Toyota LandCruiser 70 Series 2.8-litre turbo diesel four-cylinder coming, V8 to live on (4 Viewers)

[wedgetail]

Hello,

It is good to see that some skills are not dead yet.

Presenting a logical narrative with arguments to support it. Proper use of paragraphs and punctuation. And good spelling.

When did being an ignorant clown became acceptable, and even fashionable?

Juan

Well might as well try and make it seem like we’re civilised!

I love that the Aussies and Kiwis use spaces between their paragraphs and have logical narratives.

I like how they swing dicks at each other.

Way better than American clowns whom write in lowercase run-on sentences with no background or context. And want “everyone” to be interested and involved.

Yeah can’t beat a good dick swinging hey? Problem is as soon as you degrade into that illiterate ranting you’ve lost even if you’re right…

Just in case you missed it here is some really good, opinionated Aussie-Kiwi, Kiwi-Kiwi, and Aussie/Kiwi-rest of us banter. With some very useful info, if I could figure out how to decipher it.

random thoughts and questions on EGTs and BTUs and boost

Which is kind of the whole point. A small turbo that's working hard (or an outdated design) and outside its efficient range produces more heat than a larger turbo that's within its efficient range. The terms "small and large" have no place in that discussion and "working hard" is also...

forum.ih8mud.com

Interesting, I’m seeing a trend here. Looks more like it’s one kiwi vs reality

 

[Dougal]

I think quads and side by sides are used more in Nz compared to Aussie. The average farm is probably a fair bit smaller, but also the amount of steep hill country and boggy wet paddocks also make a full size 4wd less viable. Here in the Manawatu you're more likely to see old Suzuki vitaras and similar used as farm vehicles, than full size utes.

You're talking north island cow country. I'm talking south island high country. Very different things.

Distance coupled with rough terrain causes fatigue, which is a massive factor in mechanical breakdowns. This is going to be much more prevalent in Australia (28x the landmass). Heat affects everything, including parts that don’t have a temperature gauge. The difference in ambiance is often 20-30*C I’d say, and the UV rating is higher due to the longitude. Dust certainly affects things - ever hit a patch of bull dust? The levels of dust in the outback can’t be imagined in NZ. Sure clay is bad, but we have rocks too. I’m not blaming all the issues on UV but I am suggesting reasons for the obvious difference in conditions.

Fatigue is the propagation of material flaws into cracks and the resulting crack growth with stress cycles. We've already established your claims of breakage were as legit as the average Australian settlers reasons for expulsion.

ROFL. Higher UV in Australia than NZ.
ROFL. 20-30C hotter. Do you often hit 60-70C?

I know a guy who crashed his motorbike and broke his foot after hitting a patch of bulldust that hid the hole he rode into. Does that count?
Dust doesn't break metal.

Maybe you’re just very cautious in the hills? A couple of export bales (800kg each) on a cruiser does mean you have to be careful, but they’ll climb some impressive slopes and descend with a good set of 7.50R16s. They handle this 1.8T (or more in fact) every day without complaint. Even loaded up one HZJ79 with two export bales, then hitched a tractor’s tipping trailer (yep wheels at the very back so 50% of weight on drawbar) on with another 3 on then set off down the road no worries. I’ll try and dig up a pick. Obviously if traverse off the track you roll and die but hey that’s what tracks are for right? We cut them into the hill side so this doesn’t happen. And sink into flat ground? WTAF - most of the time it’s that dry the crow bar sings when you start digging a post hole, what planet are you on? Unless you’re talking about NZ conditions - which is fine but I’m talking about the need for vehicles that handle Aussie terrain without excessive maintenance and that’s solid axle vehicles like the 70 series and patrol utes which is found by trial and (expensive) error.

You're not going anywhere except flat and slow with 2 bales on a cruiser and 3 in tow. We know you're exaggerating (again) because that loading would bend the cruiser chassis.
Here's one on a cruiser and 2 on a trailer, any ute can move that much. But you can move a lot more with a truck or tractor:

The diffs were smash through the steel bash plate - hit rocks so hard the impact was transferred. Rear diff never came into it as they stopped dead. Diff probably would’ve hit as well, although so would the transmission in the POS kubota.

So that's on a Kubota side by side that has nothing to do with utes at all. Nice to know that claim was also BS.

