Diesel engine for 200 series in USA

[tempestv8]

As further proof that Aussie & Kiwi buyers prefer diesel over petrol, look no further than a Range Rover Vogue Supercharged V8 petrol vs a Range Rover Turbo Diesel V8.

The Supercharged petrol model is $20K dearer than the diesel but after 4-5 years, it is cheaper to buy as used, compared to same mileage and spec diesel. I'd hate to wear that sort of depreciation if I were a petrol SUV owner.

 

[pagemaster]

Here are a couple of 2002 landcruiser 100's for sale.
The diesel has almost 3x the odometer reading of the petrol (199,000km vs 71,000km) yet it's still got a 10% higher asking price.

Toyota landcruiser VX 2002 for sale - TradeMe.co.nz - New Zealand
Toyota Landcruiser VX-LTD 5 STAGE AUTO 2002 for sale - TradeMe.co.nz - New Zealand

Something smells fishy! The petrol is listed as 2002 model yet it comes with the 2003 model upgrades such as interior, as well as the 5 speed transmission. 2002 models had a different centre stack, non gated lever and only a 4 speed.

As for the diesel. It appears to have the 2003 centre stack but it has the 2002 model centre console. It also looks like it might be modified, its called the facelift model, has heated cloth seats, 20 inch wheels or 17 inch factory wheels.

Something doesn't seem right!

I do like the fact that the petrol has cloth seats, power lumbar, gated shift lever and it has factory nav. Those are some nice features for a non top-of the line model.

I don't doubt that a diesel Land Cruiser will hold its value more than a petrol Land Cruiser in Australia, but in North America, I find it a hard to believe that someone will pay a premium for a 280hp diesel Land Cruiser over a equally equipped 381hp gas model brand new. Down the road the diesel might hold its value better (due to being extremely low volume...higher asking price) but it doesn't get to the point that the current 4.5 model is too underpowered for North American tastes.

 

[Dougal]

Something doesn't seem right!

Different countries get different specs. Get over it.

blah, blah, blah


but it doesn't get to the point that the current 4.5 model is too underpowered for North American tastes.

Yawn, 280hp is "underpowered" for a country with 55mph speed limits.
Methinks your perspectives are a little out of line with reality.

 

[pagemaster]

Different countries get different specs. Get over it.



Yawn, 280hp is "underpowered" for a country with 55mph speed limits.
Methinks your perspectives are a little out of line with reality.

LOL at the 280hp comment, sorry but the 280hp is way to underpowered for the US. It would never sell, the 4.7 made 281 horses and was laughed at in the LC, Tundra, Sequoia and even GX models as being underpowered.

It wasn't until Toyota introduced the 5.7 that they got some serious respect.

As for truck diesels in North America, the starting HP rating are pushing 380hp from a 6 litre or higher displacement. Howover, these vehicle push the 8800 or higher GVWR.

If Toyota was to get into diesels, they would have to at least cross the 325hp mark. The Tundra would be seriously laughed at if Toyota put the 4.5 litre diesel in that truck. As for the Land Cruiser, not a chance!

I will say that things are certainly different over there in Australia, the 70 series/Hillux pick ups use boxed frames while the Toyota Trucks here are all open C-Channels. The Land Cruiser has many different models while we have only one model with one option. Things are clearly different.

In NA, everything is about power, performance and bragging rights and North America diesel pickups were make 280hp back in the mid 90s...not sure why anyone would think a 280hp diesel Land Cruiser could be a success in 2010. A Land Cruiser in the USA is considered a premium large sport utility vehicle unlike the most of the Africa/Australia/South America where they are considered wagons with a full range of model options. UK consideres the LC as a luxury vehcile complete with the Lexus LX570 suspension bolted to the diesel powertrain.

 

[Carl L]

Yawn, 280hp is "underpowered" for a country with 55mph speed limits.
Methinks your perspectives are a little out of line with reality.

While I've been with you on the merits of diesels, I must correct the belief that the US has 55mph speed limits. Most freeways are 65mph or 70mph in CA while Texas has an 80mph speed limit.

