I drove the 200 series diesel the other day. First impressions here. https://forum.ih8mud.com/showthread.php?p=2809232#post2809232
Drove the 200 Diesel today.
- Thread starter Dougal
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
How's the power?
- Thread starter
- #4
Ample.
You'd need a decent hill and some other traffic to truely appreciate it. But my drive was on the flat. It hit the speed limit quickly and smoothly. Speedo reads up to 260km/h.
I would love to see pics also.
What'd I say?..........
I would like the rest of the world to know that in america there is no such thing as "enough" power,
Also americans do NOT know how to drive Diesel's that could be part of it too, you know 3,000rpm red line and all. We got to have foot in the floor 6,000rpm, 4mpg race motor's here......
"I gots ta pass!, gots ta pass!"
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #7
Sorry, didn't get any pics that time. In the enginebay there's nothing really to see. A large air/air intercooler on top of the engine which is ducted from the front of the bonnet like the 90 series Prado.
Otherwise it's just a sea of plastic covers.
What'd I say?..........
I would like the rest of the world to know that in america there is no such thing as "enough" power,
Also americans do NOT know how to drive Diesel's that could be part of it too, you know 3,000rpm red line and all. We got to have foot in the floor 6,000rpm, 4mpg race motor's here......
I am sure any modern diesel would feel quite "snappy" when compaired to my 62...I would gladly trade a few seconds off the much overrated 0-60 times for better mpg and the beneficial torque a diesel would achieve in a 100--200 series..
I was browsing online yesterday looking for what diesels were available SUV wise in the US and the only ones that would be even a remote possibility for me were the Grand Cherokee and the Touareg... Being a faithful MB supporter for many years sill couldn't sway me to even consider a GL. Audi's Q7 doesn't interest me the least bit as well...Oh, the joy's of a "free" market !!
- Thread starter
- #9
I am sure any modern diesel would feel quite "snappy" when compaired to my 62...I would gladly trade a few seconds off the much overrated 0-60 times for better mpg and the beneficial torque a diesel would achieve in a 100--200 series..
IMO the slush boxes toyota uses will stop anything from feeling snappy. I recall something like 8.7 seconds 0-100km/h for the diesel 200 series, but can't find anything official on the toyota NZ or AUS websites.
*edit*
8.2 seconds to 100km/h for the diesel. It's on the toyota.co.uk website
*/edit*
Last edited:
I would gladly trade a few seconds off the much overrated 0-60 times for better mpg and the beneficial torque a diesel would achieve in a 100--200 series..
So would I......but that would make us A-typical.......(meaning the only ones)
The MB tech it talked to the other day for about an hour: "Yeah but they are slow..."
Me: "I dont care!............I'd rather have the 40mpg!"
And you also said "compared" there is NOTHING in NA to compare it with...
- Thread starter
- #11
I've come across a lot of guys from the US who absolutely love diesels. Love them enough to drive 20 year old NA diesel vehicles with 60hp rather than drive a newer petrol car.
But the US car makers keep telling you there's no demand.
But the US car makers keep telling you there's no demand.
Im in TX and there are s***loads of Ford, Dodge and Chevy diesel trucks all over the place. I would say the majority of these trucks are being used as we use our LC's. I realize the motors in those 3/4--1 tons are not nearly as refined as the diesels found in LC's, LR's, etc all over the world but that doesn't bother me one bit..If Toy offered a 200 with a diesel option in the USA I would buy one.
Im in TX and there are ****loads of Ford, Dodge and Chevy diesel trucks all over the place. I would say the majority of these trucks are being used as we use our LC's. I realize the motors in those 3/4--1 tons are not nearly as refined as the diesels found in LC's, LR's, etc all over the world but that doesn't bother me one bit..If Toy offered a 200 with a diesel option in the USA I would buy one.
I can't see Toyota offering a diesel in the Land Cruiser. From what I have read is that the average household income of Land Cruiser owners is something like $240,000. With that type of income, I am sure gas prices are the last of these peoples worries. I have read that the Land Cruiser can get close to 10.5litres per 100km .