I might as well repeat myself as you haven’t taken it on board - conditions are very different here and in the agricultural industry it’s a very widely known and accepted fact that cruisers are the cheapest work ute to run on farms in rough conditions in the long run. I’ve managed machine fleets and worked on agricultural vehicles the majority of my working life and seen the costs and time involved in maintenance. A vehicle needing less maintenance keeps costs down which is exactly what a cruiser does. As I said - call up any garage in outback or very rural areas and ask them which vehicles take more to keep in good working order, or which service conditions better. You clearly don’t believe me so why don’t you ask someone else in the industry if it matters so much to you (not sure why you’ve taken such offence to 70 series but you clearly have an irrational hatred).

widely known and accepted huh?

Just like the suspension failures with no photos you walked back, the smashed out diffs that turned out to be on a SXS instead of a ute?

Go to any serious commercial property here and 9/10 work utes will be cruisers. I’ve worked on several properties in NSW, as well as a coupled in QLD’s gulf country and the extensively in the east Kimberley region. Not one of these places used any utes apart from 40 or 70 series. They’re not the dressed up lifted chipped “weapons” you see in the suburbs but are stock (apart from updated rear springs) standard with cheese cutters - bought and owned by tight fisted and economically minded companies or old cockies because they know any other option will make life harder.

Sure bro: Our list of Australia's most popular utes - https://www.farmonline.com.au/story/8068195/our-list-of-australias-most-popular-utes/

 

[wedgetail]

You're talking north island cow country. I'm talking south island high country. Very different things.



Fatigue is the propagation of material flaws into cracks and the resulting crack growth with stress cycles. We've already established your claims of breakage were as legit as the average Australian settlers reasons for expulsion.

ROFL. Higher UV in Australia than NZ.
ROFL. 20-30C hotter. Do you often hit 60-70C?

I know a guy who crashed his motorbike and broke his foot after hitting a patch of bulldust that hid the hole he rode into. Does that count?
Dust doesn't break metal.



You're not going anywhere except flat and slow with 2 bales on a cruiser and 3 in tow. We know you're exaggerating (again) because that loading would bend the cruiser chassis.
Here's one on a cruiser and 2 on a trailer, any ute can move that much. But you can move a lot more with a truck or tractor:
View attachment 3347067



So that's on a Kubota side by side that has nothing to do with utes at all. Nice to know that claim was also BS.

widely known and accepted huh?

Just like the suspension failures with no photos you walked back, the smashed out diffs that turned out to be on a SXS instead of a ute?

Sure bro: Our list of Australia's most popular utes - https://www.farmonline.com.au/story/8068195/our-list-of-australias-most-popular-utes/

I never said the front diff smashes were utes, I even mentioned side by sides just before.

You haven’t been reading my posts (or misunderstanding them). My point is maintenance costs are significantly higher due to to IFS not being able to handle the wear and tare. There have been breakages of IFS but I mentioned at least twice it wasn’t overly common and that the reason for cruisers domination is the reduced maintenance!

The only reason I replied to NZ Nath was I was trying to be friendly - not because it had anything to do with your silly vendetta.

I didn’t take pics of my mates ranger that snapped the suspension strut - I was flat out at the time and didn’t want to gloat. I saw he took a tractor into the paddock, picked the front end up and reversed it back - it wasn’t even towable. Am I making this up? Well I guess you can use that excuse it fits your “story” better.

I always didn’t take pics when his next ranger started cracking apart at the wheel arches. He was pretty stressed at the time and again I didn’t want to appear high and mighty. Am I making this story up? Again I guess it’s better for you if I am.

I didn’t/do much work myself on IFS utes as my employers aren’t foolish enough to buy them as work utes. I watch them peoples’ degrade quite quickly but generally aren’t directly involved so haven’t many pics of worn out bushes etc..

Of course Australia’s most popular utes are IFS - they’re by far the most common on the market. I’m talking about extreme conditions on remote rural Properties Which in the scheme of things are low numbers. Again - go to any large scale outback farming operation they will without doubt be using cruises.

