Toyota LandCruiser 70 Series 2.8-litre turbo diesel four-cylinder coming, V8 to live on (1 Viewer)

[Dougal]

You're still not comparing apples to apples though.

I found 1 pic of a 70series with broken back.
The helper air bags kind of illustrates the point too.
The lesser Japanese utes can't match the carrying capacity of the 70 series without them.
There's plenty of pics where the break is away from the air bags

That's my point. There is evidence everywhere of bent ute chassis. Everyone knows it happens and why it happens. There isn't evidence anywhere of the claimed endemic IFS issues.

I found this interesting. Toyota Australia have raised the GVM on the 70 series to 3510kg. This puts them in a light truck category so it can meet simpler crash standards:

2023 Toyota LandCruiser 70 Series increases GVM and keeps V8, for now

New load capacity increases have been confirmed for the 2023 Toyota LandCruiser 70 Series, along with its turbo-diesel V8.

www.drive.com.au

Before the GVM was around 3200-3300kg depending on spec. No different to much lighter utes. Big problem in countries where police weigh light vehicles.

 

[mudgudgeon]

That's my point. There is evidence everywhere of bent ute chassis. Everyone knows it happens and why it happens. There isn't evidence anywhere of the claimed endemic IFS issues.

I found this interesting. Toyota Australia have raised the GVM on the 70 series to 3510kg. This puts them in a light truck category so it can meet simpler crash standards:

2023 Toyota LandCruiser 70 Series increases GVM and keeps V8, for now

New load capacity increases have been confirmed for the 2023 Toyota LandCruiser 70 Series, along with its turbo-diesel V8.

www.drive.com.au

Before the GVM was around 3200-3300kg depending on spec. No different to much lighter utes. Big problem in countries where police weigh light vehicles.

I don't know. I google search shows a lot more broken ball joints on ifs vehicles than in solid axle vehicles

100 series and 105 series cruisers are a good example.
They are very close to identical apart from solid axle front, and ifs.
Lower control arms, and ball joints are a known weakness within the landcruiser community in Australia.

 

[Dougal]

I don't know. I google search shows a lot more broken ball joints on ifs vehicles than in solid axle vehicles

100 series and 105 series cruisers are a good example.
They are very close to identical apart from solid axle front, and ifs.
Lower control arms, and ball joints are a known weakness within the landcruiser community in Australia.

The 100 series also got better engines and interiors so people keep them longer.

There's still a decent presence of 100 series on the road here and our road-tax system means the km taxed is on display in the windscreen. One I saw the other day had ~600,000km on it. Which is more than I've seen on any 80 series. We didn't get the 105 here from toyota so I don't have that comparison.

 

[mudgudgeon]

The 100 series also got better engines and interiors so people keep them longer

That's a pretty long bow to draw.

The use car market shows both versions are still in demand and with similar mileage levels.

Search carsales.com.au it's staggering what people ask for high mileage 80s and 105s.

There's loads of anecdotes of group 4 wheel driving trips with a mix of cars, IFS regularly have ball joint and driveline failures on obstacles where solid axle vehicles didn't.

Before LCOOL vanished, there was no shortage of reported failures in ifs cruisers.

The availability of aftermarket LCA upgrades and ball joints backs this up too.

 

[Dougal]

That's a pretty long bow to draw.

The use car market shows both versions are still in demand and with similar mileage levels.

Search carsales.com.au it's staggering what people ask for high mileage 80s and 105s.

There's loads of anecdotes of group 4 wheel driving trips with a mix of cars, IFS regularly have ball joint and driveline failures on obstacles where solid axle vehicles didn't.

Before LCOOL vanished, there was no shortage of reported failures in ifs cruisers.

The availability of aftermarket LCA upgrades and ball joints backs this up too.

Which long bow? The 100 got better engines and interiors than the 105 or something else?

There is no shortage throughout history of parts breakages on everything. There are whole industries built around the upgrading of drivelines and suspension components for both solid axles and independent suspension.

But that's not what was being claimed. It was claimed that all the IFS utes were having constant suspension issues and breakages where the 70 series weren't.
But there is no evidence anywhere on the internet to support that. Further anyone using the 70 series more than occasionally offroad has already upgraded the suspension. They're too long, too low and too hard in stock form.

One of the other big issues is load capacity. The claimed tare weight of a 70series dual cab is ~2.2T with no deck. GVM is 3300kg (except for Australia where they've used 3510kg to skip car safety regs). They're a big heavy vehicle that can't legally move or carry more than smaller, much more nimble and lighter vehicles.