- Thread starter
- #14
Fuel consumption only one of the many reasons to buy a diesel over a petrol.
Ok...So what else?
From what I have seen on Toyota's different websites from around the world is that 5.7 litre in America has the highest tow capacity among all Land Cruisers at 8500lbs. The 5.7 and 4.7 come with crawl control which not available on the diesel and costs a little less.
Both the 5.7 and the 4.5 diesel both have the same 6 speed transmission.
So far I only see fuel consumption as the only positive.
- Thread starter
- #16
Does 650Nm mean anything to you?
If you've never driven a good turbo diesel you might not know what the fuss is about. But the big fat torque curve on a diesel means you've got a much bigger % of your rated power on tap than a petrol.
They aren't even offering the petrol model in my country. Probably based off sales figures on the previous 100 series.
And does 381hp mean anything to you?
Just kidding. I think 650Nm converts to around 480lbs of torque. Am I right about this? The 5.7 is rated at 401lb of torque. The 5.7 also tows about at 1/2 ton more that the diesel version using the same exact transmission and ratios from what I have research. Also, there is no way the diesel can get to 60mph faster than the 5.7 gas engine.
So right there. In my mind the winner by far is the 5.7 gas.
In my mind, the diesel does have a longer life cycle (but Toyota gas engines are pretty good) and a much better fuel economy.
- Thread starter
- #18
And does 381hp mean anything to you?
Just kidding. I think 650Nm converts to around 480lbs of torque. Am I right about this? The 5.7 is rated at 401lb of torque. The 5.7 also tows about at 1/2 ton more that the diesel version using the same exact transmission and ratios from what I have research. Also, there is no way the diesel can get to 60mph faster than the 5.7 gas engine.
So right there. In my mind the winner by far is the 5.7 gas.
In my mind, the diesel does have a longer life cycle (but Toyota gas engines are pretty good) and a much better fuel economy.
If getting to 100km/h as fast as possible is your main criteria, then why would you ever consider a landcruiser?
The main difference between the diesel torque and petrol torque is the rpm that it's available. For the diesel it peaks at about 1500-2500rpm, the petrol has to be revved to about double that.
In fact the power from the two engines merges at 195kw at 3500rpm.
Below 3500rpm the diesel produces more power, above 3500rpm the petrol produces more.
I'm bemused that the towing capacity on the petrol could be higher as towing capacity is usually set by the chassis limits, not the engine. Where did you find that info?
Is it possible you're comparing information from different countries with different safety standards for towing?
The aussie sites list 3500kg regardless of engine. But they don't get the 5.7 option.
I am just giving you 0-60mph so people know the unloaded performance. There is NO DOUBT that the 5.7 litre is a proven performer. There have been claims that the 5.7 in the Tundra can out perform the bigger diesels in the North American HD pick up trucks and these diesels are hitting close to 650lbs of torque (I am not sure what that is in Nm).
I am VERY sure the USA safety standards are not much different compared to New Zealand. The USA safety should be just a as safe as NZ.
From the Toyota USA website it states that the Lanc Crusier can tow 8500lbs which is about 800lbs more than the Cruiser in NZ.
Lastly, if I am correct. Having a higher peak torque and high peak hp will allow you to take advantage of more gearing which is about the same in both trucks because both NZ LC's and USA LC's have the same 6 speed transmission thus having more more allows the US version LC to tow more.
And thats exactly where the more towing capacity, better acceleration, more passing power but less gas mileage come from.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #20
You're sounding a little defensive there. I'm not knocking the petrol version, just stating why I prefer diesels.
I can't find anything useful on the NZ toyota website regarding towing capacity. But the Australian site lists 3500kg. That is the limit for the 1 7/8" and 50mm towballs used in these two countries.
For higher ratings you're usually looking at a ringfeder fitted to heavy trucks.
For example the rangerovers year 1969-1994 were rated at 4000kg tow capacity (yes that's fractionally higher than the US 200 series. But finding a towball rated to 4000kg is close to impossible.
Where browsing US towhitch sites shows the 2 5/16" size with a 10,000lb rating. Under the UK and Australian standards that option isn't available.
