigwhistle]
4.5l isn't a BIG V8 in anyone's standards But it is a Diesel and these are built to work hard and have a Long life, Petrol V8's Not so much regardless of how BIG they are.
As for "Blowing away unsuspecting P platers at the lights" Well I grew out of that Phase decades ago[bigwhistle]Big difference is that the y62 makes the bulk of its torque earlier in rev range unlike most v8s that really need to rev. I also get excellent highway economy and considering my vehicle weight is over 3 ton 11.5-13 is excellent, something else old school v8s can't do. Then there's the advances in metallurgy and engineering that have pretty much closed the gap on diesel longevity.

Work hard? Really, a v8 diesel that only makes the same power as a triton! Biggest difference is that the triton will have 100% more reliabilty than the Toyota over its life span...... and you paid 30k more for this privilege [emoji85][emoji51]

As for beating p platers off the line, thank God my heart still races for a few seconds. Young enough to enjoy the "heart race with adrenaline" but old enough to know when to hit the breaks.

[350RRC]

A 1970 Windsor 351 ( which I have owned) has similar specs (515nm/223kw), Nissan hasn't advanced much past this in the last 40 odd years[bigwhistle]
4.5l isn't a BIG V8 in anyone's standards But it is a Diesel and these are built to work hard and have a Long life, Petrol V8's Not so much regardless of how BIG they are.
As for "Blowing away unsuspecting P platers at the lights" Well I grew out of that Phase decades ago[bigwhistle]

I had an XW Fairmont wagon with a 302 W and C4............. just beautiful and reeasonably frugal on the highway. Should never have sold it.

The 350 in my POS has done close to 700,000 now, on lpg, and had already been reco'ed at least once before being imported and lpg fitted.

i.e. has done well over 600,000 on lpg.

Maybe it wouldn't have done this on petrol, dunno. [bighmmm]

DL

[Eevo]

unlike most v8s that really need to rev

ummmm.......

[Tombie]

I take it that ALL of the detractors of the tojo 4.5 V8 actually personally
own one or have owned one to be able to "Qualify" their comments[bigwhistle]

Spend a lot of time in them. And very few other users of them like them.

As they are used “for purpose” it’s amazing how often they fail too... Starters are nightmares....
And fuel systems require regular upkeep.

It’s the body, steering, suspension and the rest of the driveline that’s the worst component though. Something is always being replaced every 1-2 weeks.

[1nando]

ummmm.......To make decent torque. Y62 makes 90% of its power at 1600rpm, that's excellent for a NA petrol v8. Sorry I did not clarify clearly[emoji2369]

[1nando]

Petrol v diesel towing. The diesel in this thing has 230kw and 750nm. You'll be surprised with the result I think.

YouTube (https://youtu.be/zVDoo5fiLCg)

[DoubleChevron]

Petrol v diesel towing. The diesel in this thing has 230kw and 750nm. You'll be surprised with the result I think.

YouTube (https://youtu.be/zVDoo5fiLCg)

That must be the most stupid things I've watched. You just pick whichever cog puts the motor in its torque band and travel at the speed it'll handle. Who runs a motor flat out near its redline to try and hold speed up a hill (especially a diesel) ................. Your waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyy out of the torque band of the motor. The diesel probably should have been hauling along at 2200rpm ... the the petrol at 3200'ish .... ie: wherever the motor makes its maximum torque value.

seeya
Shane L.

[1nando]

That must be the most stupid things I've watched. You just pick whichever cog puts the motor in its torque band and travel at the speed it'll handle. Who runs a motor flat out near its redline to try and hold speed up a hill (especially a diesel) ................. Your waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyy out of the torque band of the motor. The diesel probably should have been hauling along at 2200rpm ... the the petrol at 3200'ish .... ie: wherever the motor makes its maximum torque value.

seeya
Shane L.Shane I think you completely missed the point mate. For starters one is diesel the other petrol, one has forced induction the other does not, the altitude is ridiculous favoring forced induction, the idea is to push the motor to test its limits. I think it's a great test.

