FJ, Liberty,H3,XTerra, Wrangler Limited

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

All of this healthy competition from Toyota rivals will fuel change, and better products.

Toyota moves VERY slowly. Every change is a measured strategy for them, and there is no question of their success. Chrysler and Ford have both been eclipsed, and GM keeps looking over it's shoulder.

I really like the Xterra. It is probably my favorite SUV available today, with good reliability, and excellent capability to cost ratio. 21mpg is excellent.

The Liberty wins points for the diesel. Hopefully its sales success will promote addoption from other brands. Other than that, it doesnt do much of anything well. Too many compromises.

The HUMMER brand is excellent on the trail (really). I have driven and tested several models. What the HUMMER's suffer from is an unskilled and uninformed driver base. If you think about it, we don't disslike the HUMMERS, it that we don't like the drivers. They are the ones destroying (and getting closed) many of our trails (Greesy Spoon in Sedona as an example), acting like testosterone charged (and balding) teenagers. HUMMER drivers are converts from BMW M3's, Corvettes and the like, not an evolutionary Toyota buyer like someone purchasing a UZJ100.


For me, I am saving my pennies for the 2007 Tundra HD diesel... Drool! :D
 
"Toyota moves VERY slowly. Every change is a measured strategy for them, and there is no question of their success. Chrysler and Ford have both been eclipsed, and GM keeps looking over it's shoulder."

Toyota has already overtaken GM if you think about it. They are not giving there cars away, those are actual sales and profits. GM will do anything to move more units so they can say they sell the most cars.

And yes, I anxiously await the 2007 Tundra Diesel and 4.4L v8 turbodiesel:D
 
Educate me? Seriously. I know diesels are good for crawling and towing. Otherwise, they're slower, noisy, they stink, etc., etc. I can't envision ever wanting one over the V8 powerplant. What do you guys want a diesel so badly for over the V8?
 
For the same displacement-
Fuel economy increase: 25-30% higher
Torque: 30-40% higher and typically flat along the RPM band

Diesels are also more reliable (typically), with a much longer service life (it is not uncommon for a Cummins Diesel to run for 4-500,000 miles before a rebuild).

Gas engines are really only popular in the US. Diesels have evolved rapidly over the last ten years, addressing the noise, smell, etc.

HP is for sports cars (and is a function of RPM)
Torque is for trucks and SUV's

Just my opinion ;)
 
A diesel doesn't need a battery to run... once a diesel engine is started it will run untill it no longer has fuel (or oil, or is damaged etc). The only thing you need the battery for is the starter and for the glow plugs. Although some modern diesels may require the battery for the engine computer, not sure if the engine will run without the 'puter.
 
Remember the 100Diesel vs. 100Petrol comparo (Drexx's site)? The petrol UZJ was the better engine overall.

I think diesels are attractive for their long life, mpg's and grunt. A couple people I know have diesel Ram trucks -and they are not idiots- so they are obviously solid rigs.

Petrol engines are very clean and advanced nowadays so even if there was a diesel option, I'm not sure I would opt for it in a wagon. I've read more than a few people trading in their diesel Toyotas for a petrol version...
 
Ocelot said:
A diesel doesn't need a battery to run... once a diesel engine is started it will run untill it no longer has fuel (or oil, or is damaged etc). The only thing you need the battery for is the starter and for the glow plugs. Although some modern diesels may require the battery for the engine computer, not sure if the engine will run without the 'puter.
Click to expand...

It also depends if you have an electric or mechanical fuel pump
 
FirstToy said:
Remember the 100Diesel vs. 100Petrol comparo (Drexx's site)? The petrol UZJ was the better engine overall.
Click to expand...

Cant find it on his site... but I'd like to read if you can find it

I've read more than a few people trading in their diesel Toyotas for a petrol version...
Click to expand...

I've read about more than a few trading in for a diesel ;)
 
I think you need to drive a diesel vehicle first to understand. I test drove a turbo-intercooled 100 series in Panama a couple of months ago and it was one of the nicest vehicles I've ever driven. Quiet, powerful diesel engine, great powerband, and 60% better fuel economy than a petrol 100 series. That may not matter to some of the 100 series owners on this board, but the only reason I chose a new 4-Runner rather than a used 100 series was the fuel consumption, I couldn't justify the monthly expense in fuel. Price was a wash between the two I was looking at.

There is also a philosophical reason to buy diesel; they can run (well) on biodiesel, and every bit counts, moves us away from dependency on foreign oil.

My daily driver is a turbo-diesel 1999 VW Jetta that I bought new. It gets 40+ MPG, I only put $25 worth of fuel in it every five weeks. It's fast, fun to drive, and has been extremely reliable in the time we've owned it. If Toyota offered the 4Runner in turbo-diesel in the US (like it does in other countries), I would have bought that instead.

