Thread: Anyone know their way around 200 Series Landcruises?

The 33" feet do a huge amount to improve ride - I've never owned a SUV body due to the fact I needed a separate compartment in back for the DG's. But the guys I worked with have had them, and comparing factory feet there isn't a huge amount of difference in ride between SUV and ute and that's with a riding in in one and out in the other sort of deal. Rear seat in the SUV is def better. Suspension upgrades do a lot for you, lift with suspension upgrade and tyre size increase is a whole different step up in ride quality. There's a considerable difference in ride comfort and noise/harshness between my Ranger with a minor lift and suspension stiffen for towing on factory tyres, and the mates with a full lift, suspension, 33's and worked with a chip fitted. His is quite a step up over mine to be honest, but it's close to 9K of work and bits.

As far as off road ability - the lifted Ranger on 33's does everything the crabs do in my experience with the exception of it is slightly longer so ramp over angle is not quite as good and rear departure angle is definitely not as good. He's clipped the left rear guard departing one hole that the SUV-type vehicles easily cleared. On the plus side, the utes with their separate tray means that it isn't such a drama to sort. I think the Ranger/BT50 twins as one option are actually slightly wider than the Cruisers as well. I notice that issue with my ute accessing work areas especially while towing. Benefit with the ute over the cruisers is about 4L/100Km better fuel economy - that adds up. Don't know why that is such a thing as it's a big difference but it's fairly close to the figures over the vehicles I've been involved in.

If you want a SUV body it's a good call, but with the modern utes and SUV's comparing apples with apples in terms of upgrades etc means there isn't the difference people expect or another way a factory ute vs a factory SUV there isn't a huge amount in it in my experience.

Interesting Cambo's comments on the 200's engine setup, that would explain why you don't experience the performance benefit you would think from the paper ratings of each vehicle comparing the Ranger and the 200's (154Kw vs circa 200Kw rated).

One point with the ute's - higher load capacity inside the vehicle. And I use all of that at times as well as trying to tow - gotta be careful with GVM at times. The main issue with factory utes - the suspension they come with is rated for an empty vehicle cruising on blacktop. Strut front is OK, but upgraded it's much better. The leafs at the rear is where it all falls over, the factory Ranger/BT50's coming out on 3 leafs and an overload plate is just BS. I inverted my springs and turned them into a frown just with a canopy, a ute drawer, a towbar and some bags in the boot. Bump stops planted hard on the chassis... Now it's sitting on a 7 leaf and overload plate pack, each leaf good for slightly less weight but the overall pack is now much more compliant and much slower to engage the overload plate and the bump stops. A side order is the traction control system engages a lot more gently and without the crash and bang that it had on the factory leaf pack.

Things I would do if I got a 200? EGR mods to help keep the intake manifolds clean, snorkel as this lifts the intake up out of the dusty areas and out from under the hot and dusty bonnet. I'm not sure if the 200's airbox is the upgraded cyclonic type that helps biff dust out but if that would fit that would also be something I'd consider... The other is fuel filter at every service or a fuel prefilter and water alarm kit and also reducing the service interval to a max of 10Km's if it's recommended is 15...