 

[wedgetail]

It's pretty hard to hide widespread issues from the internet. They have the internet even in rural australia. I've also experienced Kiwis being better at breaking things than almost anywhere else worldwide. Yet we don't have the claimed ute IFS issues.
Plenty of engine issues etc etc.

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?



Chassis issues are a great example. They are all over the internet. A large contributor is "helper" air-bags which point load the chassis over the back axle. Another large contributor is the Triton having the shortest wheelbase and the whole deck behind the back axle!

As you can see the 70 series isn't immune though.

Right - so reckon I’m lying huh? That’s a pathetic comeback. And you’re not in the industry I’m talking about are you? So you’re not qualified to even comment on it. I am - a farm mechanic for 10 years and now farm mechanic for 4. I am 100% in the thick of it - I work on farmers vehicles, all my friends are farmers, most of their utes spend minimum of 50% of the time off road. And like I stated - you really think crusty old farmers give a **** about posting about flimsy utes breaking? They just deal with it (by buying something tough) and move on. Trends like this aren’t reported as the media isn’t interested in talking about it. All garages in agricultural areas will say the same thing as I am, sorry google doesn’t tell you it but if you like I can give you the name of at least 20 local mechanics to back me up. Story just gets stronger the further outback you go.

Australia has 5x the population and 29x the land mass of New Zealand - fatigue plays much more of a roll here and there will be many more diverse issues.

You missed the obvious with that broken 70 series - it’s a custom dual cab chop so who knows what’s been done or not done, certainly not the way Toyota engineered it

That's my point. There is evidence everywhere of bent ute chassis. Everyone knows it happens and why it happens. There isn't evidence anywhere of the claimed endemic IFS issues.

I found this interesting. Toyota Australia have raised the GVM on the 70 series to 3510kg. This puts them in a light truck category so it can meet simpler crash standards:

2023 Toyota LandCruiser 70 Series increases GVM and keeps V8, for now

New load capacity increases have been confirmed for the 2023 Toyota LandCruiser 70 Series, along with its turbo-diesel V8.

www.drive.com.au

Before the GVM was around 3200-3300kg depending on spec. No different to much lighter utes. Big problem in countries where police weigh light vehicles.

That’s because it affects a much higher number of people and it happens on public roads. And here trucks start at 4499 kg so no worries for their biggest market.

The 100 series also got better engines and interiors so people keep them longer.

There's still a decent presence of 100 series on the road here and our road-tax system means the km taxed is on display in the windscreen. One I saw the other day had ~600,000km on it. Which is more than I've seen on any 80 series. We didn't get the 105 here from toyota so I don't have that comparison.

the vast majority of 100 GXL and 105 GXL run the same interior. Only the VXs were better and the pov pack 105 more basic. Won’t argue the 100s got better engines but there’s no correlation between how long people keep them there

But that's not what was being claimed. It was claimed that all the IFS utes were having constant suspension issues and breakages where the 70 series weren't.
But there is no evidence anywhere on the internet to support that. Further anyone using the 70 series more than occasionally offroad has already upgraded the suspension. They're too long, too low and too hard in stock form.

no this was not what “was claimed”. I stated IFS utes were experiencing consistent breakages in the very extreme use commercial farmers in rough areas were putting them through. Compared to the rest of the population and country, this is a relatively small share, one of the reasons you can’t google it. As previously stated, I can pass on contact details of other rural mechanics, or just look up any in rural farming areas and have a chat.

Another issue with the light duty IFS utes is the rear axle design. It’s a clear pointer the manufacturers don’t intend them for extreme use or they’d stick a full floating axle under them, like all Aussie cruisers, stock upgraded patrols, ALL trucks etc..

Then there’s the stupid CV boots that are constantly ripping and f*cking the CVS.

