Help

[Previa Diesel]

Is Canadam the same guy as Previa Diesel on this board - the guy selling the HZJ77 in the classified section?

Answer: No. I'm on the Island, not in Prince George.

I have a Surf with the same 2LTE engine though and from reading the Australian forum in particular, it seems there are a number of possible reasons for head failure:

1. Clogged cooling systems
2. Low coolant levels - the 2LTE is particularly prone to developing airlocks reportedly. Do this if you have a 2LTE: http://www.allhead.com.au/cooling.html
3. Fan clutch failure - who would notice this?
4. Restricted water passages in head gaskets - some report no more overheating after using gaskets with coolant holes the same size as those in the head and block. Why would Toyota use gaskets with reduced holes? Has been suggested this was a last minute attempt to fix a design flaw in the head. When you have a thermal problem like this cracking, there are two possible approaches. Either you attempt to keep the head cool all the time by allowing high flow or you attempt to prevent sudden changes in temperature by restricting coolant flow. Since iron does not have the thermal conductivity of aluminum for example, you might think it would be better to reduce the flow and prevent rapid heating and cooling - which is what causes castings to crack usually, esp. complex castings like cylinder heads that have a lot of unequal stresses. It may be that Toyota called this one 'wrong' and the better option is to allow higher flow and prevent the head (which is reportedly 'thin' and therefore more conductive) from ever getting too hot. BTW, I never fully open the heater vavle on my Surf when the engine is hot - I don't want the thermal shock of a slug of cold water hitting the head. (maybe I should check the actual routing of the pipes!)
5. Driver abuse, particularly dangerous with high ambient temperatures like Australia. These engines are not happy over 3000rpm. They are not gassers and cannot be driven as such. People used to driving gassers expect to just put their foot down more when they are 'not going fast enough'. You can't do it with a diesel.
6. Design flaws in head - I've never seen any photos or drawings to support this, but everyone seems to say that the reportedly heavier/thicker 3L (2.8l) head does not have these problems.

I would have a good look at the IP and see if the yellow paint and lead seals are still intact. Does the fuel screw look like it has been adjusted? Some folks like to mess with the settings for more power. I'm not aware of anyone in NA who has the diagnostics to tune a 2LTE, therefore better not to mess with it.

Finally, adjust your mirror so you can keep an eye on the tailpipe, when you start putting out black it's time to ease off.

The 2LT is a pretty tough engine, I had one of mine (worn engine) run away on me three times before I learned how to drive it and it still ran OK afterwards. A runaway diesel is quite an experience.

 

[108Cruz]

Wayne.

My 1990 LJ71 is with the 2LTE. you say they are rare, thats god to know.

It is also an automatic tranny. Now if I use the red ECT button which I have used in the past in a hilly part of the Okanagan area, and niticed that it seemed to have more zip through the tranny ,will this help with the shifts in the higher mountain area's or should I just leave it in Drive.

Peter

 

[light_duty]

Peter, you can use the ECT, but I prefer to actually use the shifter when in hilly areas. Use the O/D lockout, and don't be afraid to shift down to 2 or whatever if called for. When driving through the mountains (on and off-road) I'm always flipping the Overdrive off and on.

 

[semlin]

difficult situation.

legally in BC here is my take. Pure caveat emptor does not apply in BC. Adam sold a vehicle that suffered a major mechanical failure within a very short time after purchase taht rendered it undriveable. The vehicle obviously had a susceptibility to that failure when he sold it and was a "time bomb". whether he knew about the problem or not is irrelevant. He is legally obliged to make good for major repairs required to make the vehicle driveable within a short time after purchase. He would lose a small claims lawsuit for the repair costs on the same basis that used car salesman do all the time when a customer gets three or thirty blocks from the dealership and the motor blows. There is an implied warranty under the British Columbia Sale of Goods Act that an item sold will be fit for the purpose intended (in this case, driving along the road). the warranty will apply for a reasonable time after purchase having regard to the condition and nature of the goods purchased. In the case of a used car, this warranty will last anywhere from a few days to weeks depending on the age/mileage of the vehicle, what the seller said about the condition of the car, what the buyer does with it, and whether the seller knew the buyer would make that use of it. It would apply clearly after only 300km of highway driving by a buyer who told the seller before the purchase he was going to drive it home to saskatchewan, so, unless Adam can prove it happened because of driver abuse, he is going to lose in court. i do not see that happening.

the implied warranty is not based on negligence or fore-knowledge of the seller of the problem. It doesn't mean Adam is a wrongdoer. It simply reflects the fact that a seller's legal accountability for the condition of an item does not end when he hands over the keys. The law requires a seller to make good if the item turns out to have been substantially unfit for the purpose for which it was sold. there is also a concept known as fundamental breach at common law that kicks in when a buyer is deprived of the substantial benefit of his bargain when goods sold suffer a catastrophic failure within a short time of purchase. Again, it does not matter whether Adam knew the item he sold was flawed or not.

