Printable View
Me too... had to take the battery out of my '95 Classic get at the RH headlamp plug...Quote:
Originally Posted by Dougal
- From fading memory, had to take the grill off and headlamps out, to change both globes.
You must be talking about more recent Jap stuff, my own experience, albeit with 70's to 90's, is the opposite.:angel:
Yes much more recent jap stuff. 2000 vintage. You need japanese sized hands to work on them. I have hands roughly double that size.
If you want a daily driver "family taxi' that is cheap to run and repair then buy a Commodore with the Buick 3800 V6.
A company I worked for ran two of those as company cars (VY I think). They used a horrendous amount of fuel. Like 15 litres per 100km average. I was thinking at the time that a carefully driven rangie would be doing much the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Hjelm
Have to agree
I have two defenders but bought a RRC as a toy.
Picked up a lpg 85 RRC carby V8 for $1200. Added a lot of toys to it off eBay
Winch bar , mud tyres, late eighties early 90's dash and seats in it. And just replaced all the bushes and just tidying up. Although it was already in pretty much good condition. When I bought it I got a roadworthy pretty much straight away.
I know they are the same underneath as the disco 1 but the drive and feel of the RRC is so much better I would always prefer a RRC over a disco.
Attachment 50129
Few years ago I looked at a 300tdi Disco to use as a runabout and have the rangie as the weekend basher.
They are nothing like a RRC to drive. Very disappointing:mad:
Those commodores must have been thrashed.. I once had a VY SS 5.7. At worse it got 15l to 100k's around town. Trip from Gold Coast to Sydney it averaged at 8.7l to 100k's. Slightly better than my diesel L322 on a trip!Quote:
A company I worked for ran two of those as company cars (VY I think). They used a horrendous amount of fuel. Like 15 litres per 100km average. I was thinking at the time that a carefully driven rangie would be doing much the same.
Camo
I also thought they might have been thrashed. So I reset the fuel computers and tried driving them nicely. No difference.:(Quote:
Originally Posted by Camo
Best I got on a 30km trip (incl hilly city and hilly motorway) was 12 litres per 100km.
I have since read that these engines lean themselves out in steady cruise conditions. Which fits well with your long flat trip. But these cars were used in an area where they never got to do that.
Thanks, but not thanks, the are terrible cars, inefficient and bad road manners.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Hjelm
IMO there is not comparison between the RR and the Falcodoros, the RR is a class in its own and as I said one of the best touring vehicles that I ever have together with the 504.
Makes sense. I know they are shocking on fuel towing.. be the same on hills. I still find it crazy a 5.7 V8 is more economical than a V6.. all comes down to gearing and load on the motor.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dougal
I reckon a Gen3 in a RRC would achieve about 12l per 100k's.. would be nice:cool:
Camo
I too find it amazing that they made a V6 which was less efficient than the V8's.Quote:
Originally Posted by Camo
Someone pulled out the fuel economy figures across a year of commodores. The most fuel efficient was the V8 manual. The worst the V6 auto.