Toyota only bother selling their HD lines to countries that need them due to extremes conditions -only Africa, Australia, South America got 105s and 79s. If Toyota didn’t think these markets needed a tougher vehicle, they wouldn’t made this decision. Another pointer is the pov pack was only offered in 105 form in Australia because it’s designed for extreme conditions where cloth seats, plastic external trims and carpets aren’t desirable. They new people wanting IFS want luxury not maximum durability hence VX only being IFS

 

[wedgetail]

You call up any mechanics and around Bourke, Tenant Creek, Mt Isa, Julia Creek, Katherine, Kununurra etc. and ask them what has more chassis/suspension/drive line issues - cruiser/patrols or IFS utes per mark i guarantee they’ll say IFS by a long shot

 

[wedgetail]

I’m actually staggered that someone who is (I assume) a 4x4 enthusiast can look at an IFS setup with all its multitude of flimsy complicated components and not see very clearly it’s never going to be as durable as a solid axle with its much larger, stronger, fewer and simpler components

 

[Dougal]

Right - so reckon I’m lying huh? That’s a pathetic comeback. And you’re not in the industry I’m talking about are you? So you’re not qualified to even comment on it. I am - a farm mechanic for 10 years and now farm mechanic for 4. I am 100% in the thick of it - I work on farmers vehicles, all my friends are farmers, most of their utes spend minimum of 50% of the time off road. And like I stated - you really think crusty old farmers give a **** about posting about flimsy utes breaking? They just deal with it (by buying something tough) and move on. Trends like this aren’t reported as the media isn’t interested in talking about it. All garages in agricultural areas will say the same thing as I am, sorry google doesn’t tell you it but if you like I can give you the name of at least 20 local mechanics to back me up. Story just gets stronger the further outback you go.

Australia has 5x the population and 29x the land mass of New Zealand - fatigue plays much more of a roll here and there will be many more diverse issues.

You missed the obvious with that broken 70 series - it’s a custom dual cab chop so who knows what’s been done or not done, certainly not the way Toyota engineered it

That’s because it affects a much higher number of people and it happens on public roads. And here trucks start at 4499 kg so no worries for their biggest market.

the vast majority of 100 GXL and 105 GXL run the same interior. Only the VXs were better and the pov pack 105 more basic. Won’t argue the 100s got better engines but there’s no correlation between how long people keep them there

no this was not what “was claimed”. I stated IFS utes were experiencing consistent breakages in the very extreme use commercial farmers in rough areas were putting them through. Compared to the rest of the population and country, this is a relatively small share, one of the reasons you can’t google it. As previously stated, I can pass on contact details of other rural mechanics, or just look up any in rural farming areas and have a chat.

Another issue with the light duty IFS utes is the rear axle design. It’s a clear pointer the manufacturers don’t intend them for extreme use or they’d stick a full floating axle under them, like all Aussie cruisers, stock upgraded patrols, ALL trucks etc..

Then there’s the stupid CV boots that are constantly ripping and f*cking the CVS.

Toyota only bother selling their HD lines to countries that need them due to extremes conditions -only Africa, Australia, South America got 105s and 79s. If Toyota didn’t think these markets needed a tougher vehicle, they wouldn’t made this decision. Another pointer is the pov pack was only offered in 105 form in Australia because it’s designed for extreme conditions where cloth seats, plastic external trims and carpets aren’t desirable. They new people wanting IFS want luxury not maximum durability hence VX only being IFS

All these consistent IFS breakages for all these years and not a single photo? 20 mechanics for 10 years (200 years total) and none of them took a photo?
A suspension link physically breaking is a big deal. You can see the, frankly terrible, Toyota Tacoma suspension in pieces all over the internet. That's the one where they support the whole corner weight by pulling on a ball-joint.
Yet the 100 series without that terrible design feature hasn't got breakage photos all over the internet. Neither have the utes you claim.

Sure a full-floater rear axle is easier to change bearings and doesn't lose the wheel if you break an axle-shaft. But the tradeoff is more weight which reduces carrying capacity. Are you seeing axle breakages on utes too?

I live in a rural farming area. The only people here driving landcruiser are contractors (baling, cultivation, earthworks etc) because they look cool and the occasional 4wd who has a massive list of modifications. Farmers are driving Rangers, D-Max and Hilux. They're way more nimble offroad, way better to drive everywhere but can carry and tow the same amount as a VDJ79.

The 79 landcruisers were sold everywhere the crash and emissions standards would allow them.
Europe and North America were impossible due to crash standards.
Both those markets again due to fuel consumption.
Can't be sold in Japan with the diesel due to emissions.

Every company sells utes and 4wd's with basic interiors for fleet use. Not sure what you're trying to claim there.

Like I said before. It's perfectly okay to be a fan of something without making up wrong claims about it's competitors.

I’m actually staggered that someone who is (I assume) a 4x4 enthusiast can look at an IFS setup with all its multitude of flimsy complicated components and not see very clearly it’s never going to be as durable as a solid axle with its much larger, stronger, fewer and simpler components

Kindly go back and read what I've actually written.