Also, in L.A. County, if you drive anywhere near the 65-70mph speed limit you'll be practically ran off the road by everything from mini vans to big rig drivers.

Now, I do agree that 280bhp isn't underpowered but with such a low price of gas out here I'd still choose the 5.7. Any where else in the world, or if I were towing, I'd take the 4.5TD while the 4.7 gas makes zero sense anywhere.

 

[Pskhaat]

Yawn, 280hp is "underpowered" for a country with 55mph speed limits.

I'm on your side Dougal, BUT they're right. 55mph limits? you talkin' about in the States? In most of the 75mph areas you see drastic elevation changes on large highways, and let's be honest 75-80mph is generally the minimum speed. A laden vehicle with pulling a camping trailer will get stuck behind the heavy trucks on the road not being able to pass up a 6-7% in traffic...yes >300HP is indeed a selling point.

Plus, you forget that with our more-than-adequate 2 weeks of vacation a year (assuming it is even approved by management) we need to get away and back as fast as humanly possible. If I had the vacation time y'all in Oz/NZ have I'd be a little happier going slower.

Next, New Zealand is smaller in land area than the State of Colorado, and weekend escapes often involve crossing States to get there, crap sometimes you have to drive the length of New Zealand South Island just to get a way from urban landscapes. Speed, unfortunately, is a big factor.

 

[IslandTimes]

It's definitely NOT unusual to be driving 80-85 mph in a 70. And for the onramps for interstates it's near a requirement to have excessive power so you can gun the engine and avoid being run over by a big 18-wheeler!

 

[jamie_scotland]

I drive in the states quite frequently and the idea that the 4.5 is inadequate is pretty hilarious.

Although traffic eventually gets up to 80/85 I spent most of my time wishing everyone would hurry up. Instead they were weaving around, too busy drinking coffee/coke or talking on the phone.

Try pulling out to pass an 18 wheeler on the German Autobahn and you'll know what its like to feel intimidated. At one stage I was running on the 155 mph limiter in a MB E320 diesel and got flashed out of the way by a convoy of faster traffic!

Even here in Scotland, I drive a taxi and any American visitors spend half the time gripping the grab rails, thinking we drive like lunatics!

The biggest selling point of the diesel in my opinion is fuel range. Once you get used to 600+ miles on a single tank its pretty hard to go back. I can't imagine having to go looking for a fuel stop every 300 miles or so.

Jamie

 

[Carl L]

I drive in the states quite frequently and the idea that the 4.5 is inadequate is pretty hilarious.

Although traffic eventually gets up to 80/85 I spent most of my time wishing everyone would hurry up. Instead they were weaving around, too busy drinking coffee/coke or talking on the phone.

Try pulling out to pass an 18 wheeler on the German Autobahn and you'll know what its like to feel intimidated. At one stage I was running on the 155 mph limiter in a MB E320 diesel and got flashed out of the way by a convoy of faster traffic!

With all due respect, you can't have spent much of that time in SoCal or the TriState areas.

As for 155mph in an E320 diesel, don't they max out at 140? I'd get that speedometer checked out.

The 280bhp of the diesel is adequate in the states, but to compete with the 405bhp Escalade and 400bhp&500bhp Range Rovers, the 5.7 is a necessary evil. Increased range is very nice I agree, but 400miles from a tank is okay for me given that my sedan struggles to give me 300.

 

[pagemaster]

The 280bhp of the diesel is adequate in the states, .

Yes adequate, but not enough to make a different if the 5.7 is offered as well. If it was the 4.7 or the 4.6 then the 4.5 would likely come out the winner in most circumstances. But up against the 5.7, no way.

Diesel models in the USA such as the MB and Audi are not range topping models like the 4.5. If the 4.5 was a mid level Land Cruiser then their would be a solid chance for it to work out. Leave the 5.7 for the top level and offer the 4.5 mid level without all the options.

but to compete with the 405bhp Escalade and 400bhp&500bhp Range Rovers, the 5.7 is a necessary evil. Increased range is very nice I agree, but 400miles from a tank is okay for me given that my sedan struggles to give me

Of course the 5.7 is necessary, now we have the Infiniti hitting 400hp.