Now, if the vehicle was really sold "as is where is" then Adam is within his rights. However, i doubt very much it was. Many people write it in contracts but few people understand its limitations. if Adam made a bunch of factual representations about the condition of the truck that he intended that the buyer would rely on and the buyer relied on it then he didn't really sell it "as is where is" no matter what the bill of sale says unless in that bill of sale the parties also expressly waived reliance by the buyer on all verbal representations and warranties made by the seller. If you really want to sell something "as is where is", you shut up, provide minimal initial information, only answer questions asked factually, and let the buyer figure things out or make an independent inspection. You definitely do not contradict the "As is where is" clause by telling the buyer the vehicle is in good condition etc... You also either make the buyer get an independent inspection or put in your contract an express waiver of all reps and warraties in addition to the "as is" clause making clear that the buyer has agreed not to rely on anything the seller says and also that you have advised the buyer to get an independent inspection.

Here it appears that Adam put a special website with a detailed blurb about how great the truck is, acted like a solicitous caring seller, and volunteered lots of information about the truck right down to driving instructions, all of which was intended to make the buyer believe it was a good vehicle with low mileage in good condition perfectly capable of driving home to Saskatchewan where he knew the buyer was taking it.

unfortunately, Adam was wrong, and, unless he is better contract draftsman than it appears, he is mistaken in believing that his legal obligations ended the moment the truck left his curb.

 

[Stone]

Holy s***, Simon...you a lawyer or something? I'm taking you with me the next time I buy anything. Thanks for taking the time to post that.

 

[champjack]

i would just like to say thank you for the information semlin you seem to know quite a bit about this stuff ........im not sure what i am going to do .......one thing is for sure i do not have a money tree in my back yard .thanks again for the info

 

[lshobie]

Well put Simon! That is bang on, with this addition - I was told in OMVIC school that if you sell a car "as is" you had better not let it drive off the lot - make sure the new owner comes and takes it with a hauler or flat bed. Otherwise you are allowing a vehicle to drive away and the new owner could then think that it is a car that is merchantable (useable for everyday type of activities). All in all the As-is declaration means nothing when you are a dealer - or a curber.

Thanks for your post.

 

[Ncturnal]

i would just like to say thank you for the information semlin you seem to know quite a bit about this stuff ........im not sure what i am going to do .......one thing is for sure i do not have a money tree in my back yard .thanks again for the info

"Seem to know" would be the optimal words with that statement. That's the problem with the internet, people can "seem" like a lot of things, but you can't really know for sure merely from a post on a forum.

Oddly enough, I found myself in a similar situation with a car I bought before. I bought a turbo car several years ago. It was the first turbo car I had ever owned. I didn't know anything about EGTs or detonation, etc. I drove the car like I had driven every NA car I had ever owned. Looking back, it was no suprise that I blew the motor the first day. I did make it home which was about 350 miles and I blew it up when I showed it to one of my friends shortly thereafter. The mileage traveled was insignificant. I could have easily blown it up 5 miles down the road when I raced a BMW M5. Did I want to blame the seller? Sure, I wanted to. I didn't want to be out all that money on a car I just bought. Was it the sellers fault? No. Did I have a leg to stand on when it came to seeking any reimbursement. Ofcourse not. AS-IS is just that. You got what you paid for, and no seller should be held accountable for what a buyer does after the sale has been completed. I know Canadam well and I'm confident that he did not misrepresent the vehicle.

 

[Ncturnal]

Sorry champjack, I editted my last post. I really wasn't being too nice. I think you have been reasonable from what I have read. Hawke and hawkesis on the other hand seem to really be out-of-line. I can sympathize with the problems you are having. I know, I've been there. I hope you get things worked out.

 

[semlin]

hmm, lots of opinions here. nocturnal, welcome to the forum. I see you joined up today to post to this thread. What kind of cruiser do you own, or are you a friend of Canadam?

