Events/Trails 2008 USA Land Cruiser Pics and Test Drive Impressions
- Thread starter ShottsUZJ100
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
- Thread starter
- #142
Don't want to ruin the Highlander with a diesel.
It compares to the MB only it's reliable. On road design, people carrier, more efficient.
You must have had some gm kool aid back in the day. Did some one in a diesel rig blow your doors off or something? I know you are a bright guy because you have a 100 but I am not sure where all the diesel hate is coming from.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #144
PU
Stink
Noisy
Smooth
Complicated
Slower
New diesels:
Less PU
Less stink
Less noisy
More smooth
Complicated
Slower than gas
I want and HAVE gas!
PU
Stink
Noisy
Smooth
Complicated
Slower
New diesels:
Less PU
Less stink
Less noisy
More smooth
Complicated
Slower than gas
I want and HAVE gas!
Wow... just... wow. I have no words. Let me collect my thoughts after that blast of utter
and see if I can respond in a rational fashion.
I think Toyota has seen the writing on the walls....the heyday of the 13MPG SUV is coming to an end which is why they've ratcheted the price on the LC to $70-$80k and the Lexus will be $80-$90k. They'll cater to those who can afford to burn expensive gas, and if they can burn expensive gas, then they can afford an $80k SUV. They'll still sell diesels to NGO's and the third world, but it won't be the $70k to $90k as*f*cking they're delivering to the US. I think it will be a very low volume seller in the era of $100 barrels of oil and a hybrid in every garage. The change is taking place right in front of us. Perhaps Toyota will bring a diesel version into the mix. Do you think we'll see a hybrid Land Cruiser?
Last edited:
Not stupid, just uninformed. Take a look at the automotive market in Europe....it forshadows exactly what will happen here as fuel costs escalate. At some magic number, people starting asking themselves just how much they enjoy that truck getting 13 miles to the gallon. Now I don't know if that number is $4, $6, or $8 a gallon, and I love my Land Cruiser, but at some number, I'll park it in the garage and drive something more economical. The demand for better fuel economy is what drove the diesel market in Europe and it's absolutely naive to think the US won't follow a similar path.
Well said...
I can afford a new 200 and if Toyota offered an optional diesel powerplant here in the US I would buy one most likely.
I can't imagine someone saying that they wouldn't buy a diesel "because of the smell." That is a fuc
ing idiotc statement if I have ever heard one !! Then again, consider the source.
You make some very good points. How much will Americans take on the gas prices vs the MPG of the vehicle they own.
This may sound silly, but it seems to be a very personal issue for each person.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #152
Uninformed has nothing to do with it. I don't need to know anything about the diesel motor to know it stinks, it's louder, they are slower, etc. Those are facts. Use your nose and ears.
No, those are errors. As I inferred earlier, you have obviously not driven a modern diesel vehicle (not counting American full-size pick-ups). My 100 Series exhaust has much more odor, noise, and just a tad bit more roughness than my parents' E320 BluTec. Those are observable facts. The 100 is in perfect tune, and compared to most other vehicles rides like a luxury car, but it is simply not quite as refined as that new diesel. Here's another one: their 4-door luxury diesel sedan accelerates to 60 MPH just as quickly as your RX-8, which is supposedly a pure sports car. Edmunds.com even got a slower time (7.0 sec. for the Mazda vs. 6.8 in the Mercedes) in a manual-transmission-equipped 2008 RX-8! So diesels are slow? Hardly.
BTW, I know you're itching to, but don't bother quoting me other tests and magazines that got 0-60 times quicker in the RX-8. I've also seen quicker times in the E320. My point is, a nearly 4000 pound diesel 4-door sedan shouldn't even be in the same ballpark in terms of acceleration, at least according to your logic re: diesel engines, and yet it is! Imagine that!
Sorry ShottsUZJ100, time to wake and smell what you've been shoveling.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #154
No, those are errors. As I inferred earlier, you have obviously not driven a modern diesel vehicle (not counting American full-size pick-ups). My 100 Series exhaust has much more odor, noise, and just a tad bit more roughness than my parents' E320 BluTec. Those are observable facts. The 100 is in perfect tune, and compared to most other vehicles rides like a luxury car, but it is simply not quite as refined as that new diesel. Here's another one: their 4-door luxury diesel sedan accelerates to 60 MPH just as quickly as your RX-8, which is supposedly a pure sports car. Edmunds.com even got a slower time (7.0 sec. vs. 6.8 in the Mercedes) in a manual-transmission-equipped 2008 RX-8! So diesels are slow? Hardly.
Sorry ShottsUZJ100, time to wake and smell what you've been shoveling.
Apples to oranges
;p
Apples to oranges
Please explain. You said diesels are slower. Obviously they are not. BTW, please see my amended post above.
They are MUCH more quiet than they used to be, and they stink MUCH less now that low sulphur diesel is becoming the norm. In fact, if you park a desel Jetta next to gas Jetta, it's tough to quickly tell which is which....they've become very quiet. And if you could get twice the fuel economy at the expense of slightly slower zero to sixty time, that's not attractive???? These trucks aren't designed for speed, they're designed for utility. You want speed, you're at the wrong dealership.
- Thread starter
- #157
Please explain. You said diesels are slower. Obviously they are not. BTW, please see my amended post above.
Apples to applies. Not some mid-sized MB to a 3-ton 100 and Rx8. Wise up!
My choice:
100-series V8 (WIN)
vs
100-series diesel
200-series V8 (WIN)
vs
200-series diesel
Tundra 5.7 (WIN)
vs
Ford-Chevy-Dodge diesel
Grand Cherokee Hemi 5.7 (WIN)
vs
MB E320 diesel
You take the smelly, noisy, and less refined models above. That's your right. Me, I want the gas!
- Thread starter
- #158
They are quiter
They smell less
etc
etc
but they are not comparable to gassers and I don't want them. And utility what? I don't own Cruisers so I can pull a 20K pound trailer.
Huh? What are you smoking? First you say apples to apples, then you compare the Grand Cherokee to the E320? My point was that, in this particular comparison, the E-class GASSER should not have been able to keep up with the RX-8, let alone the diesel. The fact that the diesel vehicle, which is HEAVIER, was in the same ballpark, shows that it is not necessarily a slow platform, regardless of body type. It's not rocket science. I swear, this is like arguing with a four-year-old.
You say diesels are slow. They are not anymore. You say diesels are stinky. They are not anymore. You say diesels are loud. They are not anymore. Get out of the 80s.
OK, if you want apples to apples:
Mazda RX-8 vs. BMW 335d - diesel Bimmer smokes the petrol Mazda
- Thread starter
- #160
Have a great day!