Thread: Disco 4 V Landcruiser Prado

Originally Posted by Grumndriva

I could be wrong, but those who have lived and worked or travelled extensively in outback Australia will know that outback Australia is very definitely Land Cruiser country.

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.

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

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

Originally Posted by Disco4SE

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?

Originally Posted by Grumndriva

I value well reasoned and factual input. If anyone can tell me how I can lawfully get a 600 km range out of a D4 towing 2.7 tonnes and with 170 kg of people, 100 kg of goodies in the back, and the desired 270 kg on the tow ball, I would love to hear it, because I don't think it can be done.

And let me stress again, this is not about which is the better vehicle. It is about which is the best for a specific job.

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.

Originally Posted by Ace

Has your mate driven the D4? Would be interesting to hear his views, or is he a died in the wool yota man?

Hi 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