Thread: Toyota announced big Landcruiser spec change & price drops in USA

Tested in the video below… there are several of these tests out there already (e.g. Ronnie Dahl) and they are all concluding the same, which is that the 4-cyl auto is not struggling at all compared to the V8 as most punters assume it would. In pretty much all the tests that I have watched so far, the 4-cyl has “won”. Having done a decent amount of hard yakka km in the 2.8 4-cyl, and many years working with the V8 here and in Aus, I kinda knew that would be the case. I simply have not experienced a performance deficit in the 4-cyl.

Bottom line is that there’s a lot of assumptions being made by fans of older, bigger engines, but the tech advances look like they have won the day and the small engine has superior metrics. I don’t buy the argument that the smaller engine will wear excessively. Toyota aren’t that dumb! Anyway, we will have forgotten all about this debate in a few years time because the V8 is on a 1-way ticket to retirement and before you know it to 2.8 will be the new normal.

Originally Posted by Flyblown

Not necessarily. 13-14L/100km is about par for the I4 1GD-FTV towing something like a decent sized boat or camper trailer. There's heaps of tests on YT with that engine in Hilux and Prado, lots of guys in Aus. The Hilux I drive regularly towing a 5m tandem trailer with a CamAm Defender, full dip tank, pump, hoses, dead sheep etc shows around 13-14L/100km on rough, steep hill country unsealed roads, going relatively slowly (prob 70km/h max) with 4WD engaged.

It's towing caravans into a head wind that the 1GD-FTV will struggle with. The long distance tests in Aus have it on a par with the V8 single turbo ute, but it ain't pretty for either of them.

What has been demonstrated again and again is the effect of accessories on fuel consumption - roof racks & roof mounted gear, bull bars, bigger tyres than stock, all the rest of the fruit. There's a significant consumption penalty to be paid if you run all the fruit as I do, out of necessity.

Agree.

To put our 10.9L/100km fuel consumption into perspective, the Patrol is completely cleanskin with standard highway tyres on. The boat and trailer combined weigh 500kg, and all the camping gear fitted in the boat, so we could rid ourselves of the roof rack. The boat itself wears a cover, making it a reasonably slippery towed item.

Still not bad for a 27 year old truck with an unopened engine and drivetrain.

Originally Posted by Flyblown

Tested in the video below… there are several of these tests out there already (e.g. Ronnie Dahl) and they are all concluding the same, which is that the 4-cyl auto is not struggling at all compared to the V8 as most punters assume it would. In pretty much all the tests that I have watched so far, the 4-cyl has “won”. Having done a decent amount of hard yakka km in the 2.8 4-cyl, and many years working with the V8 here and in Aus, I kinda knew that would be the case. I simply have not experienced a performance deficit in the 4-cyl.

Bottom line is that there’s a lot of assumptions being made by fans of older, bigger engines, but the tech advances look like they have won the day and the small engine has superior metrics. I don’t buy the argument that the smaller engine will wear excessively. Toyota aren’t that dumb! Anyway, we will have forgotten all about this debate in a few years time because the V8 is on a 1-way ticket to retirement and before you know it to 2.8 will be the new normal.

yeah yeah but the driving experience all well and good listening to the asthmatic 2.8 but ya actually internally sobbing wishing it was a V8 rumble thats gotta be worth something

Having seen one early example of the current 4cyl Toyota completely worn out and ready to be junked in less than 100,000Km's towing a variety of large work boats I tend to disagree.

Towing big heavy parachutes is the hardest work you can do to a light vehicle from what I've experienced - the bigger engines doing less work for the same power so survive better. You can get the book specs out of the engine and they look OK on a wall chart, and for most people they don't operate in the top 25% of the engine's output very much let alone continuously. You can substitute tech for capacity for a while, but not continuously.

Originally Posted by No.3

Having seen one early example of the current 4cyl Toyota completely worn out and ready to be junked in less than 100,000Km's towing a variety of large work boats I tend to disagree.

All brands have a very small percentage of mechanical failures, that become inflated stories on the internet, especially on forums. We can never see what really happened, we only hear what "my mate" said. So without any evidence, I don't really believe this story as is I'm afraid. Something else would have happened, guaranteed.

With today's modern engines, pretty much all serious mechanical failures from bikes to utes to heavy plant and equipment, there's always been a significant contributing factor. A servicing mistake covered up, intentional misuse causing damage, persistent use outside of specified operating parameters. Whatever it is, it's usually conveniently removed from the re-telling, if it was even known in the first place.

Only time will tell,

Im not a fan 4cl 70s must as well get a hilux or Ineos
Hopefully, by that time, Ineos manage to pull their sh#t together and make a proper cabin chassis.

Originally Posted by Barry the hunter

yeah yeah but the driving experience all well and good listening to the asthmatic 2.8 but ya actually internally sobbing wishing it was a V8 rumble thats gotta be worth something

You mean V8 cabin (wind) noise .

