Cruiser Jimmy
Moderator
Welcome
ジム
ジム
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
landtank said:Also sold classified milling technology to the Russians which allowed them to make silent running rotors and park a sub out in NY harbor![]()
EnDLeSS said:Hmmm.......Im wondering how come theres no LC80 Diesel available in US?![]()
80cruiserscool said:cool pix's,
what's with the blue vibrator knob??
Kalawang said:Neowulf,
Does your 80 come with a 24 volt starter ? I hear they're good for deisels in cold climates.
Kalawang
Kalawang said:Hi,
Not to be saying or implying anything, but I'm wondering why you would want a deisel in the first place.
By my experience, a deisel, not turbo, needs about 30% more displacement than a gas engine just to approximate the pick up of the gas engine. I hear it's more difficult to start in cold weather and I'm certain if you get water into the intakes you're looking at an overhaul or something pretty close. Also, if you run your tank dry, you have a lot of pumping on the fuel pump and a lot of cranking before getting it started again.
I drive a deisel, but I have a preference for it because the fuel costs me about 20% less than gasoline.
Why do I see variations of your above quoted statement so often on this board from different people ? It's seems to me you should be very comfortable with gasoline engines.
Kalawang
aamiggia said:The grass is greener on the other side.
I love diesels... in trucks, they blow in cars. At least if you are used to high RPM rice rockets. The 1FZ-FE Petrol 4.5 liter I-6 does not get enough credit. It has similar numbers to the American V-8's and much better gas mileage. I get better gas mileage than a Durango and I spin 4 wheels all the time.
Gassers are quiter, smoother, close to the same power if not turboed. When it's cold the fuel does not turn to gel and they are less suseptable to water in the fuel.
But having peak torque at <1800 RPM, getting 20% better gas mileage, and not having an ignition system is nice.
Originally posted by neowulf
it also has an original outback fueltank(+50 litres fuel and separate gauge)
Kalawang said:MoJ,
97Landbruiser,
Back in the late '50's I traveled in a Ford Fairlane from Chicago to L.A. and had absolutely no problems. Back then at least, Ford made very reliable and affordable cars. We arrived in L.A. with nothing more than travel dust and dirt.
Kalawang,
I agree. I think in the 50's and 60's Ford (and the other American automakers) made good reliable cars. Then in the late 70's and early 80's, the oil embargo hit the US and gas prices skyrocketed. Consumers wanted smaller cars and the US automakers suddenly found themselves competing in an an arena they were unfamiliar with - small, lighweight, fuel efficient cars. They tried, but they were not successful in building good 4 cyl. cars and light trucks.
My Ford was a 1985, which was designed by Ford in 1980 - 1981. The engine electronics were horrible on this vehicle. Are you familiar with the TFI module? This earned Ford a class action lawsuit.
I believe Ford makes better vehicles now, but back in the 80's they were horrible.