Your personal experience seems to be different from Champjacks. You admit you drove your turbo very hard. If Champjack's wife did the same thing and this caused the problem, I would agree with your verdict. It does sound to me like that is not the case though, and I have assumed as much above.

Your faith in the honesty of all canadians is very kind but irrelevant (and, I am afraid, misplaced in some casaes, although I have no reason to doubt that Adam is completely honest). As i noted above, Adam's honesty or even his negligence is irrelevant to a claim by champjacks in this case.

Your personal faith in the application of the pure doctrine of "caveat emptor" and the inviolate effect of the words "as is" as displacing all obligation to a buyer is interesting. You obviously have not studied BC law, so I can only assume you believe these are moral or ethical standards of universal application. I respectfully disagree.

The question we are dealing with is really quite mundane: who among the seller and buyer bears the risk that an item like a vehicle when sold already has a flaw that materializes immediately after the sale and deprives the buyer of a substantial part of his bargain?

this is a legal issue governed by the laws of the jurisdiction where the sale occurred.

It is not a moral issue any more than the extent of your insurance coverage is a moral issue. It is simply a question of whether pure caveat emptor applies to pass all the risk to the buyer at the time of sale or not.

In most jurisdictions, including, as i understand it, most or all us states, pure caveat emptor does not apply. this is a matter of social policy because it has been found that pure caveat emptor encourages an unacceptable amount of concealed fraud by sellers. Instead, Sale of Good Acts and lemon law legislation have been widely adopted to protects buyers by putting the risk on the seller for a short period after the purchase if there is a catastrophic failure of the goods. A seller is responsible for a reasonable time for major flaws that are already in the goods when they are sold but do not immediately show up. In the case of a used car, this usually buys you a few days or maybe weeks, although the task of proving the flaw was in the goods when you bought them gets harder after the first day or two.

The only real question is whether Adam managed to waive all warranties using the "as is" clause. if you want to waive all warranties in a retail consumer transaction you must be very explicit and you must be consistent. Saying "as is where is" in the contract is not enough if you then contradict that by making a bunch of representations about the condition of the vehicle the way Adam did. If you want to sell something as is where is, you should not say anything about it to the buyer, or else you will need fancier lawyering in your contract than "as is where is" to make the bargain stick.

what i do agree with you on, is that in many cases the best way to deal with this situation is to suck it up and move on. time is valuable and small claims court, though not expensive, burns up your time and may not work out in the end. in this case, I think Champjack has a stronger basis than most for wanting to take adam to court but i will bet he will happily take another option if he can, and may well choose to chalk it up to experience.

 

[Zimm]

the idiosyncrasies of canadian law aside this is what i get from this thread.

1) do not buy a truck with this motor. any motor that pukes due to a long gentle uphill climb, is a POS. who cares if it lasts 300000 miles when driven it at the same speed of a lawn tractor? a gm 6.2 would last forever under the same conditions, but i'm not buy'n any 82 olds'.

2) the driver puked the motor.

3) disreguarding the first sentence, if what semilin wrote was true (no reason to think otherwise) you'd have to be crazy as a loon to sell one of these rigs in BC, and the seller needs to know this. ignorance of the law, no matter how unfair, is still no excuse.

4) it appears as if the driver received advise OTHER than the sellers' PRIOR to the purchase. i'm not buy'n that this lady decided on her own to buy a LC, when so many on this board seem to know the poor soul. if it's morally correct for the seller to chip in for her mistake (or, frankly, toyotas FLAW), then everybody else who encouraged her to get involved with this model ought to chip in too!

5) i suddenly feel lucky we can't get these here in the lower 48.

 

[hawkesis]

As stated, I'll no longer comment on providing a warranty, it's no longer an issue.

I'm not Previa Diesel, by the way.

As for Linda's questions, they may assist in the repair of the truck, so I'd be happy to answer:

I had the radiator rebuilt back in January as it had a leak at the top of the tank. This was mentioned to the buyer. As for why you can't find the posts, I suppose you're not looking hard enough. Here's the thread: https://forum.ih8mud.com/showthread.php?t=74630&highlight=rad

I never changed the thermostat, it operated properly while I owned the truck, so there was no reason to.

Are you accusing me of taking off a hidden hitch when I sold the vehicle? The buyer asked me if any part of the vehicle would be removed when it was turned over to her. The answer was "my satellite radio." Oh, and I took my vinyl phone numbers off the window for them. When viewed the truck had no other hitch than the factory loop on it.