As for bending the chassis with two bales - ha ha mate you are talking utter bull**** and certainly not from experience. These photos show standard loads we were using when feeding out in the 17-20 drought. Three times a week we’d load up with large square export bales, averaging mostly 800-860kg each (export bales are pressed under much higher pressure in the baler to maximise space on ships, and represent much better VFM w/r to cartadge). Yes climbs up the steep hillsides were very slow, most of these vehicles were in low range 99% of the period. The hzj79 with the trailer did that many times. No chassis ever bent with these loads, in fact the only drama over that three year period was one rear spring pack that snapped but that was due to a devious life on the beach and before we started the primary leaf was abraded 50% through. If you think these photos are lying, or want clarification, I can give you the names and contact details of any of the blokes working here during that period, over PM of course. Trucks and tractors were used but feeding 3000 head of cattle with hay took all hands and all vehicles

Sitting prouder as it has +600kg constant rated springs

VDJ getting the same treatment in the background

 

[wedgetail]

The reason I know the weight of the bales is I was carting it from town in the semi so looked at the weigh bridge ticket each time

 

[Dougal]

Maybe you’re just very cautious in the hills? A couple of export bales (800kg each) on a cruiser does mean you have to be careful, but they’ll climb some impressive slopes and descend with a good set of 7.50R16s. They handle this 1.8T (or more in fact) every day without complaint. Even loaded up one HZJ79 with two export bales, then hitched a tractor’s tipping trailer (yep wheels at the very back so 50% of weight on drawbar) on with another 3 on then set off down the road no worries. I’ll try and dig up a pick.

Posts up claiming 2 bales on tray, three on a trailer with 50% nose weight. See the quote above.^^
Rear axle weight from the hay would be 1600kg (hay on the tray) plus (50% of 2400kg hay and 800kg trailer) = +1600kg on the tow ball.
Total +3200kg on the rear axle all up.

Gets called out for exaggerating.

Then posts up picture below showing trailer only has two bales and ~25% nose weight (400kg on the tow ball).
Total +2000kg on the rear axle and you're in for a slow and painful trip.

As for bending the chassis with two bales - ha ha mate you are talking utter bulls*** and certainly not from experience.

Mate I've lived and worked in Australia. I know how much BS is spun there.

 

[wedgetail]

Posts up claiming 2 bales on tray, three on a trailer with 50% nose weight. See the quote above.^^
Rear axle weight from the hay would be 1600kg (hay on the tray) plus (50% of 2400kg hay and 800kg trailer) = +1600kg on the tow ball.
Total +3200kg on the rear axle all up.

Gets called out for exaggerating.

Then posts up picture below showing trailer only has two bales and ~25% nose weight (400kg on the tow ball).
Total +2000kg on the rear axle and you're in for a slow and painful trip.



Mate I've lived and worked in Australia. I know how much BS is spun there.

Have a closer look - you can see three bales on the trailer - if it makes that much difference to you. Two stacked on ends (like all the utes are loaded), one on top. Pretty stupid and I observant comment that shows your biased supposition- how can a bale sitting on its flat be sitting on a bale on its side if there wasn’t one next to it, especially as it’s clearly off to one side? Obviously it’d topple off - it needs two underneath. If you’re missing that, I’d say your mechanical observations are way off as well.

It’s true I remembered the axle slightly further back, but still a very high draw bar weight on top of an already overloaded tray shows they can take a lot more than advertised. And your claim that load would bend the chassis is just so far wrong it’s absurd. But then again you’re used to light duty utes so maybe that’s what you’re thinking of? Or are you blaming it on the trailer axle being 200mm further forward. BTW it’s a heavy duty tipping, unloaded it’d be approaching 1 tonne. So plus the 5 bales that’s almost 5 tonnes, and more than 2.5T on the rear axle. I never said it was fast, but it held up, day after day after weeks after week after month after month. Just like the other utes with their 1.6 T+ crawling in very rough terrain. I am confidant no ranger, hilux, navara, Amarok, d-max or Colorado could sustain this use for the time period and remain serviceable without excessively high levels of maintenance.

There’s no doubt about it cruisers (and patrols) just plain and simple take more punishment and need less maintenance in harsh conditions. Farmers know it and vote with their wallets, Toyota knows it in how they advertise the hilux and how they advertise the cruiser. You can see it in the components- compared to hiluxes, cruisers have bigger and stronger diffs, bigger and stronger gearbox, bigger and stronger (as in less stressed) engine, bigger and stronger springs. There’s just no denying the fact the cruiser is built and sold as the more heavy duty vehicle. Trying to deny this is delusional and makes you seem like a fool.