 

[GTSSportCoupe]

This has been a fun read.

One thing is for certain: Both Kiwis and Aussies can be stubborn and opinionated!

 

[svsisu]

This has been a fun read.

One thing is for certain: Both Kiwis and Aussies can be stubborn and opinionated!

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

 

[wedgetail]

All these consistent IFS breakages for all these years and not a single photo? 20 mechanics for 10 years (200 years total) and none of them took a photo?
A suspension link physically breaking is a big deal. You can see the, frankly terrible, Toyota Tacoma suspension in pieces all over the internet. That's the one where they support the whole corner weight by pulling on a ball-joint.
Yet the 100 series without that terrible design feature hasn't got breakage photos all over the internet. Neither have the utes you claim.

Sure a full-floater rear axle is easier to change bearings and doesn't lose the wheel if you break an axle-shaft. But the tradeoff is more weight which reduces carrying capacity. Are you seeing axle breakages on utes too?

I live in a rural farming area. The only people here driving landcruiser are contractors (baling, cultivation, earthworks etc) because they look cool and the occasional 4wd who has a massive list of modifications. Farmers are driving Rangers, D-Max and Hilux. They're way more nimble offroad, way better to drive everywhere but can carry and tow the same amount as a VDJ79.

The 79 landcruisers were sold everywhere the crash and emissions standards would allow them.
Europe and North America were impossible due to crash standards.
Both those markets again due to fuel consumption.
Can't be sold in Japan with the diesel due to emissions.

Every company sells utes and 4wd's with basic interiors for fleet use. Not sure what you're trying to claim there.

Like I said before. It's perfectly okay to be a fan of something without making up wrong claims about it's competitors.



Kindly go back and read what I've actually written.

I’m sure there’d be heaps of photos, just not necessarily posted on places you can google them, probably fair few on Facebook - I don’t look out for them or search for them as it’s completely normal. Everyone just accepts solid axles break less so it’s no big deal to come across flogged out IFS. I’ll admit that out and out catastrophic breakages aren’t overly common - the ranger breaking its major component and the rodeo engine falling out didn’t happen every day. But relentless ball joint wear, control arm bushes and rod end wear was much more excessive than SFA component wear.

My point is not that they snap all the time - it’s that they constantly need maintenance, where in comparison solid axles don’t. Like I said - it’s very plain to see why: multiple lightweight parts and complex linking geometry versus fewer heavier components in a simple system. That’s a classic engineering scenario for a less robust system vs a more robust system - any other result would be an anomaly.

The decision to make these utes with a road/handling bias and away from an out and out rugged working design is also characterised by the choice to run a semi floating axle (as I said Nissan offered a full floater as the HD upgrade in a patrol). Full floaters offer much more than ease of changing wheel bearing - they’re removing a major force from the axle shaft meaning all it has to do is transmit torque rather than both payload and torque. I’m not seeing a lot of semi floaters breaking axles, probably partly because people don’t load them up as much as a full. There is a reason literally not one single truck (I’m talking 4.5gvm+) I’ve seen let alone heard of, that’s using a semi floater in Australia. The fact the IFS manufacturers use a passenger car design is just another indicator these are light duty vehicles.

You might be seeing more farmers with IFS utes, but like I said New Zealand is a much smaller sample size and much much much smaller land mass so doesn’t have anything like the same fatigue issues. You don’t have experience of these vehicles in relentless Australian conditions so you can’t really compare them. Like I said call up any mechanic in a rugged remote farming area and have a chat, I know how it’ll go. They don’t post pics of a flogged out IFS ute - it’s like them posting a pic of dropping the sump oil out, it’s mundane and every day.

Yet another issue with IFS in a rugged work environment is the frequent ripping of CV boots, which if not rectified immediately results in needing a new CV. Working on quads and side x sides this is the most common repair very quickly followed by control arm bushes, ball joints and rod ends. And also the huge loss of ground clearance with a heavy load when braking down a very steep hill - seen a couple of IFS diffs cracked open from this scenario.

It’s true some of the countries the 79 is available in have less stringent crash testing. Although here the 79 has 5 star ANCAP - same rating say a hilux IFS. However there is a natural link between the level of a country’s ruggedness/remoteness/harsh conditions and level of crash testing. The governments know there is a trade off between high safety features and overall vehicle ruggedness.