[DoubleChevron]

Shane I think you completely missed the point mate. For starters one is diesel the other petrol, one has forced induction the other does not, the altitude is ridiculous favoring forced induction, the idea is to push the motor to test its limits. I think it's a great test.

Forced induction is always going to win at altiutude. But that test is still just dumb. Reliability of operation over extended periods of time towing at its GVM matters. not how hard you can punish a car up one single hill... one single time. That is completely meaningless.

Of course a cummins diesel is going to out tow a small petrol v8 in pretty much any scenario. When V8 petrols were used in industry, they used detuned big blocks versions and were cammed so they were all "down low" torque. Take a look at the old F250's for example. They had a 460 big blocks in them. And would crawl up that climb in the slowest lane with the Citroen 2cvs ................. They would still be doing the same work today, 20years later, just as slowly and effortlessly.

seeya,
Shane L.

[1nando]

Forced induction is always going to win at altiutude. But that test is still just dumb. Reliability of operation over extended periods of time towing at its GVM matters. not how hard you can punish a car up one single hill... one single time. That is completely meaningless.

Of course a cummins diesel is going to out tow a small petrol v8 in pretty much any scenario. When V8 petrols were used in industry, they used detuned big blocks versions and were cammed so they were all "down low" torque. Take a look at the old F250's for example. They had a 460 big blocks in them. And would crawl up that climb in the slowest lane with the Citroen 2cvs ................. They would still be doing the same work today, 20years later, just as slowly and effortlessly.

seeya,
Shane L.You obviously did not watch it. The NA petrol trumped the Cummins diesel. Same engine in the y62

[ozscott]

Diesel had 500 pounds more load. No petrol will enjoy being under max load towing up hills at nearly 6000rpm on a regular basis...sure fire way to destroy it. I love petrol V8's but for towing diesels are typically better in the long run where towing regularly.

Cheers

[Eevo]

Diesel had 500 pounds more load. No petrol will enjoy being under max load towing up hills at nearly 6000rpm on a regular basis...sure fire way to destroy it. I love petrol V8's but for towing diesels are typically better in the long run where towing regularly.

Cheers


most diesels wont do 6000rpm...

[ozscott]

Admittedly I.skipped through it but the petrol.was loaded up foot to the boards holding just under 6000rpm. Most post was ambiguous but I mean the petrol.wont like nor last doing that regularly. Cheers

[1nando]

Diesel had 500 pounds more load. No petrol will enjoy being under max load towing up hills at nearly 6000rpm on a regular basis...sure fire way to destroy it. I love petrol V8's but for towing diesels are typically better in the long run where towing regularly.

CheersMissed the point. 500 pounds is 227kg. The Cummins is a big diesel compared to the v8 diesel 200 for example (touted as Gods tow chariot in Oz) yet the petrol blew it away.

Most diesels don't make any decent power after 3500rpm and as a result have less of a gearing advantage.
The v8 did rev to 6000rpm but also sat on its peak torque band at 4400rpm often. Had he placed the gearbox into manual mode he probably could have stopped the box dropping a gear and maintained the torque band at 4400rpm and not needed to rev it out.
The fuel usage is almost the same, so much for the great fuel economy of diesels. The fuel use in the Cummins is high compared to our dual cab toy cars with toy motors cause it actually has some power.
9 minutes 45 seconds of hard work and the modern diesel couldn't outshine the NA petrol in what many here are claiming should be a easy diesel win...[emoji11]

Simple test, hard test, petrol passed with flying colors... excuses welcome

[trout1105]

Simply put IF a petrol engine is such a better option for towing, longevity and economy then WHY are all the truckies driving diesel powered trucks and the Tugs in the harbour are also diesel powered???
Also good luck driving a petrol powered 4WD in the Top End during the wet through all that water[bigwhistle]

[ozscott]

Missed the point. 500 pounds is 227kg. The Cummins is a big diesel compared to the v8 diesel 200 for example (touted as Gods tow chariot in Oz) yet the petrol blew it away.