As for being an illegitamate business, I made that website with the intentions of starting an import company. The buyer can assure you that it was not used in the sale. The truck was originally viewed and bid on eBay, where it didn't reach reserve price. The sale was made after that, privately. The buyers will agree that no mention of my fabricated "Canadam Enterprises" was made, the truck was sold from person to person.

There's not a post on this board that Wayne makes and people ignore. Crusher's has absolutely no reason to defend me, he doesn't know me. He's also one of the most knowledgable people around regarding the 2LTE. Notice this:


This thread originated as one for Jack looking for assistance with his LandCruiser problem, the fact that it has turned to a "turn on Adam" forum is sad.

oh adam....you are probably a really great guy, lots of friends and a girlfriend who cares about you....

i don't want to be giving you a bad time, saying nasty things about you or questioning your integrity. so, my apology if i've come off as a bitch...most of the time i am a nice, friendly, want to see the best in everyone person.

so now...i am going to assume you have emailed jack and told him to let you know what the total cost of getting his rig back on the road when japanese motors in edmonton is through with it, and he has bought an airline ticket to fly there and pick it up. once you find out what his additional expense is you will do what you would expect if the situation was reversed and send him a cheque to help cover the cost...and you know what...even a token amount would make a big difference. so belly up to the bar buddy and i'll buy you a beer!

~linda

 

[hawkesis]

oh adam....you are probably a really great guy, lots of friends and a girlfriend who cares about you....

i don't want to be giving you a bad time, saying nasty things about you or questioning your integrity. so, my apology if i've come off as a bitch...most of the time i am a nice, friendly, want to see the best in everyone person.

so now...i am going to assume you have emailed jack and told him to let you know what the total cost of getting his rig back on the road when japanese motors in edmonton is through with it, and he has bought an airline ticket to fly there and pick it up. once you find out what his additional expense is you will do what you would expect if the situation was reversed and send him a cheque to help cover the cost...and you know what...even a token amount would make a big difference. so belly up to the bar buddy and i'll buy you a beer!

~linda

ps....jack would never be in this situation if it wasn't for me. i encouraged him to buy a landcruiser, actually one for sale here in regina...damn i wish he would have listened to me...but no he saw yours, asked a few questions...liked what you had to say and went that route instead of the one here....so you see i feel somewhat responsible for the path he is on at the moment. i do count my relationship with my brother as important... sorry you got caught in the middle.

 

[semlin]

Zimm

I agree on 1, have no idea how you got 2 out of the thread, agree on 3 except that i would sell it with a very express "as is" clause specifiying no reps, warranties or anything else in relation to it, for 4, you are right: other people's advice can matter if the buyer relies on it, which is why it is also good for a seller to insist on an independent inspection or write into the contract that buyer was advised to get one, 5, what's not to like once the h/g is fixed

and those idiosyncrasies are not so different down south

the idiosyncrasies of canadian law aside this is what i get from this thread.

1) do not buy a truck with this motor. any motor that pukes due to a long gentle uphill climb, is a POS. who cares if it lasts 300000 miles when driven it at the same speed of a lawn tractor? a gm 6.2 would last forever under the same conditions, but i'm not buy'n any 82 olds'.

2) the driver puked the motor.

3) disreguarding the first sentence, if what semilin wrote was true (no reason to think otherwise) you'd have to be crazy as a loon to sell one of these rigs in BC, and the seller needs to know this. ignorance of the law, no matter how unfair, is still no excuse.

4) it appears as if the driver received advise OTHER than the sellers' PRIOR to the purchase. i'm not buy'n that this lady decided on her own to buy a LC, when so many on this board seem to know the poor soul. if it's morally correct for the seller to chip in for her mistake (or, frankly, toyotas FLAW), then everybody else who encouraged her to get involved with this model ought to chip in too!

5) i suddenly feel lucky we can't get these here in the lower 48.

 

[Ncturnal]

hmm, lots of opinions here. nocturnal, welcome to the forum. I see you joined up today to post to this thread. What kind of cruiser do you own, or are you a friend of Canadam?

I'm a friend of Adam's as I clearly stated in my post. The types of vehicles in my garage are no more relavent to this discussion than any of your incorrect assumptions or opinions. Truthfully, I have no business in this thread, but then again, neither do you, Hawke, or hawkesis.

Your personal experience seems to be different from Champjacks. You admit you drove your turbo very hard. If Champjack's wife did the same thing and this caused the problem, I would agree with your verdict. It does sound to me like that is not the case though, and I have assumed as much above.