I’m not a “fan” of 79s, my relationship with them is purely work related. I don’t and probably wouldn’t have one as a personal vehicle. The people I work for, and everyone I know, buy them because they’re the toughest vehicle on the market with the lowest running cost - in the long term (think 30-40 years working life, something you wouldn’t expect from a ranger) they’re the cheapest option.

I’m not making up wrong claims about anything - I’m simply reporting my experience while working directly in the relevant field. They’re not competitors when they’re the same manufacturer - Toyota offer the Landcruiser and hilux side by side, with the cruiser as the option for extreme conditions. Toyota wouldn’t bother with the cruise if there wasn’t demand. I notice you tried to deny the current suspension wasn’t demand related. Every dealer I’ve spoken to (5 in the last 6 months while looking for another 79) said exactly the same thing - supply had been postponed due to the unprecedented demand for 79s in the last two years. This was to allow the factory to recover from the deficit and probably increase production capabilities

Mudgudgeon raises a perfect point in 105 vs 100. 105 sold as the the tougher rural/mine/contractor option, 100 as the luxury version. 100s are very well known across the board for cracking lower control arms, it’s ludicrous to deny it and you can find online chat about it as it’s a popular world wide model (as opposed to the 79 which mostly resides in Australia). Also known for doing CVs. Why did Toyota offer the 105 at all - would’ve been much simpler and cheaper to stick with one model. But they knew there was a strong Australian and African/Middle East market for a tougher more rugged model which the 100 couldn’t fulfil. They didn’t worry about the 200 as by that time the VDJ76 was introduced in Australia to takeover where the 105 left off. Likewise the 300 now. There was never a full size 70 series wagon here until the VDJ came in (not sure if it was 2007 or later the 76 came)

 

[Dougal]

I’m sure there’d be heaps of photos, just not necessarily posted on places you can google them, probably fair few on Facebook - I don’t look out for them or search for them as it’s completely normal. Everyone just accepts solid axles break less so it’s no big deal to come across flogged out IFS. I’ll admit that out and out catastrophic breakages aren’t overly common - the ranger breaking its major component and the rodeo engine falling out didn’t happen every day. But relentless ball joint wear, control arm bushes and rod end wear was much more excessive than SFA component wear.

My point is not that they snap all the time - it’s that they constantly need maintenance, where in comparison solid axles don’t. Like I said - it’s very plain to see why: multiple lightweight parts and complex linking geometry versus fewer heavier components in a simple system. That’s a classic engineering scenario for a less robust system vs a more robust system - any other result would be an anomaly.

The decision to make these utes with a road/handling bias and away from an out and out rugged working design is also characterised by the choice to run a semi floating axle (as I said Nissan offered a full floater as the HD upgrade in a patrol). Full floaters offer much more than ease of changing wheel bearing - they’re removing a major force from the axle shaft meaning all it has to do is transmit torque rather than both payload and torque. I’m not seeing a lot of semi floaters breaking axles, probably partly because people don’t load them up as much as a full. There is a reason literally not one single truck (I’m talking 4.5gvm+) I’ve seen let alone heard of, that’s using a semi floater in Australia. The fact the IFS manufacturers use a passenger car design is just another indicator these are light duty vehicles.

You might be seeing more farmers with IFS utes, but like I said New Zealand is a much smaller sample size and much much much smaller land mass so doesn’t have anything like the same fatigue issues. You don’t have experience of these vehicles in relentless Australian conditions so you can’t really compare them. Like I said call up any mechanic in a rugged remote farming area and have a chat, I know how it’ll go. They don’t post pics of a flogged out IFS ute - it’s like them posting a pic of dropping the sump oil out, it’s mundane and every day.

Yet another issue with IFS in a rugged work environment is the frequent ripping of CV boots, which if not rectified immediately results in needing a new CV. Working on quads and side x sides this is the most common repair very quickly followed by control arm bushes, ball joints and rod ends. And also the huge loss of ground clearance with a heavy load when braking down a very steep hill - seen a couple of IFS diffs cracked open from this scenario.

It’s true some of the countries the 79 is available in have less stringent crash testing. Although here the 79 has 5 star ANCAP - same rating say a hilux IFS. However there is a natural link between the level of a country’s ruggedness/remoteness/harsh conditions and level of crash testing. The governments know there is a trade off between high safety features and overall vehicle ruggedness.

I’m not a “fan” of 79s, my relationship with them is purely work related. I don’t and probably wouldn’t have one as a personal vehicle. The people I work for, and everyone I know, buy them because they’re the toughest vehicle on the market with the lowest running cost - in the long term (think 30-40 years working life, something you wouldn’t expect from a ranger) they’re the cheapest option.