 

[Carl L]

Of course the 5.7 is necessary, now we have the Infiniti hitting 400hp.

It looks like you misread my post, unless you are just repeating my point. I am in favor of the 5.7.

 

[jamie_scotland]

With all due respect, you can't have spent much of that time in SoCal or the TriState areas.

As for 155mph in an E320 diesel, don't they max out at 140? I'd get that speedometer checked out.

The 280bhp of the diesel is adequate in the states, but to compete with the 405bhp Escalade and 400bhp&500bhp Range Rovers, the 5.7 is a necessary evil. Increased range is very nice I agree, but 400miles from a tank is okay for me given that my sedan struggles to give me 300.

No I'll give you that, mostly around Houston and all over Florida.

No, official specs for the E320 are 155 mph (limited) and 0-62 in 6.6s, even the little 4 cylinder diesel E220 will crack 140. There might not be much in reserve but the E320 will sit at 155 all day.

Now you guys are making more sense. The diesel would be cheaper than the 5.7 in the same way that diesel Range Rovers are cheaper than the Supercharged V8.

The 5.7 will still sell to posers that want to brag about max hp or other irrelevant stuff and the diesel will sell to people that want real world performance, effortless driving and a decent range.

Jamie

 

[pagemaster]

Now you guys are making more sense. The diesel would be cheaper than the 5.7 in the same way that diesel Range Rovers are cheaper than the Supercharged V8.

Are you kidding me. Everywhere the diesel LC and gasser LC are sold, the diesel starts at about $10k more premium.

A diesel would have to be a bare bones or mid level model to sell less than the 5.7

The 5.7 will still sell to posers that want to brag about max hp or other irrelevant stuff and the diesel will sell to people that want real world performance, effortless driving and a decent range.

LMAO! Yeah because the 5.7 spanks the 4.5 in EVERY statistical performance category including real world driving while towing or not towing....There is nothing the 4.5 can do that the 5.7 can do better. The only thing the 4.5 out perform the 5.7 is in MPG.....

The 4.5 actually competes with the 4.7

 

[jamie_scotland]

I'll get back to you on that one. Currently looking for a market where the 5.7 sells alongside the diesel. I might be some time

I said real world daily driving performance not statistical drag racing! Next time you go for a drive, think about how long you spend with the engine above 3000 rpm... Not long i'd bet.

If you care so much about getting to 60 that little bit sooner you're driving the wrong vehicle.

Besides,I'll soon make up the 1.5 seconds or so difference when you have to stop for gas! ;p

 

[pagemaster]

I'll get back to you on that one. Currently looking for a market where the 5.7 sells alongside the diesel. I might be some time

Does not exist. There is nowhere where they sell both the 4.5 and 5.7. There is a reason for this!

said real world daily driving performance not statistical drag racing! Next time you go for a drive, think about how long you spend with the engine above 3000 rpm... Not long i'd bet.

Real world driving the 5.7 is outstanding. more than 350 lbs of tq ate at 2000rpm is more than enough.

Both the 4.5 and 5.7 both cruise at the same RPM at highway speeds.

381hp and dual VVTi is going to win out over non VVti 4.5 diesel with 280hp every single time except for the pump....there just is no comparison on how good the 5.7 is compared to anything ever put in a Toyota Land Cruiser.

 

[Dougal]

I drive in the states quite frequently and the idea that the 4.5 is inadequate is pretty hilarious.

Although traffic eventually gets up to 80/85 I spent most of my time wishing everyone would hurry up. Instead they were weaving around, too busy drinking coffee/coke or talking on the phone.

Try pulling out to pass an 18 wheeler on the German Autobahn and you'll know what its like to feel intimidated. At one stage I was running on the 155 mph limiter in a MB E320 diesel and got flashed out of the way by a convoy of faster traffic!

Even here in Scotland, I drive a taxi and any American visitors spend half the time gripping the grab rails, thinking we drive like lunatics!

