Printable View
Sounds like your mind is made up..
Enjoy the LC 200.
http://www.goseeaustralia.com.au/article/589/
"A Toyota Customer Relations team member said today that the Toyota Owners manual was not necessarily ambiguous as it had a world-wide application. He said that LandCruisers were not built as a tow vehicle and once purchased it was up to the owner how the vehicle was used and what was fitted and added to the vehicle in terms of accessories. "
I would say you are wrong. Well I would disagree, there are plenty of vehicles that can survive the outback just as well as any land cruiser. But if you are doing alot of outback travel your maintenance scheme needs to reflect this, as it does if you are constantly towing heavy loads. The whole "You need a toyota to travel the outback" is a load of one eyed media hype and brand biased dribble.Quote:
Originally Posted by Grumndriva
D4 or 200 series, doesnt really matter, both are on the higher tech end of the scale and if either breaks down I would suggest that you would have tow wait a similar length of time for parts to arrive and the vehicle to be fixed. There might be a heap of old 80 series cruisers lying around that parts can be scavenged off, but modern vehicles are all in the same boat, you will have to wait for parts.
Please search the forum re the WDH issue - it's been done to death. By your use of the D2 with polybags as a comparison, it's obvious you don't understand the D4 system. In a nutshell - I and many other D4 owners have owned both systems - WDH and D4 EAS. We can tell you from real-world experience which is better. You've had WDH experience only, and so have your LC-owning mates. How can you make that call? The Overlander article you cite was seriously flawed in that they actually used the WDH on an EAS D3. The two systems 'fight' each other.
And what's wrong with jerry cans on the van? I use my 2.6T van with 4 jerries. Gets me an _easy_ 600km
Cheers,
Gordon
To the OP (Disco4SE),
In my experience, the Prado, especially the diesel, will not keep up with a D4 off-road. Apart from virtually nil front articulation, no TC when diff lock engaged, the strangest "terrain response" settings you could imagine ('sand' and 'rocks' in the same setting??) and minimal clearance, the diesel is just plain gutless.
Not that I'm bagging the 'Yota :angel:
Cheers,
Gordon
Bloody Hell...........looks like I may have opened up a can of worms.
For what it is worth, here are my thoughts.
I too have had Landcruisers and it was a hard decision between the D4 3.0 and the 200 Series. After having both demo vehicles at the same time over a long weekend of towing, off roading etc, my mind was made up to go with the D4.
The towing aspect is important to me along with reliability. The D4 generates more power and torque 'to the wheels' not to be confused with flywheel figures. This shows in the figures 0 - 100 Kph. D4 gets there in 9.6 seconds, Landcruiser 10.5 seconds. Best of all, the D4 produces 85% (500Nm) of torque from idle, just where you want it. I found the gearing in the D4 alot better spaced. The Landcruiser was in and out of 6th gear while towing, even on the flat, whereas the D4 was happy to sit in 6th all day long, up hill and down. I'm not interested in being the first one to 100Kph but I do enjoy a relaxed trip while towing.
FYI: In late 2009 there were 17....yes 17 Landcruiser 200 Series stuck up in NT with blown motors as a result of overheating from towing vans in the heat. Not alot of people found out. Not sure if they have fixed the problem as yet?
The self adjusting air suspension was also a points winner for me. It meant that I can load my vehicle up with tools / equipment etc, hook up the boat or trailers, and it will stay level the whole time. Went to Tasmania last year with 1/2 ton of tools in the vehicle mainly to one side of the car because of other luggage etc. It rode dead level and handled bends like no tomorrow. I had a LC100 and fitted polyair bags. The ride was great while towing, but as soon as you unhook the boat / van, it rode like a bastard.
In summary, I think you have to weigh up exactly what overall percentage of the vehicles use is actually towing. I'm tipping 3% - 5% maybe?
For me, I'm happy with my D4.
BTW: My mate went for the LC200 instead of the D4. He has already had a tailshaft replaced and travelled 1/2 the Klm's.
