This thread has some character..or should that be characters:D:DQuote:
Originally Posted by feraldisco
Good to see so much green eyed passion...or is that passion when looking through forest green coloured glasses!:D
Cheers
Printable View
This thread has some character..or should that be characters:D:DQuote:
Originally Posted by feraldisco
Good to see so much green eyed passion...or is that passion when looking through forest green coloured glasses!:D
Cheers
Quite a bit of posting overnight! Well, Terry (Grum) has made his choice, and good luck. Sorry I couldn't provide the figures he wanted earlier, but we were busy last night. I was rather disappointed that he didn't respond to my last post, because I thought I'd answered his remaining concern.
However, it's not right to say he didn't get answers to his questions, so at least all this to-and-fro seems to have been helpful. Look at his original list of cons for the D4 on page 1 of this topic. Although he never acknowledged an answer or correction, his objections were whittled down to one point - range vs load.
His objections were based on a payload figure of 670kg for the LC200 and 657kg for the D4. More on those figures later ........
Anyway, assuming the veracity of these figures, I've pointed out that range can be rectified and still keep the vehicle weight legal. Fit a long range tank or carry one jerry can. Simple. Terry had 127kg to play with after all his required weights were taken into consideration (versus 140 kg in the LC200 - not really much in it!). A long range tank weighs around 30kg. An extra 20 ltrs of diesel adds 18kg. So lets call it 50kg. Still leaves 77kg. With 100 ltrs of usable diesel that should see him to his 600km range requirements. There is no need for a rear bar (which adds significant weight) - there are several wheel carriers available that fit directly to the existing chassis points.
In the D4, he could add another 85 ltrs of diesel to his tank and still be legal. That would give him 185 usable ltrs of diesel, which towing a 2.7T load at 100kph, should see him get around 1100km. He could not do that in the LC200 and remain legal. He can't fit another tank to the LC200 (legally), so there's no room for improvement.
If he wanted to add more gear, he could easily remove the 3rd row seats, which he claimed he didn't need. He couldn't get that kind of range plus load out of the LC200 and remain legal.
Both cars would fail his requirements if a bull bar were fitted. The D4 with an alloy bar would come closest though.
Now to the quoted figures. This is where the argument disappears. The payload for the two was calculated by subtracting the manufacturers' stated kerb weights from the gross masses. However, the 'kerb weight' is not calculated the same for both companies. LR's kerb weight INCLUDES a 75kg driver. Toyota does not specify a driver - they claim the kerb weight 'varies' from 2630kg to 2700kg. Terry chose the 2630kg figure. So the reality is that the usable payload for the D4 SDV6 SE is 657kg + 75kg = 732kg. For the LC200 GLX diesel it is somewhere between 600kg and 670kg, depending on 'options'. This is assuming both are diesels.
So in the end there was no real merit to any of the points raised. The only consideration would be cost (ie adding a long range tank and wheel carrier) and personal choice. Nothing wrong with that.
On a final note though, I'd agree that all this had been thrashed out before and really didn't need going over yet again.
Cheers,
Gordon
Edit: In fact the payload for the LC could be even less than 600kg - Toyota do not specify if their kerb weight includes fuel. LR's does.
Bloody skinny Brits...how many Disco 3/4 drivers in Australia would weigh 75kg:DQuote:
Originally Posted by gghaggis
Cheers
I think I object to the inference:D I weighed in this morning at 77kg and that's after putting on 4kg (I've alaready lost 1) over Christmas / New Year while staying with my wife's family in Peru - way too much beer:wasntme:Quote:
Originally Posted by ozscott
Quote:
Originally Posted by Celtoid
All I would say is to all you D4 owners who don't like repeating yourselves is don't visit the D2 site because every week you get the same threads started. There would hardly be a page that didn't have at least one '3 amigo's' thread or 'why does my TD5 rattle and vibrate' and I have hardly ever heard anyone complain that the same questions are repeatedly getting asked and every time often the same members give assistance.
If the fact that this discussion was had at least in part a couple of months ago is driving some of you mad then I only hope your precious D4's don't develop some sort of regular failures like the D1 and D2's have or you will all run away forever or go completely mad as the same questions keep popping up. Maybe some of you have little patience with these types of threads because your first Land Rover experience is a D3 or D4.
By the way Terry didn't start the previous thread about 'Crossing Over To The Dark Side' I did. He contributed to it but he did not originate it like he has been blamed for and as I have said previously no one forces you to answer or comment on any thread, if you don't like a thread just ignore it and let those who are prepared to discuss it rationally have their little dabate.
Since that previous discussion some months ago he has had a brand new 4.6 engine with about 25k on the clock slip a liner, so he had to buy another reconditioned TRS engine just before Christmas. That was his second new 4.6 that had crapped itself, the first one lasted only about 7k from memory due to no fault of his. So I can understand why he was not feeling 100% confident in the Green Oval and his trusty D2 that he had spent an absolute fortune on building up into a very impressive bit of gear. This lead him to decide over Christmas to stop spending on the D2 and start to look for a new tug so he would feel more confident when on one of his long range trips out into the middle of nowhere.
He made several comments and asked for information to try and get a handle on what vehicle could legally do what and in part that knarked some of you because he was considering a Toyota and he copped it or as you admitted Celtoid you and others flamed him.
I consider that it is a real shame the he has decided to walk away from this site which he was a long time member of after how this has been handled by some.
While he was a member here he actively went out of his way to try and assist others when they had problems and when he had knowledge that could assist others. How do I know this? Because he assisted me on several occassions when I had questions and needed first hand experience.
Shame he wasn't given the same level of latitude and patience as he often showed others who were struggling with something to do with Land Rovers.
Regards,
TerryO
I think that's a bit unfair. Personally I would have preferred he simply searched and found the previous discussions, but I still tried to the best of my abilities, time allowing, to answer his concerns. It's not my fault that the majority of them had no foundation in fact. He seemed unwilling to accept this.Quote:
Originally Posted by TerryO
The D4 WILL do what he wants, easily, safely and legally. But it requires a long range tank. That pretty much sums it up.
For those interested - if you check the Toyota UK site, where they have to use the same definitions of "kerb weight" as LR, we can infer that the LC 200 weighs in at 2700kg, meaning the figures to use which are comparable are:
LC 200 GLX Diesel: UK defined payload = 600kg
D4 SDV6 SE: UK defined payload = 657kg
Cheers,
Gordon
According to the Toyota UK site Gordon, the kerb weight of the 200 series is actually even heavier at 2720kg, and as has already been mentioned there is no mention of whether that includes a driver or fuel.
(and to confuse it even more the brochure Ive just downloaded from the Uk site says 2615kg) - good to be consistent!
Now I have a question that to me seems obvious. If you are NOT towing, and put 600kg in the back of your 4wd, you CAN NOT us a wdh to transfer the weight forward.
This begs the questions of why, for 250kg +/- you need a WDH. at all, other than makeing the car ride level.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gghaggis
I did say 'by some' Gordon. I didn't say by everyone who took part in the thread, in reality I was trying not to single anyone out for being either helpful or for flaming the man apart from Celtoid who through himself under the bus and admitted it.
Those who played the man instead of the ball know who they are.
cheers,
Terry
That's for the equivalent of the VX, not the GLX. But as the Australian site states the VX weighs "2675 to 2720", I think we can take it that the GLX should also be compared at its "maximum" in the range "2630 to 2700".Quote:
Originally Posted by Psimpson7
In other words, the MAXIMUM figure quoted by Toyota Australia should be used when comparing to LR products, as it's closer to the same weight procedure used in the UK.
Cheers,
Gordon