As for the Cruiser, the conversion to diesel is almost done. Other Cruiserheads that have used the same engine are getting between 22-28 MPG (depending on the vehicle configuration), even at the bottom of that spread it will be almost twice what I got with the original petrol engine. I keep my vehicles a LONG time, so the initial purchase price is not my only concern, it's the fuel/maintenance costs over the life of it.
 
j7addict said:
It also depends if you have an electric or mechanical fuel pump
Click to expand...


Fuel pump? THem's gasoline words!

Diesels have injector pumps, unless it's common rail in which case it is a high pressure fuel pump, since the fuel mixture is metered on the rail/injector level rather than the pump level.

Most modern diesels, especially the TDIs, the CRDs do have electrical sensors and most of them have a mixture of electronic and mechanical fuel metering, so I doubt most modern diesels will run without electricity for very long. Maybe they would go into a limp home mode where the fuel isn't properly metered, I don't know. I know on the VW TDI, the throttle is drive by wire and electronically controlled, so no electricity, no go. And I also know on the Liberty's CRD diesel that the injectors are elctrically fired, so the same goes for them.

Old school diesels will run without any electricity whatsoever. all they need is air, fuel and lubrication.

Fred
 
ShottsUZJ100 said:
And the V8 in the 100 has more of both (compared to the 4.2TD), right?
Click to expand...


Perhaps it may, I don't know.

But the amount produced is only half the equation: the other important part is when it's produced. Ideally, for off roading and trailering you want the peak torque below 2000 RPM. When you're rock crawling, do you really want to be driving 15 MPH to get your peak torque at 4000 RPM?

Diesels as a rule have much flatter torque curves. Without getting too technical, (Because there are entire books written on the subject, several I can recommend if you like) that's cause diesels are "constant pressure" engines rather than "constant volume" engines.

Fred
 
Last edited:
sisukid1975 said:
Perhaps it may, I don't know.

But the amount produced is only half the equation: the other important part is when it's produced. Ideally, for off roading and trailering you want the peak torque below 2000 RPM. When you're rock crawling, do you really want to be driving 15 MPH to get your peak torque at 4000 RPM?

Diesels as a rule have much flatter torque curves. Without getting too technical, (Because there are entire books written on the subject, several I can recommend if you like) that's cause diesels are "constant pressure" engines rather than "constant volume" engines.

Fred
Click to expand...

Gotcha. The V8 though in the 100 has 320 lb/ft of torque. Of that 320, 90% is available at only 1100 RPM. This surpasses the TD's numbers. So, it has the torque and it has it where you need it...down low and throughout the band...and you have much more HP too. I can't see giving up the 100's V8 for anything. :confused:
 
ShottsUZJ100 said:
Gotcha. The V8 though in the 100 has 320 lb/ft of torque. Of that 320, 90% is available at only 1100 RPM. This surpasses the TD's numbers. So, it has the torque and it has it where you need it...down low and throughout the band...and you have much more HP too. I can't see giving up the 100's V8 for anything. :confused:
Click to expand...

from http://trucktrend.com/roadtests/suv/163_0406_full/index3.html
and http://toyota.com/vehicles/2006/landcruiser/specs.html

"Toyota's iForce 4.7-liter V-8 ... horsepower (at 240) and torque (315 at 3400 rpm),"

The curve below shows it's 2500 rpm torque, and it is not near peak. Toyota's website states it's peak torque is 325 Ft/lbs at 3400 as well.

On the other hand, let's look at the specs on the Toyota 3.0 Litre diesel. I could not find the torque curve for the 4.2 actually, but this works just fine, as I have no problem comparing the torque curve of a 4.7 liter gasser to a 3.0 litre diesel. :)

THe peak torque for a Toyota 3.0 litre diesel is 302 Ft/lbs, and it develops it at 1800 RPM and maintains it till 2600 RPM.

THe I force has more torque, yes, but it has it at 3400, but we're talking about 23 Ft/lbs of difference and the 3.0 is only a 4 cylinder. When you compare the mileage of the two, the benefit of Diesel becomes clear. Especially after you factor in the longer life typical of a diesel and the lower maintenance.

I would imagine the 4.2 trounces the Iforce in the low end torque field.

http://toyota.co.uk/vs2/pdf/LC3_96_spec.pdf

Fred
 
Last edited:
sisukid1975 said:
from http://trucktrend.com/roadtests/suv/163_0406_full/index3.html
and http://toyota.com/vehicles/2006/landcruiser/specs.html

"Toyota's iForce 4.7-liter V-8 may carry the lowest rated horsepower (at 240) and torque (315 at 3400 rpm),"

The curve below shows it's 2500 rpm torque, and it is not near peak. Toyota's website states it's peak torque is 325 Ft/lbs at 3400 as well.

On the other hand, let's look at the specs on the Toyota 3.0 Litre diesel. I could not find the torque curve for the 4.2 actually, but this works just fine, as I have no problem comparing the torque curve of a 4.7 liter gasser to a 3.0 litre diesel. :)

THe peak torque for a Toyota 3.0 litre diesel is 302 Ft/lbs, and it develops it at 1800 RPM and maintains it till 2600 RPM.

