Thread: dude bought a LEMON LANDCRUISER 200 series

Originally Posted by Celtoid

I wonder how much of the same crap is on the Toyo sites......as much as it makes me smile....

Cheers,

Kev.

I signed up on the Toyota owners club Australia site to try & find out a bit of info on the Hi ace,no point on looking,nothing to learn on the site at all,just a load of garbage.
Anyway,if you go to the LC 200 section,there are pages & pages of complaints....,makes for interesting reading

Originally Posted by isuzurover

Unlike you Brian, the rest of the world has moved on since the 1950s. Most (good) cars in the '80s, '90s and '00s used <100 ml per 10000km.


Edit - besides which - the toyota engines use ~33% more than your "pint per 1000 miles". So acceptable oil consumption has increased by 33% in the last 60 years???

Isuzurover, a pint per 1000 miles was considered good and a quart per 1000 not too bad. And these were petrol engines that don't normally use a lot of oil if in good condition. These Toyota people are complaining about a mere 17 ozs. in 630 miles. If they are running out of oil and shagging engines it is their own bloody fault for not lifting the bonnet and pulling the dipstick regularly. I sacked truck drivers for less.

I am sure you are aware that the stuff in a diesel's sump is not much different to the stuff in the fuel tank and a diesel will run quite handily on lube oil.

I have owned many diesels from an LR 2.25 to Detroit 8V92TA's and maintained and overhauled a few that were just a bit bigger in ships and power stations and the like. If any diesel engines I owned were not using a bit of oil when working, then I would suspect they were topping their own sump up with unburnt distillate and get an oil analysis.

I remember a standby gen set, 2500 hp, whose operating instructions mentioned acceptable oil consumption up to 16 lbs./ hour under rated load. Two gallons or 9 litres. It did have a 90 gallon dry sump tank. Oil to be checked every shift.

Originally Posted by MickS

Don't worry..there's plenty of D2 owners who can tell you a tale about lemons...

...and D1s and RRs and Freelanders too!!

Originally Posted by INter674

...and D1s and RRs and Freelanders too!!

And Commodores and Falcons and Patrols and Landcruisers.

IMHO

Originally Posted by Brian Hjelm

Isuzurover, a pint per 1000 miles was considered good and a quart per 1000 not too bad. And these were petrol engines that don't normally use a lot of oil if in good condition. These Toyota people are complaining about a mere 17 ozs. in 630 miles. If they are running out of oil and shagging engines it is their own bloody fault for not lifting the bonnet and pulling the dipstick regularly. I sacked truck drivers for less.

I am sure you are aware that the stuff in a diesel's sump is not much different to the stuff in the fuel tank and a diesel will run quite handily on lube oil.
I have owned many diesels from an LR 2.25 to Detroit 8V92TA's and maintained and overhauled a few that were just a bit bigger in ships and power stations and the like. If any diesel engines I owned were not using a bit of oil when working, then I would suspect they were topping their own sump up with unburnt distillate and get an oil analysis.

I remember a standby gen set, 2500 hp, whose operating instructions mentioned acceptable oil consumption up to 16 lbs./ hour under rated load. Two gallons or 9 litres. It did have a 90 gallon dry sump tank. Oil to be checked every shift.

What's your point ?

Originally Posted by PAT303

The difference between the two is chalk and cheese,the 1HD-FTE is one of the best T/D's around,good power with good economy.The V8 doesn't have either. Pat.

Exactly.

Deano

Me thinks that alot more people suffer issues with Toyota's than people really know. Land Rover owners tend to voice their opinion much more on the internet. Toyota either stick their head in the sand or they do sneaky warranty work when its in for a service so you never really know it was a problem. How else would they keep this so call awsome reliability reputation.

Originally Posted by Brian Hjelm

Isuzurover, a pint per 1000 miles was considered good and a quart per 1000 not too bad. And these were petrol engines that don't normally use a lot of oil if in good condition. These Toyota people are complaining about a mere 17 ozs. in 630 miles. If they are running out of oil and shagging engines it is their own bloody fault for not lifting the bonnet and pulling the dipstick regularly. I sacked truck drivers for less.

I am sure you are aware that the stuff in a diesel's sump is not much different to the stuff in the fuel tank and a diesel will run quite handily on lube oil.

I have owned many diesels from an LR 2.25 to Detroit 8V92TA's and maintained and overhauled a few that were just a bit bigger in ships and power stations and the like. If any diesel engines I owned were not using a bit of oil when working, then I would suspect they were topping their own sump up with unburnt distillate and get an oil analysis.

I remember a standby gen set, 2500 hp, whose operating instructions mentioned acceptable oil consumption up to 16 lbs./ hour under rated load. Two gallons or 9 litres. It did have a 90 gallon dry sump tank. Oil to be checked every shift.

Without getting to far off the subject, I personally dont agree with the assumption that all deisel engines should and do use oil..

Our C series 8.6ltr gen set on the Austral has just done 50,000hrs over the last 10yrs, running non-stop, only time it was stopped was to change oil or the end of the season, it had oil sample's every 500hrs and only once had a trace of fuel dilution, that engine never burnt or used oil till it got to 49,000hrs and it uses about 2 ltrs every 10days of non- stop running.

I am stripping it down in january to see what wear it has, but if my engines start using anymore than 1-2ltrs between services(500hrs) then I start looking for leaks etc.

If I paid $87,000 for any modern motor car and it used any oil then they would be getting it back..


Cheers Ean

Originally Posted by Brian Hjelm

Isuzurover, a pint per 1000 miles was considered good and a quart per 1000 not too bad. And these were petrol engines that don't normally use a lot of oil if in good condition. These Toyota people are complaining about a mere 17 ozs. in 630 miles. If they are running out of oil and shagging engines it is their own bloody fault for not lifting the bonnet and pulling the dipstick regularly. I sacked truck drivers for less.

I am sure you are aware that the stuff in a diesel's sump is not much different to the stuff in the fuel tank and a diesel will run quite handily on lube oil.

I have owned many diesels from an LR 2.25 to Detroit 8V92TA's and maintained and overhauled a few that were just a bit bigger in ships and power stations and the like. If any diesel engines I owned were not using a bit of oil when working, then I would suspect they were topping their own sump up with unburnt distillate and get an oil analysis.

I remember a standby gen set, 2500 hp, whose operating instructions mentioned acceptable oil consumption up to 16 lbs./ hour under rated load. Two gallons or 9 litres. It did have a 90 gallon dry sump tank. Oil to be checked every shift.

I take all this irrelevant drivel to mean that you are:

(a) stick in 1954
(b) off with the fairies
(c) off your meds

Ship and heavy truck diesels are irrelevant. We are talking cars and light 4x4s here. Plenty of fleet and domestic users do oil analysis.

e.g. my 3.9 never shows fuel dilution on the oil analysis. I check the dipstick regularly and have a graduated catch can below my Provent. With 380k km on the clock, I used less than 125 ml over 15k km.

The 3.9 is by no means atypical.