I’m not making up wrong claims about anything - I’m simply reporting my experience while working directly in the relevant field. They’re not competitors when they’re the same manufacturer - Toyota offer the Landcruiser and hilux side by side, with the cruiser as the option for extreme conditions. Toyota wouldn’t bother with the cruise if there wasn’t demand. I notice you tried to deny the current suspension wasn’t demand related. Every dealer I’ve spoken to (5 in the last 6 months while looking for another 79) said exactly the same thing - supply had been postponed due to the unprecedented demand for 79s in the last two years. This was to allow the factory to recover from the deficit and probably increase production capabilities

Mudgudgeon raises a perfect point in 105 vs 100. 105 sold as the the tougher rural/mine/contractor option, 100 as the luxury version. 100s are very well known across the board for cracking lower control arms, it’s ludicrous to deny it and you can find online chat about it as it’s a popular world wide model (as opposed to the 79 which mostly resides in Australia). Also known for doing CVs. Why did Toyota offer the 105 at all - would’ve been much simpler and cheaper to stick with one model. But they knew there was a strong Australian and African/Middle East market for a tougher more rugged model which the 100 couldn’t fulfil. They didn’t worry about the 200 as by that time the VDJ76 was introduced in Australia to takeover where the 105 left off. Likewise the 300 now. There was never a full size 70 series wagon here until the VDJ came in (not sure if it was 2007 or later the 76 came)

You've changed your argument from "breaking" to "flogging out bushings". Those are totally different things. Suspension bushing wear mostly happens when they're lifted and motion range is bigger than the bushings can do. SFA chew out bushings for exactly the same reasons. At stock heights suspension bushings often last the life of the vehicle. The average ranger will change engines before bushings. I know a guy who's on his third engine.

CV joint boots are a maintenance item. Just like swivel joint seals on SFA vehicles. Both are a royal PITA. I own both. Both use ball joints for the steering.

Holden/Isuzu made the Rodeo from ~1980 to ~2010. How can an engine fall out? How can you break a diff on the ground when they all have bash-plates? Don't see any utes breaking rear axles these days either.

VDJ79 has never been ANCAP tested and only has 2 airbags according to brochures. The 75 was ANCAP tested in 2016 and standards have tightened since then: Toyota Landcruiser Cab Chassis Safety Rating & Report | ANCAP - https://www.ancap.com.au/safety-ratings/toyota/landcruiser-cab-chassis/604bff
That's why Toyota Australia found a loophole to raise the GVM and take it out of passenger vehicle class: 2023 Toyota LandCruiser 70 Series increases GVM and keeps V8, for now - https://www.drive.com.au/news/2023-toyota-landcruiser-70-series-v8-increases-gvm/

I know two people who still have 70 series. One has a VDj79 because it he likes his trucks. He's an earthmoving contractor. Had to jack up the suspension straight away. Other is a rural contractor with an HZJ75 which has been in his family for about 20 years. It's pretty stock but on it's second gearbox. It's slow, noisey and thirsty but it's paid for and it's holding together well. When purchased other utes were smaller. He also owns a hilux.

Neither of these vehicles have the lowest running cost. They cost more to buy, they drink more fuel and they cost more to maintain than lighter utes which can tow and carry the same weight. A VDJ79 cab-chassis is about 2200kg with no deck. Here GVM is 3300kg. Carrying/towing capacity is the same as a ute.

Supply being delayed due to excess demand? ROFL.

 

[wedgetail]

IFS is a joke in relentless rough conditions. Where I just moved from a cattle property all the private IFS vehicles were destroyed by the road in - everything from Hiluxes, Rangers, Colorados etc. needed constant and frankly extreme maintenance (could hardly keen ball joints and bushes up to the hiluxes, rangers bodies cracking off above the wheel arches, snapping suspension struts, snapping chassis, rodeo engine falling out etc.).

You've changed your argument from "breaking" to "flogging out bushings". Those are totally different things. Suspension bushing wear mostly happens when they're lifted and motion range is bigger than the bushings can do. SFA chew out bushings for exactly the same reasons. At stock heights suspension bushings often last the life of the vehicle. The average ranger will change engines before bushings. I know a guy who's on his third engine.

CV joint boots are a maintenance item. Just like swivel joint seals on SFA vehicles. Both are a royal PITA. I own both. Both use ball joints for the steering.