While the LC most likely was not driven hard in the manner I described in my case, I learned today while reading on this informative message board that her trip over the Rockies could be viewed in the same light as driving my turbo car hard, and it could have easily cause the very problems involved, and special precautions needed to be taken. Is there anyone even disputing this point so far?

Your faith in the honesty of all canadians is very kind but irrelevant (and, I am afraid, misplaced in some casaes, although I have no reason to doubt that Adam is completely honest). As i noted above, Adam's honesty or even his negligence is irrelevant to a claim by champjacks in this case.

At no time did I even remotely imply that I have faith in all Canadians. On the contrary, one of the most dishonest people I know is Canadian (Jeffrey Burke @ Extreme Boost). If you think I did imply that, then your comprehension is poor at best. Hopefully your comprehesion of law is better since you try to post like you are an authority regarding it.

The question we are dealing with is really quite mundane: who among the seller and buyer bears the risk that an item like a vehicle when sold already has a flaw that materializes immediately after the sale and deprives the buyer of a substantial part of his bargain?

In your feeble attempt at making yourself look smart on the internet, you prove Canadam's case for him. Your assumption that the vehicle already had a flaw is not a proven fact. It is speculative at best and that won't win you many court cases. Expert testamony has contridicted your belief, and no amount of mundane, rambling posts from you will change that. Your assumption also questions Canadam's integrity and therefore makes relating my personal experiences with him relavent to this discussion.

what i do agree with you on, is that in many cases the best way to deal with this situation is to suck it up and move on. time is valuable and small claims court, though not expensive, burns up your time and may not work out in the end.

Pretty much, especially when it is FAR from an open and shut case from a factual standpoint.

 

[light_duty]

5) i suddenly feel lucky we can't get these here in the lower 48.

Oh, you've got 'em all right. At this very moment there is a surprising number of Americans going to ridiculous lengths to put these very engines into their 4Runners and mini trucks.

And of course, a good number of these will fail as well, because the engines are all coming out of JDM Hilux half-cuts that were abused and neglected back home.

Every engine has its weakness. The 2L-TE's greatest weakness is its...weakness. At least Toyota is helping us out by making the 2L-T heads cheap to replace! Seriously - if you do the work yourself with a jobber gasket, you can do the repair for about $1000.

 

[Zimm]

Zimm

I agree on 1, have no idea how you got 2 out of the thread, agree on 3 except that i would sell it with a very express "as is" clause specifiying no reps, warranties or anything else in relation to it, for 4, you are right: other people's advice can matter if the buyer relies on it, which is why it is also good for a seller to insist on an independent inspection or write into the contract that buyer was advised to get one, 5, what's not to like once the h/g is fixed

and those idiosyncrasies are not so different down south

with the pa lemon law, as i understand it, a dealer gets 3 chances to fix the problem. the same problem. it applies to new cars. as for used cars? as is means as is. there are guys that make a living running around in a mechanics truck inspecting cars. 200 to one of them is alot better than 3000 for a head.

the Q for this motor is; is the new head an improved version that allows taking the truck into a headwind without tacking? or do you still have to watch the pyro like it was an 1882 steam locomotive?

after reading waynes post i came to conclusion #2.

 

[nickw]

Is there a high nickel alloy version of the head available?
I know you can get it for the 3B.
Cruiser_guy has one on his BJ60 (turbo 3B) as well as his daughter on her FJ55 (turbo 3B).

I think cruiser_guy said they were $1500 CND shipped a few years ago, and that they came out of Australia. They were supposed to be very resistant to cracking.

I wonder if that option is available for the 2LT.
Would be a nice if you did not have all the heat worries.

Cheers.
Nick

 

[Ncturnal]

By the way, just out of curiosity, has it even been determined whether or not the head is even cracked?

 

[Hawke]

Pretty much, especially when it is FAR from an open and shut case from a factual standpoint.

This topic has obviously touched a nerve with MUD members. Buying a Cruiser is as much an emotional issue as a financial one. For the experience to immediately go wrong is devastating emotionally and financially.

The positive side of this experience is that we can all learn something from it. Whether this, as Ncturnal suggests is a "FAR from an open and shut case. . . " remains to be seen.

The best thing to do right now is maintain a calm head (me as well) and let's see how this plays out. It's conclusion will have ramifications both for buyers and sellers and the support of the Landcruiser enthusiasts on IH8MUD.

I suspect the resolution will take awhile but we will let the IH8MUD members know how it plays out.