Where this matters is reduced maintenance - and when maintenance costs are already the highest expenditure on vehicles it makes a very big difference when you need to do less of it, hence the overall cheaper cost of ownership I see with cruisers - under these specific conditions. Not mr average Australian who lives in the suburbs and goes fishing in his ute once a month

Yes there’s heaps of bull**** in Australia, likewise NZ. A lot of the kitted out 79s you see around town are not needed, but that doesn’t mean there are people that buy them to do a job where they are the most appropriate tool

 

[Dougal]

It’s true I remembered the axle slightly further back, but still a very high draw bar weight on top of an already overloaded tray shows they can take a lot more than advertised. And your claim that load would bend the chassis is just so far wrong it’s absurd. But then again you’re used to light duty utes so maybe that’s what you’re thinking of? Or are you blaming it on the trailer axle being 200mm further forward. BTW it’s a heavy duty tipping, unloaded it’d be approaching 1 tonne. So plus the 5 bales that’s almost 5 tonnes, and more than 2.5T on the rear axle. I never said it was fast, but it held up, day after day after weeks after week after month after month. Just like the other utes with their 1.6 T+ crawling in very rough terrain. I am confidant no ranger, hilux, navara, Amarok, d-max or Colorado could sustain this use for the time period and remain serviceable without excessively high levels of maintenance.

Your claimed towbar weight will not only bend the chassis, but it'll lever the front wheels off the ground.
Reality corrects your claims and we can see the front unweighted but still touching.

5 big square bales are easily, safely and legally shifted with a ute all the time. 1 bale on the ute and 4 on a flat deck trailer.

Breaking stuff all the time is usually sign you're doing everything the wrong way.

 

[wedgetail]

Your claimed towbar weight will not only bend the chassis, but it'll lever the front wheels off the ground.
Reality corrects your claims and we can see the front unweighted but still touching.

5 big square bales are easily, safely and legally shifted with a ute all the time. 1 bale on the ute and 4 on a flat deck trailer.

Breaking stuff all the time is usually sign you're doing everything the wrong way.

Cool story bro. Lucky you were there so you can tell us what really happened - which was what exactly?

The chassis did not bend. Bent chassis is a major rego defect and would’ve not been viable to repair - do you want the rego number so you can look up it’s rego history or status (available online for all NSW vehicles)? Or is the photo fake? Do you want the original file so you can inspect metadata?

Irregardless of whether the vehicles should or shouldn’t have been loaded like that, in that terrain, is beside the point. The point is, cruisers are tougher than hiluxes and their competitors

 

[Dougal]

Cool story bro. Lucky you were there so you can tell us what really happened - which was what exactly?

The chassis did not bend. Bent chassis is a major rego defect and would’ve not been viable to repair - do you want the rego number so you can look up it’s rego history or status (available online for all NSW vehicles)? Or is the photo fake? Do you want the original file so you can inspect metadata?

The chassis didn't bend because reality didn't match your exaggerated story.

The point is, cruisers are tougher than hiluxes and their competitors

Quite likely. But you can say that without fabricating all these other stories.

 

[Dougal]

Video review here:

I haven't watched it all yet.

 

[roscoFJ73]

We use to put nearly 3 tons of wet concrete + 4 passengers, in the back of 2 x 75 series and drive them over rough ground. The OEM suspension sagged a fair bit, but they did it and kept on doing it. No landrover could do that without breaking in half.

 

[roscoFJ73]

But you can say that without fabricating all these other stories.

Fabrication is your forte Dougal and always has been. Remember when you stated that there were only 5 HDJ100 series in the world with 5 speeds? LOL

 

[JuanJ]

We use to put nearly 3 tons of wet concrete + 4 passengers, in the back of 2 x 75 series and drive them over rough ground. The OEM suspension sagged a fair bit, but they did it and kept on doing it. No landrover could do that without breaking in half.

Hello,

Ages ago I saw a similar setup, but instead of concrete the 75 Series hauled timber wood from a forest uphill to a saw mill down the hill.

Yes, the suspension sagged a bit but the truck kept going. The muffler was gone. When the day was over, that same truck took us home in a 60 something kilometer drive.

They had another hauler as well, a Kaiser Jeep M715. They referred to it as "the power hauler" and they kept it on site.