Holden/Isuzu made the Rodeo from ~1980 to ~2010. How can an engine fall out? How can you break a diff on the ground when they all have bash-plates? Don't see any utes breaking rear axles these days either.

VDJ79 has never been ANCAP tested and only has 2 airbags according to brochures. The 75 was ANCAP tested in 2016 and standards have tightened since then: Toyota Landcruiser Cab Chassis Safety Rating & Report | ANCAP - https://www.ancap.com.au/safety-ratings/toyota/landcruiser-cab-chassis/604bff
That's why Toyota Australia found a loophole to raise the GVM and take it out of passenger vehicle class: 2023 Toyota LandCruiser 70 Series increases GVM and keeps V8, for now - https://www.drive.com.au/news/2023-toyota-landcruiser-70-series-v8-increases-gvm/

I know two people who still have 70 series. One has a VDj79 because it he likes his trucks. He's an earthmoving contractor. Had to jack up the suspension straight away. Other is a rural contractor with an HZJ75 which has been in his family for about 20 years. It's pretty stock but on it's second gearbox. It's slow, noisey and thirsty but it's paid for and it's holding together well. When purchased other utes were smaller. He also owns a hilux.

Neither of these vehicles have the lowest running cost. They cost more to buy, they drink more fuel and they cost more to maintain than lighter utes which can tow and carry the same weight. A VDJ79 cab-chassis is about 2200kg with no deck. Here GVM is 3300kg. Carrying/towing capacity is the same as a ute.

Supply being delayed due to excess demand? ROFL.

I never said the IFS utes were constantly breaking - you inferred that. I said I have seen breakages (Ford even has an official repair kit for the Ranger’s body because it’s common enough, my mate was sent one by Ford Australia through his dealer. It includes large rivets and pressed plates), they do occur (obviously anything can be broken). My main point was that IFS utes meed excessive maintenance - more than flogging our bushes. None of these vehicles I witness are lifted - they are always stock, they cannot take the conditions and where about prematurely, unlike SFA vehicles. I’ve never seen a vehicle in this industry last it’s life on orignal bushes - not even a cruiser, they generally need new bushes around the 200-250k mark by which time IFS would’ve been through 3-4 sets. Ball joints likewise (king pins on cruisers need doing which is a bigger job but 1/4 of the frequency). CV boots ripping is constant, with quad bikes and side by sides can easily be once a week.

The whole point of solid axles is they need less maintenance- that’s the idea of something that’s tougher. You can more or less keep any vehicle going forever doing any job with enough maintenance. I mean you could do heavy haulage with a VW golf if you replaced the clutch/gearbox/drive line/tyres every few meters. In Australian agricultural conditions cruisers are a lot cheaper to run because of this exact reason - they are so much tougher the reduced maintenance makes them cheaper to own. That’s why everybody uses them! Most farmers I know (and work for) are absolute tight arses and if IFS utes were cheaper long term they’d run them. But they’re not, they cost a fortune in time and or money, so they don’t.

Legal carrying and towing capacities aren’t relevant on private property, these vehicles get loaded up obscenely.

It’s very clear from your stories that New Zealand conditions are much much kinder and easier on agricultural vehicles. You just can’t make a judgement on the harsher Australian conditions that you haven’t experienced and judge the light duty IFS utes on it without seeing for yourself. New Zealand doesn’t have the distances, doesn’t have the heat and doesn’t have the dust that grinds down machinery.

The front diffs get broken through the bash plate - coming down a steel track with a heavy load while braking, hitting a big rock very hard with too much weight and the impact goes straight through the thin steel bash plate into the diff housing. The driver judges the ground clearance in a flat level non braking height and gets undone because the drastic decrease in clearance under these conditions. A solid axle vehicle does not suffer this issue

I’m confused by your statement about air bags - you say VDJ79s we’re not ANCAP tested and have two airbags, yet your link shows single cabs were tested in 2016 and achieved a 5 star rating, which expires at the end of this year. It’s true the VDJ76 and VDJ79 duel cabs weren’t tested, but they do have multiple airbags. And seeing as we (or I at least) an talking about commercial vehicles then single cabs are the most relevant model.

 

[Dougal]

I never said the IFS utes were constantly breaking - you inferred that.

