Mining companies shun hard-working 70-series

Absolutely, without any doubt.....spot on.
Pure arrogance.....and they have been caught napping.

Brett....

Exactly, the man says it himself

“In other places where the LandCruiser is sold, places like South America and the Middle East, occupational health and safety doesn’t come into it,” Mr Cramb said.

Good on BHP and the other miners for putting the safety of their workers first.

Cheers

that is a excellent point mine safety must come first

But Toyota rested on their laurels just a bit too long this time thinking customer loyalty would over ride the safety aspect

thank you Alan just what I was thinking but could not get the correct words on paper

so many company's become number one and loose the plot along the way

What the Middle East want is what we get, why do you think Landcruisers have gone to V8 engines. To satisfy the Middle East.

It does make you wonder then what Toyota have planned for the 70 series replacement then as it's being thought about right now apparently.

TTSA
I dont think they have V8 in the middle east!
As far as the 200 go, they have 6 cylinders
CJ

from middle east web site

The Land Cruiser is also available in three more responsive engines: o 4.0L V6 petrol engine o 4.5L V8 twin turbo diesel engine o 4.7L V8 petrol engine

you even get rear diff lock in some of the models

$70674.61 Australian Dollar for a basic v8 diesel engine model

there is a lot of different variations

Low range?

24 forward and 6 reverse, plus front and rear diff locks as standard, so. . . .yes

TYPO, its only has 4 reverse gears

Like Nissan’s Patrol ute, the 70 Series remains a three-star vehicle, but there are hopes the 70 Series can be reclassified as a truck – and therefore exempt from BHP’s five-star fleet vehicle requirement.

so what is the point of safety laws when you can by pass that law

what a joke

Yeh well there is another problem.
our current crop of what Geoff refeers to as Medium duty utilities are nothing of the sort.
That are without exception the light utes of decades ago beefed up and slapped with rediculous towing capacities.

Like the 70 series which has hardly changed in basis since th 40 series, they have reached the limit of possible development of the form factor.

everthing from the wheel studs up is reaching the engineering limit due to the progressive increase in weight and capacity.

If you look at the specs the old 40 series was about the same weight, carried and towed about the same and made about the same power as the 04 hilux....yet the wheels and axles of the current landcruser have developed little from the 40 series.

What is required is a from the ground up redesign......if in fact a completely different range of vehicles, to meet the completly different needs the users have today.

As I said earlier....all to often we hear of the current vehicles being overloaded and broken,....both toyota and nissan have known issues with wheel studs breaking on the late model variants..... or people looking for GVM upgrades because the vehicles chosen are fundamentally inadequate.

Right now, Isuzu are pitching their light rigid truck range to tradesmen directly against these beefed up light utes.
And leet me tell ya a real 2 tonne payload truck that sells for around the same price as one of these light utes is a very attractive thing to a serious tradesman.

Perhaps we might see some of the range of toyota trucks we have not seen in australia for decades.

Maybe the 4wd companies should consider building a passenger body on one of their light rigid 4wd truck chasis.

Going back to the Iveco..as anexample....the twinn cab version comfortably seats 4 adults in the back seat and still takes an 8 foot tray.
Most of these light ute dual cabs that have trays so small ya chave to stick a long handled shovel in the back diagonally, one seat one addult in the rear seat in comfort.
And iff you do manage to cram 4 100KG adults in the cab, you have real issues with front axle overload with a bullbar and winch fitted and if you don't, you only have enough payload left over for a few toola dna the blokes lunch boxes.

As I say a serious re-think is in order from both the users and the motor companies.

cheers

There's also the next generation Tundra but unless it comes with a diesel and RHD it will be a non-starter in Australia.

"Punkchewayshun" - Chief of the Chippewa 1680-1714.

Relax, read slowly, take your time. You'll be able to work it out (or should that be "Relax, read slowly, take your time, you'll be able to work it out.") ( bleep brackets before or after parenthesis?)

It's probably more about contribution to the debate than than being grammatically correct Ross. Kick back and enjoy.

Cheers Mick

G'day BooBook

You have only mentioned some of the big companies - you should see what OH&S is doing to small business in this once great country !


Cheers and happy travelling

Gazz

Ps - don't forget to wear your steel caps, put on your Hi Viz and hard hat and fill out your risk assessment form when you check your trailer hitch while you are at well 23 on the Canning !

Gazz,

You forgot the Scope of Work and Environmental Impact Statement.

Gotta be careful we don't inadvertently squash an endangered 3 toed Desert Cockroach.

Geeze I'm glad I sold the business and retired a couple of years ago.

It use to be that you could hire someone, showed them what was required and paid them an agreed amount.
Now you have to be a combination father confessor and psychoanalyst.

Oh, and by the time my low tech, out of date old Cruiser calls time I will in all likelyhood be ready for the scrap heap as well.

Cheers
Pop

OH&S is killing the Golden goose.
I love it....taking longer to do JSA's, Start Cards,SWMS, and take 5's than doing the job! No wonder Australia is becoming uncompetitive.

I always laugh at the Environmental report here each morning. Companies report small spillages of 2 litres of hydraulic oil from an Excavator or Loader and a full report is attached...what the report doesn't say is the "small spill" took 120 litres to replace, but Bechtel and Chevron are happy to have the wool pulled over their eyes.

Yep, profit over safety. Providing a safe work place costs money therefore lets not spend the money to do so, is that the argument?
We had an accident at work the other day and the fact came out that of every accident that has occurred in the yard in every case no JHA, Take 5 or any risk assessment had occurred.
Tell me again, safety processes are a waste because they cost money

Morning Alan

When Australia has no more big business left and 500,000 of the 900,000 plus small businesses in this country have gone broke we can all feel SAFE while we wear hard hats and HiViz in the dole office while we are filling out JHA's in the cue ! I am not saying we shouldn't have safety at our workplaces but it's now over the top and costing this country dearly - we don't manufacture much anymore so the Government needed to create a new industry (OH&S) to create jobs and keep the money turning over.

I have 2 businesses, the main one is in construction and I fill out all the stupid forms then go about my work the exact same way I have done for the last 45 years so no piece of paper will make anything safer for me - the most dangerous part about working in construction is driving to the job site - how does filling out forms make that safer ??

All the best and safe travelling

Gazz

Yes but to be fair Gazz, when the economy comes crashing down in about 12 - 18 months, and we all drop hard to the ground, those hard hats will come in handy. And we can use the high vis vests when we revitalise the shoe making industry on $1.00 per hour, exporting to productive countries like China.

Unfortunately, with 3 tiers of overlapping government, and unions with nothing really useful left to do, OH&S has become the new union battleground supported by bureaucracy that designs laws that govern all to stop the actions of the troublesome 3%.

I'll never forget once I had to replace a radio in an office of a hazardous site. I needed a screwdriver and it was specialised. I did about 1 1/2 days of courses including tool handling, and filled out forms for 3 hours for a 10 minute job. It was in a standard office environment. Unbelievable. That company is closing their Australian manufacturing and moving overseas next year with about 600 job losses. Apparently Australia is over twice as expensive for OH&S.

Its a big issue, and i will be the first to agree that there is probably better ways or more effeicient ways to achieve the same goal. However it has to cover all and be capable of being understood by all, so it is dumbed down.
But you would be surprised accidents still do happen to smart people for the exact same reason listed above, fill out the forms and do the job the same way you have always done it.

While a comparison can be made about our competitiveness is in decline because of OH&S think what the alternative is. We have very save work places in Australia, and that means the mjority go home in one piece every night to their families. Think what the aletrnative is if we go back to old ways for the sake of competitiveness.

The solution is to increase OH&S in our competitors markets, make them as safe as us so the difference in cost is less.

Safety is not a cost in industry, it is an investment. If there was no safety programs, think what the compensation bills or the insurance premiums would be. There still will be a cost to business that would make us uncompetitive.

"Safety is not a cost in industry, it is an investment."

Thanks for that gem Alan. After wading through a load of generalised crap I knew there'd be a sparkler somewhere. Compliance requirements are possibly over the top in some industries and circumstances but in far more cases they've more than proven their worth. Pity some of our govt environmental "protection" agencies don't take them so seriously (Orica in NSW).

Hi Bazooka
There are Actual companies that have won more work by investing in safety. It also leads to better staff retention and lower insurance premiums.
Contrary to some views major resource companies do take safety serious and are prepared to pay more for safer contractors.
I am one of those that select contractors and safety does take priority over price.

Alan

Forgot to mention

Your boss or the company you work for don't really care about your safety - it's all about avoiding litigation should there be an accident !


Cheers

Gazz

^^^^correct answer^^^^^

An expensive exercise in preemptive arse covering brought about by draconian French styled whs system which was imported into Victoria, put into a Petrie dish by the politicians and grown into a vile mess by the solicitors and 'whs professionals' - an oxymoron if I've ever heard one......
Corporates are now being held to ransom by their own whs departments and the red tape being churned from them.

Just my thoughts from running a mid tier construction company servicing corporates for the last 20 years.

Yep, statistics show that OH&S is the last thing anyone needs in building and construction.

I beg of you, please consult your statistics - industrial accidents are on the rise in spite of the idiocy. And costs are simply uncompetitive. There's plenty of top fight WHOSO's retiring to the country rather than kill innocent workers because large American resource companies working in QLD (read between the lines) force them to sign off on dodgy work statements. They won't do it, so Jimmy the Cadet gets the job. I sit on two different consultative safety panels within the building industry, and am passionate about the safety of our crews. Unfortunately our combined years of experience pale in comparison when held up against a child who has completed a degree in generalisation and has zero practical experience.
Every day I deal with idiocy from within the ranks of those who'd presume to protect us freom ourselves. Most of this tribe are either young uni leavers or incomeptents who failed as tradespeople -a generalisation, but one I'll leave out there to be disproven by your statistics.
I had a plumber REMOVED FROM SITE last week - his crime - he removed a glove to use a calculator.
Just this week, after having signed off on all our paperwork, a 'child' WHS officer from a tier one company who first demanded that any EWP we used on a job be less than 11m (I have never heard of this), then refused the machine supplied because it could be towed by a car and in her opinion wasn't safe........Sub 11m EWP's are all kennards toys and that's why we don't use them in the first place - she had ZERO understanding of what she'd signed off, and then backflipped when she saw what she had demanded. 1 night shift and $25k in baseline overhead - GONE.
Until someone shows me how having a 50 year old tradesman write out a Safe Work Method Statement for using a shifting spanner (no I'm not kidding), is going to help him or any bastard around him, I'll call the current state of WHS affairs for what it is - a complete and utter waste of time and money.
We NEED WHS, and it needs to be tough, but it needs to be directed by those who have a clue, not those who are incompetent, inexperienced or motivated by other means (NSW Unions getting kickbacks for all successfully prosecuted company fines jumps to mind.....).

No-one on this forum has suggested the system is anywhere near perfect (as some of the instances you claim might suggest) but Worksafe Australia stats seem to rain on your parade in a big way. Serious accident stats are by no means precise but as far as they go they have shown across the board decreases in rates in just about every industry over the last decade. That said I do recall reading claims a while back that construction industry accident rates increased when Howard barred union access to sites - or something to that effect. And in case you want to misinterpret me again, I'm not suggesting that unions are the answer to OH&S problems in every or any industry.

I operated in the mining industry from 1970 to the late 1990's - and I'm glad I'm out of it and retired now. The overwhelming OSH BS is just swamping the country.

Now, here's a OHS BS story that is true because the bloke is one of my mates, and we talk regularly.
This mate owns a couple of 5 tonne pantech trucks and drives one of them himself. He delivers FOAM and MATTRESSES, in the metro area, on contract to a big bedding manufacturer.

He gets instructions to deliver a double mattress to a big mining contractors depot in the metro area.
Now Bob is a go-getter, he doesn't stuff around. He roars into a furniture manufacturers or bedding retailers place - backs up to the dock and dives into the back of his truck, manhandles the mattress, foam, or whatever out onto the dock - gets the paperwork done, and he's out of there within 5-7 minutes at most.

However, this delivery to the mining contractor will go down in Bobs life story book.
He rocks up to the boom gate, gets admitted to the yard, and is told to park in the middle of the hardstand area. He waits and waits, and finally after about 10mins, some pimply faced OSH person turns up and asks what he has to deliver. Bob says, "a mattress! - where do you want it dropped?"

The OSH person inspects the rear of Bobs truck (5 tonner with 16" wheels, and a tray less than 900mm off the ground), and says -
Oh, you'll have to wait, until I can arrange assistance and safety equipment for you!"

Bob starts to see red about this point, and says, "What ******* assistance! I don't need any!! I throw these mattresses around every day, I do it all by myself, all day long!!"

The OSH knob promptly starts reciting the riot act to Bob. "You can't unload that mattress by yourself, that is excessive weight, you could injure yourself!
In addition, your tray is more than 500mm from the ground, and has no safety railing - you could fall and injure yourself!
Please stay in your truck until I've organised the safety equipment and assistance personnel!"

Bob by this stage is apoplectic. 20 mins has gone past, he's still got a heap of deliveries to make, and the mattress is still in his truck.
Any other place, he'd have made two more deliveries by now.

The OSH knob returns after another 10 mins - with TWO helpers - a set of stairs - and a set of hand rails for the rear of the truck tray.

Bob fumes while all this is set up - then when its all in place, he's allowed to enter the rear of his truck - but he's not allowed to handle the mattress by himself.
No, the mattress has to be carried by 4 persons, ensuring that there's not the slightest possible chance of harm coming to any single muscle.

After 45 mins, the mattress is out, all the safety equipment has been removed, and Bob is free to go. He hits the road and promptly gets on the phone to the depot manager.

I won't quote what he said, but I can assure you, he repeated every word in his swear vocabulary at least twice, blistered the paint in the managers office, and probably burnt the earpiece on his phone as well.

He ended by stating, that if there was ever another order from that managers company, for delivery to that depot - there was a snowflakes chance in hell of him ever doing a delivery to that place again, as long as he lived!!

Bob still burns up every time I mention the companys name!

This type of BS is exactly what is causing Australia to fall behind dramatically in the costs dept.
Bob lost 45 mins of his valuable time, by being forced to comply with what was effectively pure BS by way of OSH rules - and the bottom line is, that with all the mining company OHS BS and petty regulation - accidents, and fatal accidents, are still happening on work sites.

The simple fact remains, that no amount of legislation, OHS laws and petty regulations, will stop idiots from having accidents and fatalities.

I'm not against safety and regulations, per se - but they need to be tempered with a large dose of common sense and practicality.
With lawyers and uni-educated people with no experience driving the OSH regime, we have little hope of developing OHS regulations that reflect a large dose of common sense.

The original is almost always a better story Ron but you missed the sequel. Next week Bob rolled up to a different place, injured his back and is now bedridden, in constant pain, and is suing the company for $millions for failing to provide a safe work environment.

Your penultimate sentence is fair enough - but who decides what is reasonable and who takes the hit when things go badly wrong?

The point about OH&S is not that you can prevent every serious "accident" but that you limit the opportunities for same, reduce the probability/risk AND minimse the impact of inevitable incidents. Yes, there is a compromise required. The question is always how much risk is acceptable.

If you're sceptical about the effects OH&S have had in reducing serious accidents I invite you to look at the figures from the SafeWork Australia website. There's about 10 or 11 years of aggregated data for pretty much every "industry". And, as I said above, iirc they show steady declines across the whole decade+ in most if not all occupations. Of course that is not all down to OH&S.

Strange,
why would an OH&S person turn to the unloading of a little pan.

A storeman would, and may tell the driver to remain in his truck and say, we will unload the mattress as you don't have any safety ppe and you are not inducted into this warehouse.

No offence intended, but something wrong with this account me thinks.

Slow one - what is wrong, is that in this particular mining contracting company, OH&S BS is out of control - as it is in many areas in mining.

Here's a typical example. A bloke grabs a 100mm angle grinder, holds it badly, grinds the wrong way, it kicks back and cuts him.

Immediately, all angle grinder useage is totally banned across the whole company because there might be more injuries.

Blokes have to wear hard hats and protective eyewear where there's not even a one in a billion chance of having something strike them on the head or in their eye.

If the same BS applied to your 4WD touring, you'd be forced to wear safety glasses on dusty roads, because some grit might get in your eye.

That is, of course, if you were actually allowed to go 4WD-driving - because you'd have had to submit a risk analysis of the drive in the bush, that you'd undertaken.

You wouldn't be allowed to change your own flat tyre, because you hadn't undergone a 5 day course in tyre and wheel fitting dangers.

Naturally, you wouldn't be allowed to use a wheel wrench, because it might slip and you'd jam a finger and get a blood blister.
No, it would have to be a pneumatic wrench, and of course, you couldn't use your wrench, until it had been inspected and tagged as safe - even if it was new.

The OH&S BS regulations and pettiness is overwhelming in many companies, and it will be the death of this country.


Bazooka - Bob has been hauling MATTRESSES and FOAM around Perth for the more than 25 yrs I've known him.
He hasn't buggered his back with a piece of foam or a mattress, yet.
I think he's triply qualiifed to determine whats safe, and what's not, over some upstart pimply-faced Uni-graduate who has never seen or worked in the real world.

You are reinforcing exactly what I'm saying, that lawyers and fear of litigation drive OH&S, not any practical application of OH&S.

Sorry Ron, I'm not reinforcing your rather myopic view of OH&S at all. Nor do I accept the silly lines about "uni graduates" and OH&S being the death of this country. Might work on a forum which accepts anecdotes as gospel but the former is a gross generalisation in my experience, the latter a very long bow which I suspect economists would dispute vehemently.

OH&S rules are rarely produced in isolation by some inexperienced, pimply faced smartie but like many work rules they can sometimes get in the way of "getting things done" and seem a little crazy - until, as I've said, it hits the fan.

But back to the point. The fact that 99% of the time "Bob" and people like him get away with "unsafe" practices isn't the issue. Bob might be fit, smart and vigilant - many aren't, as you acknowledged yourself. One simple oversight could turn his world upside down.

OH&S is about rasining awareness and identifying and mitigating risk, and reducing the severity and rate of serious accidents. The fact that there are significant $cost implications is a major driver for business. Hello, if it wasn't many would ride roughshod over their employees' welfare - as used to happen in the bad old days. Most of us find "workarounds" and "practical solutions" but at least with OH&S we're armed with a little more information. Safety in any workplace is a fundamental right, not a condition to be quibbled over.

G'day Bazooka

A very good friend of mine used to own and run an electronics factory here in Australia making semi-conductors for mobile phones and computers ( I think that's what they're for ) and employed 11 people including the receptionist. He sold his product to a few overseas companies and made what most Aussies would say was "very good money". As time went on and with the increasing pressure of OH&S requirements his costs went up and up and up while his "very good money" went down and down and down.

Realising he would go broke if something didn't change, he closed the business down, moved to China and set up the exact same business manufacturing the same product. He now employs over 30 Chinese people and is making what most Aussies would say is "ridiculous amounts of money" !

He now says that anyone who runs a business or is thinking of running a business in Australia with all the dumb and stupid OH&S requirements must have rocks in their head.

Bazooka - could you please tell these now unemployed 11 Aussies with children and mortgages how fantasticly the OH&S rules have benefitted them while the 30 plus Chinese workers have a job and earn good money "considering where they are" and the Chinese Government is getting the tax from them while they have yet to have an accident or get injured whilst on the job without stupid OH&S laws ??????

My mate's is just one of the hundreds of companies that has closed down here and moved overseas because of ridiculously expensive unwarranted OH&S crap - how many more companies need to shut down and how many more people need to go on the dole before someone with a modicom of intelligence realises that this is killing Australian enterprise !!!

Maybe the five and a half thousand employees at Holdens in Adelaide could become OH&S officers when the plant shuts down
( due to high overheads including OH&S crap ) and they can make everything "safe" for the remaining few businesses that will survive in this once great counrtry !

YES we all need a safe workplace - but if there is NO workplace - what's the point ???


All the best

Gazz

Ps what OH&S form do I need to fill out to avoid RSI whilst typing ?

For the most part companies, especially large ones, do have a genuine concern to ensure a safe-working environment for their employees. And it is right they do so.

Having said that, OH & S is frequently driven by insurance companies who want to limit their liability, and the legal fraternity, who want to profit from the fees that OH & S cases bring.

This is one of the by-products of becoming a litigious society…

You realize that the system has gone mad when you watch electricians working in a new project home painted and carpeted ready for a family to move in the following day fitting off a couple of power points wearing hard hat, glasses and gloves, after they have finished you then need the painter to go around and touch up the marks on the walls from hard hat dint marks.

I am all for workplace safety but OH&S has become a career in itself and is making people stupid and lazy in the workplace. People walk around a building site these days without being "street smart" with this mindset that the paperwork has made them safe

"OH&S is about rasining awareness and identifying and mitigating risk, and reducing the severity and rate of serious accidents"

I really wish I could agree with you mate, and I really wish that was the case, and we could all get on with it, but that statement is an ideal, not a reality and exposes your position as one who doesn't have to live with the consequences of the current regime.

It is becoming abundantly apparent that there are members here who 'do' and there are members here who 'might'.
What is hardly surprising but noteworthy from a social science perspective is the gaping maw between the two camps.
That maw is the ocean of rehtorical diorhea which has flooded into various workplaces, and only those who have to sail the cesspit to eke out a profit and protect the director's arses would understand the current state of affairs for what it is.

My opinion is that the unnecessary financial burden being placed on the sectors who value add to this country has already made us uncompetitive, and we must be prepared to reap the financial backlash because of it.

I will not compromise safety on any of my sites, but I'll die in the trenches with my blokes before I admit that the diatribe being peddled to us daily on site has ANYTHING to do with saving us.
It is in the main just businesses making sure they can't be sued in case anything goes wrong.

We had WHS about right 10 years ago. Since then it has become a joke.

I'm out.

gbc your post has nailed it.

Sure Gazz your mate and hundreds of other businesses are shifting OS because of OH&S. Pull the other one it whistles. Perhaps it was a factor and he doesn't have to deal with issues of worker safety in China or Bangladesh, or.... but if he's anything like other businesses the real reason he moved is so that he could pay low wages, not pay super, sick leave etc etc. In short, be competitive.

G'day Bazooka

My mate's exact words to me at the time were " Gazz, I either sink or I swim " He chose to swim and saved his 30 years of hard work he put in to building up his business !

With your love of OH&S I'm guessing you never ever complain about the cost of housing - the cost of electricity - the cost of water - the cost of fuel - the cost of food - the cost of car parts and repairs because you would just say - I'm happy to pay that amount because I know that all these high costs are because my fellow Australians have safe work practices ! I am also guessing you would never buy anything from overseas via ebay because you don't support overseas safety standards ! One last guess - I bet you proudly fly the Eureka flag !!

All the best to you Bazooka

Happy and safe travelling

Gazz

Ps Don't forget to wear a life vest when driving through creek crossings deeper than 200mm because it pays to be safe.

There's been a lot of silly generalisations and gross over-reactions and over-simplifications on this thread Gazz but your last post takes the cake for silliness. I could equally say I'll bet when someone's father or mother gets killed or seriously inured at work due to a lack of "OH&S" (attention to and concern for the safety of workers) that you'd simply wave that away as a cost of doing business. But that would be unfair and quite puerile - much like your last post.

I'm not knocking your mate for taking his business offshore. That would be another gross over-simplification and failure to recognise his personal efforts and entrepreneurial skills. But we don't need to be Einsteins to know why goods can be produced cheaply in China and I doubt if many Australians would want to see the treatment and conditions of workers in this country brought back down to those levels.

Not sure who the rep was but he does need to check his facts. Australia is the second largest Land Cruiser market. Well ahead of the US.

He knew that

Cheers tony

That is he knew that we were the 2nd biggest market for cruisers, but cruisers was a very low priority for Toyota, they sell so many more other models!

Did he also mention that Toyota makes about as much profit on one Land Cruiser sale as about 40 Yaris sales or 25 Corola Sales.

Then you would have to wonder why they brought out that last attempt.

Regards Tony

It's all part of a negotiation game between the Australian Mining companies and Toyota played out in the press. That kept sales going till the next round of negotiations.

Statements in the paper from BHP or Toyota are not designed for you and I to read, they are carefully aimed at the other side through PR agencies who are part of the game. It's like when you see full page ads for F18 fighters in the newspapers. They don't expect to sell them to average Joe, and only care if a 3 - 4 people see the ad, so long as they are the right 3 - 4 people.

What a load of rubbish....... Some need to understand the 4.2 liter 6 cylinder diesel is dead and stop hoping it will one day return, the V8 is far superior to the old dinosaur.

The six cylinder in the Toyota Landcruiser and the Nissan Patrol could not be made emission compliant at a price that was acceptable.

Lucky most of us have stepped out of the dark ages and moved to modern times.

With due respect Tonyfish I don't think that sales rep knew what he was talking about or was merely passing on idle gossip. There have already been comments in motoring press around the world re Toyotas 300 series due for release in Australia in 2016. Here is one such comment:

"When asked about the next Landcuiser Series, Sadahashi Koyari, Chief Design Engineer for the 200 Series stated that they are thinking of upgrading the transmission to 7 or 8 speed, as well introducing a possible hybrid model and possibly a monocoque body."

Whether they keep the V8 diesel remains to be seen but my guess is they will after the $s invested in its development. They will tweak it up to probably 225kw for the 300 series. I think the Landcruiser will be around for a long time yet.

Cheers

Tonyfish to car salesman.

"I am thinking of getting a new car. Should I buy the current model that you have in stock right now, or wait till the new model."

Car salesman to Tonyfish.

Answer a)

"Buy right now, I hear there won't be a new model so it is pointless waiting. There is never a better time to buy than right now, here is a pen."

or Answer b)

"Woahhh, slow down! Put that pen down, and your credit card away right now. Are you crazy! The new model in rumoured to be in 3 years will be much better. We are getting rid of that troublesome V8 that silly owners love, and are going back to the pre-euro 4, 6 cyl naturally aspirated diesel, 82kW of pure acceleration terror on wheels. Come back and see me then if I still have a job here"

Hmm which would they say?

LOL

Boobook - You obviously like rambling, go for it mate!

The Salesman I was talking to was not vehicle related, he was on sick leave after an operation. I was there for other reasons when he noted he worked a a Toyota distributor.

We got talking Toyota's and how I would not but the current V8 Version as they are not what I would want. They were His comments that I shared after talking about the turbo 6cyl.

May I suggest you would not know what I would say if I was purchasing a car!

I really do not give a hoot what Toyota does. :-)))

Regards Tony

Yes why did they do that? It was also said to me that it got the V8 as it was already available and it was not likely they would put money into bringing another engine up to specs! Considering Cruisers were low on their Total Market Sales!

Sounded reasonable to me and I will not by a V8 :-)

Cheers Tony

Apparently they had to space out the chassis rails to fit in the V8.

Well thats the dumbest thing I've read on this post so far. I have 3 v8 utes, all with over 200 000ks on them. They get used on station tracks, on a 150km run into town, pull a 3000 litre fuel tank to fuel earthmoving gear, all hard kms. All of these utes have big toolboxes and aircompressors bolted into the back of them. Never have I ever noticed an issue with the different front/rear track. This is the hard work these utes were designed for. Then along comes some expert who might drive on a gravel once a year asking why would any one buy a vehicle with different front/rear track, thats so funny, get out in the real world and try one. Ohh and by the way, the fuel tanker has a different track again, never an issue !!!

pete qld posted:
"Well thats the dumbest thing I've read on this post so far."

LOL Pete, you obviously haven't read Tonyfish's other comments then.

I must be dumb because I thought there was a reason that we bothered to have campers built with the track to match the tow vehicle. It's a wonder all the other dumb manufacturers haven't built their vehicles with different track front to rear!

Pete QLD

The different front and rear tracks does make a difference. If you had ever tried passing a road train on the highway at high speed you would know what I mean. There handling is terrible. ARB make a modification - spacers in rear to increase the rear track. Improves the ride but negates your warranty.

They are an uncomfortable vehicle with very uncomfortable seats. I have to use a lumbar support (supplied by work) due to problems with my lower back. I hate driving my work vehicle. I guess if you only drive 70 series you do not have a reference point.

I have upgraded from a medium sized DC to a dual cab 79 and love it, 3 mates have followed suit since my purchase and two others are intending on doing so as well.
As Pete Qld posted, these things are a much tougher durable vehicle than all of the other medium sized utes on offer.
Sure they don't have the domesticated features of the others and fully understand why people would prefer the softer variants and they most likely fulfill there needs and expectations perfectly but they are a different category of vehicle altogether.
Toyota doesn't care about Australia as we are insignificant in the scheme of things, we will get what we are given and until a better option is available I will happily stick with my 79

The other thing that many people fail to consider is that, no manufacturer will be making a good retail margin on fleet sales to the mines.

They probaly have to sell 2 or 3 mine vehicles to make the sort of profit they would on a full priced retail sale.

As it stands, toyota has dominated 5 or 6 catagories of vehicles in the retail market for the last 10 to 15 years.

So why would you push for a low unit count market like the mines when you have a very profitable retail market that yeilds a far higher profit margin.

cheers

Hi Allein,
Your Magna has depreciated almost to $00.00 as a trade in especially with high kms.
Drive it till it dies, sell it to a wrecker and then update because you will get more value from everything that way.

Disco.

My workshop neighbour, Joe, runs a mechanical repair shop opposite me. Joe is pushing 70, and he's a top bloke.
He drives in with a 2000 model Magna a couple of days ago. It has a broken back window, and a dent in the roofline at the top centre of the back window. At lunchtime, I go over to chat to him, curious about what happened to the Magna.

Joe rolls his eyes and says, "It belongs to my 86 yr old cousin. It's a good condition car, done less than 200,000kms - but he went to back out of his garage, and he knocked the switch on the remote for the tilt-a-door as he backed out! The door started coming down, the handle mechanism hit the top of the back window, and broke it - and then the handle hooked on the roof before he knew what was happening, and before he could stop!"

"He went down to his local smash repair shop to get a quote to fix it - and the bloke took a look at it, walked around it a few times - then said - 'listen mate, I'll do you a deal! I'll give you $400 for it, and you can go down to the car yard and buy yourself another one!' .. " LOL

So here was Joe, pretty cheesed off, trying to fix this old Magna for his cousin, for free - because the old bloke has no money, and doesn't want to, and can't afford to, buy another car! Ahhh, the joys of rellies!! LOL

They already are. Bands of reflective tape and 3 different coloured flashing lights with whip aerials with a flashing light on top.

Cheers
Pop

Why? Maybe we should go back to making the FJ!

FJ Holden that is!!

Not a bad idea ...... At least we would be able to fix them!

1HD-FTE couldn't pass the 2006 pollution laws. Hence the move to common rail.

I'm a bit worried about buying cars with electric starter motors. They were so much more reliable when we used to hand crank them.... :-)

Worklplace safety is killing us. The cost to business is rising with everything that is lumbered on us.
Yes safety is important, but we are going overboard.
I mean why not make it mandatory that any miner getting into a vehicle put on a safety airsuit that surround him in bubbles upon impact, together with a helmet and neck brace and don't forget the H safety harness.
I mean "if it safes one life it is worth it" as the do gooders say. Let alone the extra 5 minutes it takes to get in and out of the vehicle, multiplied by thousands every day multiplied by 365 day a year

I reckon here should be a balance, all these laws are costing us money and work is rushing us by going overseas.
We are being crippled. What about common sense and skill?
CJ