The biggest selling point of the diesel in my opinion is fuel range. Once you get used to 600+ miles on a single tank its pretty hard to go back. I can't imagine having to go looking for a fuel stop every 300 miles or so.

Jamie

Even the 1.4 seat I rented in europe had no problem doiing 170+ km/h. According to the maker it'll do 177 but it got there quite easily and did even more downhill. Cruised happily at a minimum of 130km/h for hours at a time and used a whole 8 litres/100km doing so too.

It's been about 7 years since I was in the states. I didn't drive or were driven on any roads which would tax a 170hp landcruiser (i.e. diesel 80 series), let alone require 280hp.

Those traffic jams and 5 line highways with gradual inclines take a lot of power.

As for the 4.7 being underpowered. That's because it's a torqueless petrol with only 410Nm at 3400rpm.
Those who understand how to read a torque/power curve know the diesel puts out more power and torque at every point than the 4.7 petrol and is only beaten by the 5.7 if you want to run it constantly above 3500rpm.

Even driving a diesel would make this abundently clear. It's why hilux's come with a 3 litre diesel or a 4 litre petrol. You need a petrol that's way bigger to deliver any meaningful torque.
BTW, only posers buy the petrol hiluxes. The real posers buy the petrol hilux and put the diesel intercooler scoop through the bonnet.

 

[Pskhaat]

...in the states. I didn't drive or were driven on any roads which would tax a 130hp landcruiser (i.e. diesel 80 series), let alone require 280hp.

Again, I'm on the diesel side every day of the week and Toyota USA can for not bringing us at bare minimum a manual tranny and cloth seats, but I'm saying there are lots of places and heaps of times I've needed more HP and it wasn't just on highways, just sayin'. I pray you didn't drive across Nebraska | Kansas? I could drive you around for months in the mountain west where you would bore yourself to death driving an LC pre-98.

Back to the meat of the thread, I am Americana and give me personally a 4.5 all day long over the 5.7.

 

[Falco80]

Interesting thread. It just highlights how different markets/regions favour particular vehicles and fuels. Diesel is quite often cheaper than unleaded fuel in my area, and the extended range you get from a diesel is a desirable thing to have when fuel stops are few and far between. Thats why diesel is a good thing down here. It's all about economy and range.
If unleaded was cheap and plentiful here in Aus then i might consider a petrol Landcruiser....but it would have to be a powerfull one though! I would love to go for a spin in a 5.7L 200 series if i could.

It's a shame Toyota don't at least offer a small number of diesel variants in the US, but really it seems only a small portion of folks are upset about it. Toyota obviously know what they are doing...or think they know what they are doing!

 

[tempestv8]

Brake horse power is harder for me to comprehend as I'm used to Kilowatts and Newton meters.....

Just to put it into metric perspective, the 5.7 yields 270kW of power and 530 Nm. It gets from 0-100 km/hr in 7.8 seconds.

The 4.5 turbo diesel manages 195kW of power and 650 Nm of torque. 0-100 km/hr in 8.6 seconds.

So, yes the 5.7 gasser has almost one whole second faster acceleration from 0 to 100 km/hr (roughly 62 mph) than the 4.5 oiler.

Which one would I pick?

 

[Dougal]

Brake horse power is harder for me to comprehend as I'm used to Kilowatts and Newton meters.....

Just to put it into metric perspective, the 5.7 yields 270kW of power and 530 Nm. It gets from 0-100 km/hr in 7.8 seconds.

The 4.5 turbo diesel manages 195kW of power and 650 Nm of torque. 0-100 km/hr in 8.6 seconds.

So, yes the 5.7 gasser has almost one whole second faster acceleration from 0 to 100 km/hr (roughly 62 mph) than the 4.5 oiler.

Which one would I pick?

Funny how an engine with 38% more peak power can only shave 10% off acceleration times.
The average power to get a 3 ton lump to 100km/h in 7.8 seconds is 148kw.
The average power to get the same 3 ton lump to 100km/h in 8.6 seconds is 135kw.

What's the 0-100time for the 4.7?