[/QUOTE]

See below:

IFS utes are NOT tough enough - the toughest work utes by a long way are 70 series and Patrols (NLA). IFS utes break (and break down), where SFA utes don’t. Ranger, Hilux and Dmax little fall apart and snap on various places, 70 series given the same conditions or worse do not. Simple as that

The whole point of solid axles is they need less maintenance- that’s the idea of something that’s tougher. You can more or less keep any vehicle going forever doing any job with enough maintenance. I mean you could do heavy haulage with a VW golf if you replaced the clutch/gearbox/drive line/tyres every few meters. In Australian agricultural conditions cruisers are a lot cheaper to run because of this exact reason - they are so much tougher the reduced maintenance makes them cheaper to own. That’s why everybody uses them! Most farmers I know (and work for) are absolute tight arses and if IFS utes were cheaper long term they’d run them. But they’re not, they cost a fortune in time and or money, so they don’t.

No, the whole point of solid axles is they're cheaper to make.

If you're doing CV boots every week then you need to change the mechanic. CV boots are pretty well protected. They rip from old age or direct contact with something sharp. Were you putting them on with scissors?

Legal carrying and towing capacities aren’t relevant on private property, these vehicles get loaded up obscenely.

It’s very clear from your stories that New Zealand conditions are much much kinder and easier on agricultural vehicles. You just can’t make a judgement on the harsher Australian conditions that you haven’t experienced and judge the light duty IFS utes on it without seeing for yourself. New Zealand doesn’t have the distances, doesn’t have the heat and doesn’t have the dust that grinds down machinery.

The front diffs get broken through the bash plate - coming down a steel track with a heavy load while braking, hitting a big rock very hard with too much weight and the impact goes straight through the thin steel bash plate into the diff housing. The driver judges the ground clearance in a flat level non braking height and gets undone because the drastic decrease in clearance under these conditions. A solid axle vehicle does not suffer this issue

I’m confused by your statement about air bags - you say VDJ79s we’re not ANCAP tested and have two airbags, yet your link shows single cabs were tested in 2016 and achieved a 5 star rating, which expires at the end of this year. It’s true the VDJ76 and VDJ79 duel cabs weren’t tested, but they do have multiple airbags. And seeing as we (or I at least) an talking about commercial vehicles then single cabs are the most relevant model.

Lets see:
Distance isn't extreme use that breaks things. It just wears stuff out in the normal way.
Heat only causes heat related issues. If you're not boiling the engine and oil then that's kind irrelevant. Cold, frost, snow, ice and rain are far bigger deals than another 10C in heat.
Dust. We've got that too. It's just not red. Filtration aside it's not an issue.
Flat vs mountains. Well damn, mountains win every time for extreme use.
Rocks, mud and clay vs red dust. Yep. Rocks mud and clay are way tougher on vehicles.

Loaded up obscenely? If you do that in tough conditions the vehicle falls off the hills and you die. If you do that on the flat you cause major ground damage and sink, especially if you do it every day. That's why we use tractors for heavy loads. Because light vehicles can't move 5 ton loads and trucks ain't got the grip. Utes (incl LC70) can move a ton on the back and tow 3 in good conditions. Offroad you halve that.

I've gotta see pics of these diffs smashed through the bash-plate. Because suspension doesn't move the way you think it does and IFS bottomed out is still higher than the diff head in the back. If you're destroying the front diff you'd have caught the back diff on the same obstacle and be going nowhere.

Unless it was all BS!

Sounds like you've worked out which ones were ANCAP tested. After I told you exactly that.

 

[OGBeno]

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.

 

[Nz Nath]

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.

 

[JuanJ]

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.

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

 

[wedgetail]

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.



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.



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.



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).



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.



Oh and on the air bags - my reply was to this:

VDJ79 has never been ANCAP tested and only has 2 airbags according to brochures. The 75 was ANCAP tested in 2016 and standards have tightened since then: Toyota Landcruiser Cab Chassis Safety Rating & Report | ANCAP - https://www.ancap.com.au/safety-ratings/toyota/landcruiser-cab-chassis/604bff

 

[wedgetail]

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.

For sure - I’m sure that’s spot on. Although side by sides are gaining traction here - mostly replacing quad bikes. Workcover are pushing them hard and there are big government funded financial incentives to buying one especially if you trade in a quad bike. They’re handy but can’t do it all. And most of them are not built for hard agricultural work - more for American recreational uses which is where the main market is. Pretty flimsy and maintenance is very high. With two exceptions - kubota (eye wateringly slow and very complex and unreliable transmissions that cost more than the competition’s whole buggy to replace), and the Tomcar which is a truly fantastic machine but can’t reverse up anything as it’s two wheel drive. Suzuki’s are still king IMO (and solid axle to boot )