Most diesels don't make any decent power after 3500rpm and as a result have less of a gearing advantage.
The v8 did rev to 6000rpm but also sat on its peak torque band at 4400rpm often. Had he placed the gearbox into manual mode he probably could have stopped the box dropping a gear and maintained the torque band at 4400rpm and not needed to rev it out.
The fuel usage is almost the same, so much for the great fuel economy of diesels. The fuel use in the Cummins is high compared to our dual cab toy cars with toy motors cause it actually has some power.
9 minutes 45 seconds of hard work and the modern diesel couldn't outshine the NA petrol in what many here are claiming should be a easy diesel win...[emoji11]

Simple test, hard test, petrol passed with flying colors... excuses welcomeNah mate. The point is for towing duties and longevity when doing towing duties diesel remains the best choice.

But yep 500lbs is 227 odd kgs [emoji1787].

Nothing to be sneezed at that 500lbs...it's a fair bit extra especially added to several tonne of load.

Cheers

[1nando]

Simply put IF a petrol engine is such a better option for towing, longevity and economy then WHY are all the truckies driving diesel powered trucks and the Tugs in the harbour are also diesel powered???
Also good luck driving a petrol powered 4WD in the Top End during the wet through all that water[bigwhistle]Mate I work with truck and dogs, bogeys, crane trucks and tippers. I appreciate a good diesel really I do. I'm not here talking about trucks, we're taking about cars.
I dare say in the near future we will see them potentially go away from diesel. Emissions regulations are killing diesels and that's forcing new technology to come to the fore. Mazda has come up with a petrol design that is just as economical as diesel without the emissions. For so long it's been a mentality of "if it ain't broke don't fix it" but thankfully technology improves over time.

The op is petrol vs diesel. I love a good diesel engine but some people could do with a bit more education on the subject and maybe look at things a little differently.

Ps I would not have had my 110 puma with any other engine than the 2.2 liter diesel. It was slow, and similar to a tractor was unstoppable. Loved it's slow progressive nature. Loved that car, loved it.

But after experiencing power and comfort like the y62 I simply can't ever go back...

[PhilipA]

I compare my much modified 3.9 V8RRC and my td5 D2. My 3.9 put out about 50% more torque than a stock 3.9 from 1500 tapering to 3000 where it was about 20-25%.

The D2 tows much better than the RRC.There is a BIG hill just North of Buladelah going South. In my RRC I would hit the bottom at 120Kmh and be doing 80 at the top and dropped out of TC lock or in 3rd towing my 900KG Camper trailer.
My TD5 hits the bottom at 120 and is doing 115-120 at the top in top locked. My TD5 is also modded with 22lb boost, big intercooler, map, ETC ETC.

True I could floor the RRC and drop down to 3rd and maybe do 100 at the top, but at what cost. The fuel economy would be horrendous.
It is also true that once you lose speed with a diesel it is very hard to accelerate up a hill while towing, the torque will carry you up, but you do not have the revs like in a V8 to accelerate .

The only time I really miss the v8 is when some dork stops me hitting the bottom of the hill at optimum speed and I am then stuck behind them and have to hit the left lane behind whatever it is that the baulker has passed.
Regards PhilipA

[101RRS]

I think there are pros and cons of both types of engines - all depends on what suits you best but there is no right or wrong.

I had always been a petrol driver and in 2004 bought my first diesel - a 98 Freelander L series - with on 72kw not a power house. When I bought it I owned a 3.9 Disco 1 V8 and drove it with a friend to pick up the Freelander. On the way back home I drove the Disco and my mate drove the Freelander - going up the hills I was not able to keep up with the Freelander - it was demonstrating its better lugging power compared to the Disco.

