Page 2 of 2
Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2008 4:22 pm
by Patroler
Toyota sell cars cause of there power and Nissan cause of there economy
pity how the new 200 used less fuel than the zd30 gu in the 4wd action dvd then
Not that im saying im a big fan of the 200's looks, and over complicated technology, but the motor sure don't seem bad.
Posted: Fri Apr 18, 2008 10:31 pm
by j-top paj
and the 80 petrol uses less than the 4.5 GU
Posted: Sun Apr 20, 2008 7:24 pm
by Mark2
Tony WestOZ wrote:I was told the pistons and rings were suffering early wear problems.
This was approx 12 months ago and on the first ones brought to Australia.
I don`t know if its still a problem.
Doesnt quite make them a 'hand grenade' - a bit of a sensationalist statement methinks. I know of some which are using 2 litres of oil per 5000 and the owners arent happy about it. Toyota says its within 'specifications'. I could live with that on an older motor but it would be annoying on a brand new one. The early GEN 3's had ring sealing/oil usage problems which Holden sorted out. They certainly arent known as 'hand grenades'.
Posted: Sun Apr 20, 2008 7:59 pm
by bogged
Mark2 wrote:Doesnt quite make them a 'hand grenade' - a bit of a sensationalist statement methinks. .
ask owners that are out of pocket $10k+ on a car with less than 100k on them.
Even grenade owners call them grenades.
Posted: Sun Apr 20, 2008 10:30 pm
by Tony WestOZ
Mark2 wrote:Tony WestOZ wrote:I was told the pistons and rings were suffering early wear problems.
This was approx 12 months ago and on the first ones brought to Australia.
I don`t know if its still a problem.
Doesnt quite make them a 'hand grenade' - a bit of a sensationalist statement methinks. I know of some which are using 2 litres of oil per 5000 and the owners arent happy about it. Toyota says its within 'specifications'. I could live with that on an older motor but it would be annoying on a brand new one. The early GEN 3's had ring sealing/oil usage problems which Holden sorted out. They certainly arent known as 'hand grenades'.
Maybe it is a bit over the top but I`d be sure tempted to through one at a Toyota dealer that tells me 2 litres per 5000km is within specifications.
My TD42 has 400,000 km on it and would be lucky to use 1/2 lt/5000km.
Posted: Sun Apr 20, 2008 10:57 pm
by Mark2
bogged wrote:Mark2 wrote:Doesnt quite make them a 'hand grenade' - a bit of a sensationalist statement methinks. .
ask owners that are out of pocket $10k+ on a car with less than 100k on them.
Even grenade owners call them grenades.
Who was referiing to a 3.0???
Have another read of the previous posts......
Re: Yank Donk for GU
Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2008 5:57 pm
by jjay_GU
the 7.3, would it fit into GU patrol ? an if so any one know were to find / get fitter..
vanbox wrote:bogged wrote:Singo17 wrote:Well while I am in the states I can get hold of pretty well any of the current Diesels. Does anyone know of anyone in Australia that has fitted an engine other than the 6.2/6.5 Chev into a GU Patrol
there have been a few threads on the Duramax, apparently they are round
4-6inches too long to fit up, apparently the powerstroke (is that the 7.3?) is longer.
guess Bruce will just have to go back to a GQ or something.
happy with the GU
not true
(not the expert but have seen one in a GU)
Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2008 6:43 pm
by Wrench_Pilot_86
there was rumors going around that nissan where scraping the patrol wagon in favor of the Armada from the states, because of declining sales, and other factors to try and compete with the landcruiser again,
as well those 200/70 series diesels do suffer from a fair bit of oil loss, up to putting 2 to 3 litres of oil in every month, toyota are sorting it out now as there has been alot of dealers sending in product reports on the matter,
although cruisers that have had a hard life from day dot are not having as much of a problem with the oil consumption, its figured that the motor has had a decent workout to set the rings properly, but you have to understand that the tech in these new generation diesels is far from what the 1HD-FTE or the TD42 had inside them, they where both around for over a decade and refined into the strong reliable workhorses they are renowned for,
and yes a cummings motor in a trol would be a tree pulling beast, and make toyota sit up and pay attention after sitting on there hands for so long, riding on there name
Re: Yank Donk for GU
Posted: Wed Oct 29, 2008 8:50 pm
by bogged
jjay_GU wrote:the 7.3, would it fit into GU patrol ? an if so any one know were to find / get fitter..
no, but the Duramax does with some massaging.. Heath has one.. look for his thread in the section.. pulls 11's in 1/4
Posted: Mon Nov 03, 2008 4:50 pm
by patrolmad
Won't see the Cummins here. These are destined for the Nissan Titan.
Posted: Mon Nov 03, 2008 8:55 pm
by bogged
patrolmad wrote:Won't see the Cummins here. These are destined for the Nissan Titan.
*shock*
Posted: Mon Nov 03, 2008 8:56 pm
by j-top paj
when are we getting a titan here
Posted: Mon Nov 03, 2008 8:58 pm
by bogged
j-top paj wrote:when are we getting a titan here
why would you want a big boxy yank designed IFS heap here?
Posted: Mon Nov 03, 2008 9:05 pm
by j-top paj
why not? have you driven one yet?
they arent that bad to drive.
not as good as a patrol offroad, but not a bad tank to drive
Posted: Mon Nov 03, 2008 9:26 pm
by bogged
j-top paj wrote:why not? have you driven one yet?
they arent that bad to drive.
not as good as a patrol offroad, but not a bad tank to drive
not that it will happen, but they would be better off keeping the body/chassis/suspension they have, which is a proven winner, and getting a real engine for it...