THe I force has more torque, yes, but it has it at 3400, but we're talking about 23 Ft/lbs of difference and the 3.0 is only a 4 cylinder. When you compare the mileage of the two, the benefit of Diesel becomes clear. Especially after you factor in the longer life typical of a diesel and the lower maintenance.

I would imagine the 4.2 trounces the Iforce in the low end torque field.

http://toyota.co.uk/vs2/pdf/LC3_96_spec.pdf

Fred
Click to expand...

You're missing the point that tells the real picture. :)

Doesn't matter where the PEAK is. It's the fact that 90% of total torque occurs at a mere 1100RPM. That's RARE for a gas powered engine. That's the reason I can hang with an Escalade going uphill and in my 35-inch mis-geared 100. From the light where HP counts he kills me.
Next, the 100 is tuned different from other V8 models. 5 less HP and 5 more torque.
 
ShottsUZJ100 said:
You're missing the point that tells the real picture. :)

Doesn't matter where the PEAK is. It's the fact that 90% of total torque occurs at a mere 1100RPM. That's RARE for a gas powered engine. That's the reason I can hang with an Escalade going uphill and in my 35-inch mis-geared 100. From the light where HP counts he kills me.
Next, the 100 is tuned different from other V8 models. 5 less HP and 5 more torque.
Click to expand...


That's a very flat torque curve which is rare for a gasser, but it does not produce the same amount of torque at 1800 RPM as even the 3.0 Litre diesel... a flat curve is good, but peaking at 3400 is not as good as peaking at 1800-2600 RPM.

Fred
 
sisukid1975 said:
That's a very flat torque curve which is rare for a gasser, but it does not produce the same amount of torque at 1800 RPM as even the 3.0 Litre diesel... a flat curve is good, but peaking at 3400 is not as good as peaking at 1800-2600 RPM.

Fred
Click to expand...

3.0? 80 and 100 are 4.2. At any rpm they have less T an HP compared to the 8. You talkin apples?
 
Exiled said:
I think you need to drive a diesel vehicle first to understand. I test drove a turbo-intercooled 100 series in Panama a couple of months ago and it was one of the nicest vehicles I've ever driven. Quiet, powerful diesel engine, great powerband, and 60% better fuel economy than a petrol 100 series. That may not matter to some of the 100 series owners on this board, but the only reason I chose a new 4-Runner rather than a used 100 series was the fuel consumption, I couldn't justify the monthly expense in fuel. Price was a wash between the two I was looking at.

There is also a philosophical reason to buy diesel; they can run (well) on biodiesel, and every bit counts, moves us away from dependency on foreign oil.

My daily driver is a turbo-diesel 1999 VW Jetta that I bought new. It gets 40+ MPG, I only put $25 worth of fuel in it every five weeks. It's fast, fun to drive, and has been extremely reliable in the time we've owned it. If Toyota offered the 4Runner in turbo-diesel in the US (like it does in other countries), I would have bought that instead.

As for the Cruiser, the conversion to diesel is almost done. Other Cruiserheads that have used the same engine are getting between 22-28 MPG (depending on the vehicle configuration), even at the bottom of that spread it will be almost twice what I got with the original petrol engine. I keep my vehicles a LONG time, so the initial purchase price is not my only concern, it's the fuel/maintenance costs over the life of it.
Click to expand...

That is interesting. Well I am certainly tempted with diesel, it obviously has some great advantages- long life and mpg's are some great motivators.

I would certainly consider a TDI Jetta, I really like those (about the only VW I like).

Exiled, do you have a 4th gen? Did you see the new reskin?
https://forum.ih8mud.com/showthread.php?t=52766
 
ShottsUZJ100 said:
3.0? 80 and 100 are 4.2. At any rpm they have less T an HP compared to the 8. You talkin apples?
Click to expand...

I'm talking the Toyota 3.0 Litre diesel that is available in nearly every country in the world, save this one.

It produces less torque than the 8 cylinder, yes. 23 ft/lbs less to be exact. But it peaks way sooner than the v-8. And the torque curve I showed you clearly indicates that it produces more torque in the critical 1500 to 2500 RPM range. This is good, especially if you like off roading and towing things. ANd as a diesel owner, I couldn't care less about horsepower. If you do, then you should stick with gas.

I guess I won't convince you, after all. I could break out the engineering references and use a bunch of math and formulae, but I doubt it will make any difference at this point.

I guess the best thing for me to do is to suggest you go to your local Ford, Chevrolet or Dodge dealer and take a Powerstroke, Duramax or Cummins for a spin. While you're there, compare their torque numbers to a gasoline engine of similar displacement. Ask the salesman what is best for heavy towing. If you can drive one and not like it cause you can't get over the fact it's diesel, then so be it. This is not the 1980s-- the days of the underpowered and lackluster 6.2 Litre diesel are over.

If you want to experience high tech diesel refinement at it's best, go to the local Mercedes Benz dealer and drive a 2005 E Class CDI. I promise you, the only way that you'll know it's Diesel is from the badge on the trunk lid.

;) :beer:

Fred
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom