Member Since: 29 Nov 2006
Location: North Yorkshire
Posts: 15269
Re: Somebody please convince me not to go over to the Dark S
away wrote:
what would you say to me to convince me not to go over to the Dark Side and buy a Toyota Landcruiser 200 Series?
Well, if ya gotta go, ya gotta go!
Nice knowin ya !!
wish you happy motoring Russ
Wow !! that is stunning
could even be tempted myself
NJF wrote:
There is only one Dark Side ...
Click image to enlarge
...... always on the road less travelled 🚧
< ‘tis but a mere scratch …….. it’ll polish out.
5th Feb 2010 10:52 pm
caverD3
Member Since: 02 Jul 2006
Location: Oberon, NSW
Posts: 6922
Re: Somebody please convince me not to go over to the Dark S
ronp wrote:
Wow !! that is stunning
could even be tempted myself
You clearly have not seen the exterior. “There are only three sports: bullfighting, motor racing, and mountaineering; all the rest are merely gamesâ€
Ernest Hemmingway
D4 3.0 Active Diff, Adaptive Lights, High Beam Assist, Surround Cameras, Privacy Glass.
D3 2.7:Adaptive Headlights,Electronic Rear Diff,ARB Bar,Blaupunkt Speakers,JVC Powered Subwoofer,Removable Snorkel,Mitch Hitch,Pioneer After Market Head Unit,Steering Wheel Control Adaptor,Remote Adjustable Supension Rod System, Taxside Dual Battery System.
5th Feb 2010 11:40 pm
tempestv8
Member Since: 11 Oct 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 57
And now for a post from the Dark Side.....
I have a DII V8 auto, which slipped a cylinder liner without having even been overheated once. Anyway, AUD$8,000 later I have a top hat liner 4.6 Rover V8 in the vehicle. A more relaxing drive, less need to push the motor. However, it's still no power house with a 1200 kg caravan at the back of it but definitely better than the 4.0 V8.
It was time to find a new vehicle. The choice I had was a run out D3 2.7 litre TDV6, or a D4 with 2.7 litre TDV6 or the new 3.0 TDV6. Or a Toyota Land Cruiser 200 Series with the 4.5 litre twin turbo V8.
I ended up purchasing the Toyota and this is what I can say:
A GXL will set you back around $84K with the KDSS, VX around $94 and Sahara around $107, drive away prices in Australia.
The GXL is poor value because you get more that much more fruit going to the VX for the additional $10K, but I guess it's a matter of whether you value leather, 18" alloys, sunroof, door courtesy lights, rear reading laps, carbon fibre finish on the center console, leather wrapping on steering wheel and gearknob, fancier silver trim on the dash and door handles, wood trim, factory window tinting, dark running boards, 2nd row side airbags, front knee airbags, trip computer, fancy instrument cluster, remote control windows, fog lamps, fancier radiator grille, and electric height adjustment on front seats, tilt adjustable headrests. To me, all of this is worth the extra $10K.
Say you are comparing the Toyota 200 Series VX TDV8 to a Land Rover SE Discovery 4 TDV6.
You'll find that the Discovery has comfortable seating for 7 adults. The Cruiser is really 5 adults and two kids. Discovery wins on accomodation if you have tall kids.
Wheel size - I believe if you buy the SE 3.0 TDV6, on road price is around the AUD$95K mark, but you get 19" wheels minimum due to the larger brake calipers. Fitment of smaller diameter wheels is not possible. This is going to mean expensive tyres and offroadability may be limited by what you can buy. With the LandCruiser, you can easily haggle the dealer to fit the 17" alloy wheels which is standard with the GXL as part of your deal. With 17" wheels, suddenly the choice of tyres is better and cheaper.
Axle articulation - the KDSS system on the Cruiser means better axle articulation, definitely superior to the D3 or D4 - this has been proven on a ramp, no disputes here. Cruiser wins.
Front bumper approach angle - Discovery 3 and 4 win hands down, the Cruiser has a very low hanging front bumper which can only be rectified by fitting a bullbar.
Tow bar arrangement - Land Cruiser's tow bar arrangement is simple and works well. The Land Rover solution is ghastly on the D3 and a bit better on the D4 but still far too contrived for my liking. Also, Land Rover do not support the use of a WDH on their tow setup, which would be a major limiting factor for you since you are planning to tow 3.5 tonnes, because you probably will have around 320 kgs or more of total ball down weight.
Suspension - Land Rover's height adjustable suspension means entry and egress far better than on the Cruiser, which has coils all around, regardless of badge level. Land Rover wins in this department.
GVM - upgrades possible and available for the Toyota, but not on the Discovery. May be a moot point unless you are doing a desert expedition trip where you would need to load the vehicle up.
Fuel tank capacity - The Cruiser is available with 138 litres from the factory but aftermarket solutions are available for either.
Dealership coverage - you should already know the answer to that!
So in the end, there were more positives for the Cruiser than the D3/D4 for my particular needs.
17th Feb 2010 11:54 pm
ad15
Member Since: 14 Dec 2008
Location: up that tree
Posts: 4866
what address shall we send the brown paper bag to???one wife.......livid
17th Feb 2010 11:59 pm
tempestv8
Member Since: 11 Oct 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 57
I'll have to add that I still have my Land Rover Discovery II - it's set up with twin diff locks, suspension lift, rock sliders, front and rear bars, snorkel, yada yada. So it's still my first pick for doing difficult offroad tracks. The LandCruiser is merely a tow vehicle and for long distance dirt road trips, e.g. outback. 8)
8)
17th Feb 2010 11:59 pm
ad15
Member Since: 14 Dec 2008
Location: up that tree
Posts: 4866
I always thought that the major point with the Toyota was the reliability ....Well they have certainly lost that baby ...maybe not the 4 x4's at the moment but it looks like toyota have finally made the mistake all the manufacturers have made in search of more profits and bigger output. Their so called good name isn't going to last long...sorry it's waving good bye on the horizon some where...
Just couldn't resist it..every one take the of the Land Rover reliability...time the tables were turned... Regards, Trev.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the wilds of North Lincs or the middle of the North Sea.
18th Feb 2010 12:09 am
DG Site Moderator
Member Since: 12 Dec 2005
Location: The Gaff
Posts: 50979
You forgot to say "does my Cruiser look like a sack of s t ...yes it does ...D3 wins 8) "
Member Since: 11 Oct 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 57
Toyota are recalling various models due to electronic throttle safety issues. The LandCruiser is not affected by this recall.
Early examples of the LandCruiser 200 had issues with engine oil consumption - up to 1 litre of engine oil can be consumed after driving 10,000 kms. This is being rectified with a redesigned vacuum pump.
Some negatives with Toyota:
1. V8 starter motor is in between the Vee of the two banks of cylinders, under the intercooler. So replacing the starter motor will be a time intensive job.
2. The six speed gearbox will only shift into 6th gear at speeds above 100 km/hr and even then it won't stay there long if there's a hill or you prod the accelerator.
3. Tailgate is high when open and women can struggle to close it because the gas struts holding it up are quite strong.
4. When folded away, the 3rd row seats eat up a bit of room. Also, because they fold up, there's no possibility of a pull out blind to keep thieves from looking into the cargo bay area.
5. Fuel filler flap is on the driver's side of the vehicle. Not as safe as on the passenger side if you are pulled over the side of the road, and have to fuel up with a jerry can.
Some positives with Toyota:
1. Fitting a DP chip will increase torque output of engine from 650 Nm to 800 Nm. Yeehaw!
2. With stock engine and no modifications, expect around 13-14 litres per 100 kms around town - no different to a TDV6 D3 - a colleague of mine had two of these and has confirmed his fuel consumption.
3. A little bit more space (but not by a lot compared to a D3) in the engine bay area to fit accessories like an air compressor or dual battery setup. No space in a D4 for a 2nd battery due to the extra ECU module in the area where it was possible for a D3.
That's about all that I can think of, at this stage.
18th Feb 2010 12:17 am
tempestv8
Member Since: 11 Oct 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 57
Re the subject of looks - the D3 looks dated to me, the D4 looks good and the Land Cruiser looks big.
If I wanted a good looking 4x4, I'd be thinking along the lines of a BMW X5 or Audi Q7. They just look good to me.
Edit: I guess it would be missing the point of this thread - the original poster is asking LandCruiser 200 Series vs a D4.
One feature that Land Rover should have included on a D4 but did not (someone correct me if I'm wrong) is a manual override for the side impact airbags. I have read that a D3 owner experienced side airbags going off when he was driving up some sand dunes which had very deep holes. The vehicle experienced the side impact airbags to go off, due to the side to side jarring motion which must have confused the computer to think that there was a collision.
The LandCruiser has an override for the side airbags.
18th Feb 2010 12:21 am
Bushwanderer
Member Since: 27 Nov 2007
Location: Northern Rivers, NSW, Australia
Posts: 2050
Hi tempestV8,
You've made your choice. I just hope that you don't live to regret it.
Best Wishes,
PeterThe Bearded Dragon
18th Feb 2010 6:24 am
tempestv8
Member Since: 11 Oct 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 57
tempestv8,
No offence meant mate but even though it is only certain models...that is for the moment. The top boss has admitted what appears to be an across the board drop in quality and you can be sure that second hand prices will drop, as they already are here. You won't find many, if any, agreeing with you on this site. Regards, Trev.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the wilds of North Lincs or the middle of the North Sea.
18th Feb 2010 1:50 pm
tempestv8
Member Since: 11 Oct 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 57
G'day Trev,
No probs at all - I don't expect anyone on this Land Rover forum will be saying that they like a Toyota better than a Land Rover (sacre bleu!), but I'm not afraid to voice my opinion. The Cruiser is not perfect and has some compromises that isn't even an issue with the D4.
I recently visited England and saw a lot of Discoveries and Range Rovers running around, and when I got back to Australia, I went to test drive a brand new D4. I've driven quite a number of D3s before and I really liked them. I had my heart set out on a D4.
I had to give myself the benefit of testing out the Toyota to see what it was like. For some reason, I liked the driving characteristics of the engine better. The D4 twin turbo had less turbo lag than the Cruiser, but I can't explain why the Toyota just felt more bullet proof.
A friend of mine was also going through the motions of testing new vehicles to replace his D3 TDv6 and he lashed out on a D4 3.0 TDV6. He wasn't deterred by the fact that his D3 was a lemon (his own words) and he had to get rid of it after the motor was replaced under warranty due to a holed piston. The dealer that changed out the short block had a couple of goes getting the job done properly.
I've experienced the character of Land Rovers and now I am happy with the soul less, white goods boring nature of a Land Cruiser. I've described it to a few people as big, boofy and dumb.
No worries!
18th Feb 2010 3:27 pm
away
Member Since: 18 Nov 2006
Location: Cossack
Posts: 111
Thanks to everyone who has replied. There are some interesting comments to weigh up. As much as I like the D3 we have right now (God knows why, it has had its problems - must be a Land Rover thing), I still have a major concern about the lack of dealerships. At the moment we are at Karratha and that makes it 1500 Km to Perth, almost 3000 Km to Darwin and about 3300Km to Alice Springs (via the Great Central Road) to see a dealer.
On the other hand there is a Toyota dealer right here in town, one 240Km away at Hedland and dealers at Broome and Carnarvon on either side of the former places mentioned. In other words there is a dealer in almost every town in Oz.
So even though none of the problems that we have ever had with the D3 would have made it impossible to proceed, the thought of something bringing us unstuck even on major highways and having to get to a Land Rover dealer is really scary. At least there was a Landy dealer at Karratha when we purchased the D3, there isn't now.
The other major issue is the ball weight of the van, which is very close to the allowable limit for the D3. The air suspension, combined with the height of the towball, combined with the inability to use a weight distribution hitch means that the van is always nose-down. The D4 would only be marginally better. Thank goodness the axles on the van have load sharing!
I agree that the Tojo's are butt ugly and lack character, but character doesn't get you from point A to point B - reliability does - and having a close-at-hand dealer in the event that something does fail is very important.
I am absolutely torn over this decision. My heart desperately wants the D4 but my brain is shouting LC200!!!
Cheers
RussD4: Expedition Rack, 104 Litre Long Range Tank, Raised Air Intake
D3: Every bloomin' thing but the kitchen sink
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Russ
and this is what I can say:
of the Land Rover reliability...time the tables were turned... 