I kept both vehicles at the same time for about 4 years so was able to compare the two in similar circumstances - the Freelander was a leisurely drive but always had good pulling power compared to the V8 which cruised really well. The V8 never pulled will up hill offroad at low revs in high range - but of course there was always low range - the Freelander was able to pull hills that the Disco could not pull in 1st high range.

I then sold the Disco and later bought the RRS - driving it back from Melbourne the first thing that struck me was how similar the RRS and the D1 V8 was on the road - the engines produced similar power and the TDV6 a little more torque - offroad the TDV6 was like all diesels just pulls and on the highway is like the V8.

Now my 101, V8 producing 22l/100km in most circumstances except sand (35-40l/100km) but 4wd otherwise the same as on the road - so different vehicles work differently.

One engine is not better than the other - they are different.

For me - on the highway, a high speed modern diesel or a modern petrol. Offroad, light work either, heavy work then a diesel - sand a diesel. Towing heavy stuff I would have thought a diesel but my brothers 200 series TDV8 struggles and gets 22l/100km but other brothers 2 litre HiLux get similar consumption to my RRS at around 13-15l/100km. Petrol can do it too but weight can be less comfortable but more importantly driving smoothly with little throttle changes makes a bit difference.

Drive what you are comfortable with.

Garry

[Barraman]

I went from a 6.0L petrol V8 Commodore SS to a D4 TDV6.

I luv the D4. It may not accelerate quite like the SS, which is mind boggling - but it gets up and goes nicely. I never towed my current 6.5M/2500 kg boat with the SS, but the D4 tows it like its not there.

The SS did about 9L/100km cruising on the highway (by dropping back to 4 cylinders), while the D4 does about 10L/100km.

The D4 does about 17L/100km towing the boat at 110km/hr, while the SS did 99.9L/100km off the lights! [biggrin]

[Eevo]

Admittedly I.skipped through it but the petrol.was loaded up foot to the boards holding just under 6000rpm. Most post was ambiguous but I mean the petrol.wont like nor last doing that regularly. Cheers

i dunno,. mine spend a lot of time near redline [bigwhistle]

[Eevo]

want torque? diesel
want power? small petrol with turbo
want power & torque? big petrol like a v8


towing a semi only requires torque, not power, hence diesel

simple?

[Tombie]

Simply - you need something Fit for purpose.

Our new Defender is Turbo Petrol (fun)
The D4 does most of the mule work (towing)

My work vehicles are different - no Flammables allowed so diesels only.

[Bigbjorn]

want torque? diesel
want power? small petrol with turbo
want power & torque? big petrol like a v8


towing a semi only requires torque, not power, hence diesel

simple?

Torque is the capacity to do work.

Horsepower introduces a time element. Horsepower is work done in time taken.

Want power and torque? Then a big diesel like a Cummins or Detroit is the solution.

Big petrol engines (up to 12 litres) had their day in trucks when gasoline prices in the USA were 20c. per gallon. They were cheaper to buy and fuel economy did not matter. Operators could wear one out and rebuild it twice for the price premium of a big diesel. OPEC fixed this idea up in 1974 with the first oil shock.

For those unfamiliar with diesel operation the operating range of a diesel engine is the rev. band between governed rpm and maximum torque. Ideally gearbox ratios would be arranged so that on reaching governed rpm and upshifting the next gear would pick up at maximum torque. Reverse this for downshifts.

[Geedublya]

Torque is the capacity to do work.

For those unfamiliar with diesel operation the operating range of a diesel engine is the rev. band between governed rpm and maximum torque. Ideally gearbox ratios would be arranged so that on reaching governed rpm and upshifting the next gear would pick up at maximum torque. Reverse this for downshifts.

This can be quite a narrow range, hence the need for multiple gears. The beauty of the latest forced induction petrol engines is the ability to produce big power and torque over a large rev range. Some of the newer diesels are getting there but still fall short.