Originally Posted by Flyblown

All brands have a very small percentage of mechanical failures, that become inflated stories on the internet, especially on forums. We can never see what really happened, we only hear what "my mate" said. So without any evidence, I don't really believe this story as is I'm afraid. Something else would have happened, guaranteed.

With today's modern engines, pretty much all serious mechanical failures from bikes to utes to heavy plant and equipment, there's always been a significant contributing factor. A servicing mistake covered up, intentional misuse causing damage, persistent use outside of specified operating parameters. Whatever it is, it's usually conveniently removed from the re-telling, if it was even known in the first place.

Nope. No bullshit, brought from new, no mods, dealer serviced, one clutch replaced under warranty and dealer/supplier walked away at about 120km's with the thing unuseable stating the vehicle had been serviced at a non-dealer mechanic which it hadn't (parked up in the sticks at a local supplier when it shit itself finally). Easiest solution for the owner was trade it for a different brand replacement and take the hit, just not worth the fight. Would like to say I've never seen anything like it it terms of the dealer performance but I have from two other brands so no love lost for any of them. They are all interested in just the money, not interested in people who are actually using the vehicles in day in, day out hard heavy work. It was sold with the work it was going to do stated up front, they reckoned it was perfectly suited when it wasn't. Having said that, I've seen two other 2.2 and 2L twin-turbo diesels die real young when asked to tow the full 3500Kg with a BIG parachute on the back, so it's not a particular criticism of the Toyota 2.8 engine - it's just that the smaller 4cyl engines relying on a massive amount of tech and forced induction to get the Kw and Nm figures do it at the expense of service lifespan. There just isn't any way around it or a way to beat the physics or mechanics of it - there is no replacement for displacement. (And that's the capital full stop).

I'll add an edit, I'd like to say I knew what happened to the ute after it was traded but I don't have hard facts on it - I did hear that it got a replacement out of a rollover and then sold on the lot, but I can't be sure on it. I would have loved to be there when the failed unit was pulled down - I'd have expected it to be completely choked in the intake manifold and flogged out in the bores. Smoking like it was and returning 56L/100Km off the onboard computer tells a story. And it did have a mod, an aftermarket winch bar...

Who’s worried about fuel consumption on a V8 Landcruiser??
I’ve just chucked on 4 new tyres and a service, fuel economy doesn’t even come into it.

I’d sooner have a 4.5ltr V8 diesel than a 2.8ltr stressed, no substitute for cubic inches.

Anyone interested in a Q7 4.2 ltr V8 diesel, one lady driver, 76km, 2012, goes like a cut cat, $27k
Mint condition. The cooks down sizing. Basically been a Remuera tractor, supermarket, gym, Newmarket to home.

Originally Posted by No.3

Nope. No bullshit, brought from new, no mods, dealer serviced, one clutch replaced under warranty and dealer/supplier walked away at about 120km's with the thing unuseable stating the vehicle had been serviced at a non-dealer mechanic which it hadn't (parked up in the sticks at a local supplier when it shit itself finally). Easiest solution for the owner was trade it for a different brand replacement and take the hit, just not worth the fight. Would like to say I've never seen anything like it it terms of the dealer performance but I have from two other brands so no love lost for any of them. They are all interested in just the money, not interested in people who are actually using the vehicles in day in, day out hard heavy work. It was sold with the work it was going to do stated up front, they reckoned it was perfectly suited when it wasn't. Having said that, I've seen two other 2.2 and 2L twin-turbo diesels die real young when asked to tow the full 3500Kg with a BIG parachute on the back, so it's not a particular criticism of the Toyota 2.8 engine - it's just that the smaller 4cyl engines relying on a massive amount of tech and forced induction to get the Kw and Nm figures do it at the expense of service lifespan. There just isn't any way around it or a way to beat the physics or mechanics of it - there is no replacement for displacement. (And that's the capital full stop).

I'll add an edit, I'd like to say I knew what happened to the ute after it was traded but I don't have hard facts on it - I did hear that it got a replacement out of a rollover and then sold on the lot, but I can't be sure on it. I would have loved to be there when the failed unit was pulled down - I'd have expected it to be completely choked in the intake manifold and flogged out in the bores. Smoking like it was and returning 56L/100Km off the onboard computer tells a story. And it did have a mod, an aftermarket winch bar...

There are thousands upon thousands of very hard working 1GDs out there that make your one lonely example look very much something else happened than just “couldn’t tow”!

Technology moves relentlessly forward, and big engines are yesterday’s tech.

Try telling that to petrol heads that love V8’s and most of the Taupo population this weekend.