Cheers, Craig
Has your mate driven the D4? Would be interesting to hear his views, or is he a died in the wool yota man?Quote:
Originally Posted by Disco4SE
Grumndriva,Quote:
Originally Posted by Grumndriva
Simple, get the 2.7 Tdv6.
Using your own assumptions the payload difference with the LC200 is only 28kgs and the payload/capacity post loading up with van, people, LRFT etc (again using your own numbers) is a payload of 112Kg for the D4 2.7tdv6 V's 140 kg's for the LC200.
My calcs
Vehicle 2.7 D4
Payload 754
Less
LRFT/Wheel Carrier 112
Passengers 160
Van 270
Fridge Etc 100
TOTAL LOAD 642
Unused P/Load 112kg
Vehicle LC200
Payload 670
Less
LRFT/Wheel Carrier 0
People 160
Van 270
Fridge etc 100
TOTAL Weight 530
Unsued P/load 140 kg
So should provide more than enough fuel for a range of 600km.
The 2.7tdv6 D4 also comes with 18 inch rims so you can sort your tyre issue at the same time.
Think "outside the box" rather than "living in the bubble".
Hopefully my maths is correct and my thoughts well reasoned but either way just some food for thought.
Regards,
George
I just came back from Robe with a mate and his Cruiser with 4.7L V8.
I towed my Jet ski and 4 people roof racks, air con and very strong head wind.
Sat on 95km/h and got 14L/100 from my 300tdi.
My mate in his got 34L/100 there and 28L/100 back towing a single axle caravan at same speed.
His range was shocking plus the amusement at watching the fuel gauge drop and hearing his feedback over the radio was priceless.
His last car was a Prado Kakadu or something which he though be too small for towing?
I do believe he regrets it now.
1st hand experience at fuel consumption and owner feedback.
I do recall him saying that it towed pretty well though.
He is not a fool and has travelled a lot.
He did not look at Land Rover because of their reliability history and little gremlims.
His words not mine.;)
Hi Ace,Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace
No, my mate hasn't driven mine as yet. We keep talking about it. Let you know when he does.
He went from a Disco 2 to a LC100 (brought the LC when I brought my LC100) and now the LC200. He wanted the D4 but his wife didnt like its 'bottom'????
Or was it the bottom on the the Toyota saleswoman that convinced my mate?????
Cheers, Craig
As far as I can tell there is a big debate about it but ultimately isnt it a difference between levering and levelling. You cannot lever suspension the way a WDH does from inside the perimeter of the vehicle - only from outside. The D3/4 uses load levelling (with front and rear) but not load levering. Load levering can only be achieved from outside the vehicle. However WDH would fight against the active load levelling in the Disco...so the short answer is that if you dont mind some weight coming off the front axle of a Disco and like its character with a very heavy load on go for it....if you dont like that idea or cant risk it (ie its hard to say unless you have a trusted person with the same weight tow van and D3/4 who can tell you honestly) then you go for another tow vehicle where WDH can be used.
I must say after reading all the stuff on here and other forums I cannot see in a physics sense how the self levelling D3/4 suspension front and rear can lever load back to the front - mere levelling simply will not fully achieve this, only partially. Having said that many on this forum tow heavy and love the characteristics of the D3/4 when towing so the fact that load comes off the front probably doesnt really matter....having said that there might be a noticeable lightening of the front end at the limits - ie around 3.5 tonns and 350kg ball weight, and IF that occurred you cannot correct it with a WDH.
I take the point about the fact that the wdh should not have been used from the start by overlander, but one wonders if it was doing anything much at all until tightened anyway but who knows.
I would certainly consider a D3/4 for towing heavy, but ideally I would like to have one for a night and would hitch up my boat at 2 tonns and my brothers van at closer to 3 tonns and go for a good run. That would be the simply answer. I remember when my local LR dealer had the sign (they pulled out when LR told them they had to build a multi-million dollar new facility to service only D3/4 and couldnt use the same shed to also service Mitsu...) you could get a vehicle for a couple of days...be nice if other dealers offered that.
The trouble with one or 2 people towing 3 to 3.5 tonns saying that all is good is that it is not your particular load, however that comment of course applies to all potential tow vehicles of any brand.
Cheers