Juan

 

[Dougal]

We use to put nearly 3 tons of wet concrete + 4 passengers, in the back of 2 x 75 series and drive them over rough ground. The OEM suspension sagged a fair bit, but they did it and kept on doing it. No landrover could do that without breaking in half.

ROFL. Exaggerate more. Go on.
You're telling us that Toyota put springs so hard in the 75's that they only sagged "a fair bit" under 3.5 ton?

But since you bought up Landrover. You seem to forget that Landrover did the dual cab long-wheelbase pickup for decades before Toyota. With a higher weight rating too.
Not to mention all the militaries worldwide using landrover instead of landcruiser.

https://topix.landrover.jlrext.com/topix/service/procedure/173715/PDF/9bd8efd5-ed6a-47d3-b11c-64e9da49d367/en_GB

Fabrication is your forte Dougal and always has been. Remember when you stated that there were only 5 HDJ100 series in the world with 5 speeds? LOL

ROFL. Nope. Go ahead and find it to prove yourself wrong.

 

[Dougal]

You know it's possible to be a 70 series cruiser fan without making up a whole heap of claims you can't back about other vehicles?

@roscoFJ73 ^^

 

[mudgudgeon]

Get a room already!

 

[roscoFJ73]

You're telling us that Toyota put springs so hard in the 75's that they only sagged "a fair bit" under 3.5 ton?

Since you mentioned it, they sagged quite a lot, probably down to the rubber stops. Im only guessing the weight due to the size and shape of the sides on the aluminium tray.
And yes, your beloved Landrovers do break in half.



As for the militaries using them, most of them are former British colonies because the Queen liked them. The countries in war zones, use 70 series.
The other main reason Landrovers were purchased by militaries, was they offered long term parts compatibility, whereas Toyota would not.
The HZJ75 rear axle has a maximum load of 2500kg which is 300kgs more than the 130 LR dual cab
And many of the Aussie LR models had uprated suspension to compete with the 7*series. I guess Toyota would be flattered with the attempts to keep up.
The Australian military still had about 1500 landcruisers last time I looked.

 

[roscoFJ73]

You seem to forget that Landrover did the dual cab long-wheelbase pickup for decades before Toyota. With a higher weight rating too.

I dont think so Dougal, you are letting your mouth get ahead of your brain. The first lwb LR was the 127inch introduced about 85?. These were made in England and outside by contractors. Toyota also sold kits to extend the cabs on the 45 series landcruisers and some countries like Australia fabricated their own kits and sold the finished vehicle directly to customers and through Toyota dealers in the late 70s . Thats at least 6-7 years before landrover Dougal. You use massive exaggerations that are not even true to start with.
I believe there may have been earlier LR dual cabs, but they were not LWB and I dont even know if they had any official input.

 

[Dougal]

Since you mentioned it, they sagged quite a lot, probably down to the rubber stops. Im only guessing the weight due to the size and shape of the sides on the aluminium tray.
And yes, your beloved Landrovers do break in half.



As for the militaries using them, most of them are former British colonies because the Queen liked them. The countries in war zones, use 70 series.
The other main reason Landrovers were purchased by militaries, was they offered long term parts compatibility, whereas Toyota would not.
The HZJ75 rear axle has a maximum load of 2500kg which is 300kgs more than the 130 LR dual cab
And many of the Aussie LR models had uprated suspension to compete with the 7*series. I guess Toyota would be flattered with the attempts to keep up.
The Australian military still had about 1500 landcruisers last time I looked.

ROFL. No Roscoe. You're exaggerating again. Just like the HZ-T not existing.

The rear axle is 2300kg max permissible which is 100kg more than the LR GVM and the front axle is 100kg less than the LR. See below. Your legal weights (GVM) are also much lower than that and lower than the LR. 1420F, 1780R kg.

Also check out those tare weights. You've only got 90kg legally available on the front wheels in some trims. That's like half an Aussie VB drinker.

Landrover 130's were all made by Landrover. But Australians fabricating their own kits is Toyota huh.

You keep missing the point that I like landcruisers. It's the BS and exaggerations I don't.

But anyway. Sounds like the 2.8 diesel and auto combo people like. But the flimsy new bonnet and guard panels they don't.

 

[Hulsty]

2.8L Diesel 70 series = No thanks.