Originally Posted by Flyblown

Tested in the video below… there are several of these tests out there already (e.g. Ronnie Dahl) and they are all concluding the same, which is that the 4-cyl auto is not struggling at all compared to the V8 as most punters assume it would. In pretty much all the tests that I have watched so far, the 4-cyl has “won”. Having done a decent amount of hard yakka km in the 2.8 4-cyl, and many years working with the V8 here and in Aus, I kinda knew that would be the case. I simply have not experienced a performance deficit in the 4-cyl.

Bottom line is that there’s a lot of assumptions being made by fans of older, bigger engines, but the tech advances look like they have won the day and the small engine has superior metrics. I don’t buy the argument that the smaller engine will wear excessively. Toyota aren’t that dumb! Anyway, we will have forgotten all about this debate in a few years time because the V8 is on a 1-way ticket to retirement and before you know it to 2.8 will be the new normal.

Yeah man that's cool, as I said we have both the hilux and cruiser and there's definitely a big difference the rally truck in the trailer going to taupo you really feel it, 1st gear on the big hills in the 2.8, the cruiser is still pulling ahead and passing.
Shes comes in at 3.5 ton and it's big, 7m long 2.5m x 3m high with all our tools etc in it, we had a prado and the first 4x4 trail 2 years ago was in whakatane....when we got home we traded it, while it got us there and back I really felt sorry for the motor.
Just what I've found in real world heavy towing...but that's really what the cruiser was designed for.
When we are no longer doing lots of heavy towing would I still have cruiser? Probably not be more than happy with 2 hiluxes.


Sent from my SM-S916B using Tapatalk

Hardly surprising @BRADS, the 200 series has almost 50% more torque than your Hilux and the Prado you had. Completely different beast to them and the single turbo V8. And you can’t chuck twenty dead sheep in the back. Well, you could, but….

Originally Posted by Flyblown

There are thousands upon thousands of very hard working 1GDs out there that make your one lonely example look very much something else happened than just “couldn’t tow”!

Technology moves relentlessly forward, and big engines are yesterday’s tech.

Didn't say it couldn't tow - what I said was continuous use towing a 3000Kg+ parachute with big wind resistance at 100% duty cycle (foot near the boards the whole time) just wore the thing out. Might seem like a sample size of one, it is a known thing in this industry but what do you do? That example is the only engine I've ever seen completely worn out in automotive use in that shorter timeframe while under dealer's warranty servicing though. Also, as you say, one engine is not a big sample, the kicker for us was the absolute 'wash the hands' by the people that should have backed it up. Seen it since from two other brands as well though, seems if you're an Auckland soccer mom in a fancy shiny truck where the closest you'll get to work is the kerb next to grass and the truck isn't even fitted with a towbar you'll be quids in for a good run. Use them hard and show issues with the gear and get the 'deny deflect disappear' treatment.

The smaller 2L and 2.2L twin turbo's I mentioned - now they just plain could not handle it (one turbo dropped in one of them which destroyed that engine, the other holed a piston from a failed injector sheared the tip clean off it. Fuel injection man had a box of sheared injectors - can't handle continuous high loadings).

Not denying that the big brands are wanting to go to cheap light small engines, but they are not yesterdays tech for heavy load applications. Computer's can't replace capacity, and the consequence of applying tech to a small engine to get big power and torque numbers is running it close to the maximum possible you can get from it. Run it at maximum 100% of the time and you'll find what dies and where the weaknesses are. This is why marine engines are not following the trend of smaller lighter = better, and things like the Hyundai Seasall line really haven't taken off like you would expect. Marine engines run at fixed power settings for a long period of time with a cyclic load/unload cycle superimposed over the top of the basic load value as the hull moves over the swell patterns - small engines don't like that and it's very similar to what you get with towing a big heavy parachute. Big engine downrated is the only answer for longevity... As for the what do you do question, go for a Ram or F350 at $160K or a light truck at $140+ (and the light trucks now have the same problem they are being built with a piddly arse little engine that is starting to show the exact same problem that I've just mentioned). NIWA's answer for towing heavy boats was four $200K American trucks which got them a write up in the media for it - it's not just me sitting here on a keyboard bashing bullsh*t.

Big engine down rated like my 4.2 tdi.Coming up to 600k soon,never been touched and doesnt burn oil.

Originally Posted by 300winmag

Who’s worried about fuel consumption on a V8 Landcruiser??
I’ve just chucked on 4 new tyres and a service, fuel economy doesn’t even come into it.

I’d sooner have a 4.5ltr V8 diesel than a 2.8ltr stressed, no substitute for cubic inches.

Anyone interested in a Q7 4.2 ltr V8 diesel, one lady driver, 76km, 2012, goes like a cut cat, $27k
Mint condition. The cooks down sizing. Basically been a Remuera tractor, supermarket, gym, Newmarket to home.

Fuel is the cheapis part of the equation,2 hrs of mechanics charge out is a tank of gas.