Brand New Patrol

Submitted: Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 17:37
ThreadID: 13423 Views:2506 Replies:19 FollowUps:30
This Thread has been Archived
After a bit of advice guys,
We are about to embark on the purchase of our first "Brand New" 4wd and have chosen patrol BUT which one 3.0lt turbo or 4.2 turbo.
We intend to go around the block permanently in July next year and hope to tow a 21' 6 Windsor crown.(overall length of 24')
We can get a pretty good deal on either but are not sure on fuel economy with the 4.2 turbo and also durability (we will not be able to replace for quite a long time)
Also which would tow a large van better??
Can anyone comment
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Wayne (NSW) - Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 17:58

Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 17:58
Jemm,
There is no substitute for cubic inches. Go the 4.2

Wayne
AnswerID: 61528

Reply By: Mrs Diamond - Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 18:18

Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 18:18
as above.
you cant beat the 4.2
AnswerID: 61530

Follow Up By: jemm - Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 18:23

Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 18:23
Wow 2 responses
2x 4.2
and fuel economy regarding towing would be OK do you think?
I mean we intend doing the lot and fuel will be a big thing. (I hope not to have to pick too much fruit!!!!)

Jemm
0
FollowupID: 323008

Reply By: Member - Jeff M (WA) - Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 18:35

Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 18:35
I'm a big supporter of the 4 cylinder diesels, and think alot of people who knock them when talking about towing have never driven a new generation diesel, however even I would be inclined to push towards the 4.2 for what you want to do. If you were towing the same van a couple of hundred k's on the weekend, it'd be 3.0L all the way, bout around Oz and wanting it to last long after that, well even if there are no facts to back it up I would still feel more comfertable with the bigger beast.
Fuel economy will be higher, but not by much. I'm sure there are some guys out there with 4.2's that could supply some in depth details on consumption while towing.
AnswerID: 61535

Follow Up By: jemm - Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 18:40

Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 18:40
Thanks Jeff,

We were not too sure as it's been a long time since we had a 4wd and then it was a T..... Saraha on GAS and frankly I could have walked faster when we did the big trip last time.
Mind you it never failed us

Jemm
0
FollowupID: 323011

Follow Up By: Member - Pesty (SA) - Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 18:48

Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 18:48
Desite my post about your patrol post the best tow 4wd of them all is the turbo cruiser. Things have changed a lot in the last few years so a comparison to an old petrol model may not be fair, take them all for a test run.
0
FollowupID: 323015

Reply By: Member - Martin- Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 18:41

Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 18:41
Hi Jemm
As a 3litre Patrol owner (2nd one) i would normally say go the three litre but after all of the troubles that we have been having with this one i would recommend that you get the 4.2. If Nissan brought out the 4.2 in Auto i would buy one tomorrow so unless they do something dramatic in the engine department and match it to an auto within the next couple of years i may have to DARE I SAY IT go back to Toyota( oh god i feel dirty for saying that) but i must admit my old sixty series never gave me as much trouble as i am having right now.
AnswerID: 61538

Reply By: Member - Pesty (SA) - Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 18:42

Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 18:42
Go with the 4.2 as power on paper for towing a large van, is not matched on the road.
Plenty of van towing people are disappionted with the lugging power of there 3.0 patrol.
Granted you can get slightly better economy from the 3.0 L but mostly without the van.
The only advantage of the 3.0 L is you get a new motor every 75,000 ks
The 4.2 will go to the 1/2 million without replacement.
AnswerID: 61540

Follow Up By: Member - Jeff M (WA) - Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 18:52

Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 18:52
Dumb isn't it, TD Auto's are just so damn good for towing...
Wake up Nissan!
0
FollowupID: 323017

Reply By: GOB & denny vic member - Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 18:42

Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 18:42
goodday jemm
as the proud owner of the 4.2td i average about 5.5ks pltowing our 16ft offroad pop top weight loaded about 1850 kgs single axle 240kgs+on tow ball we are hoping our new van will arrive next week tandem 150kgs on ball not sure about full load weight yet but i use my nissan every day loaded for work and average about 7.5kspl
the only thing tell them you dont want there rubbish tyres pick the ones you want and try to get them in the dael
yuo cant get the 4.2 tdi st in auto either unless the latest model go that way

steve
AnswerID: 61541

Follow Up By: jemm - Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 19:06

Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 19:06
Hey Steve,

No they don't do the auto in the 4.2 (would prefer it but)
I'm thinking they won't throw in the tyres either but hey we'll give it a go.

Hate Salesmen

Jemm
0
FollowupID: 323020

Follow Up By: DARREN - Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 19:40

Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 19:40
Jemm, they will upgrade tyres for you but you need to negotiate it in the deal i.e. whilst they are still brand new, the Nissan dealer simply swaps them over at the local tyre shop. It cost me approx $500 more to get 285/75/16 Cooper ST's when I bought my GU last year. I did it on the advice of several friends who have done the same.
0
FollowupID: 323033

Reply By: Jimbo - Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 18:54

Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 18:54
Have you thought about the 4.8 petrol and LPG. It will have miles more power and torque than either of the oil burners and will be cheaper to run.

"LPG, power to the people"

Regards,

Jim.
AnswerID: 61544

Follow Up By: Truckster (Vic) - Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 19:18

Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 19:18
4.8 will never be cheaper than a diesel to run.

one magazine in softsand low range work gained a wonderful 54l/100klms.. I couldnt stick a drill into my fuel tank to get that sort of economy.
0
FollowupID: 323023

Follow Up By: mygu4500 - Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 20:08

Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 20:08
Truckster

4.5 gu on gas 20-25l per 100kms x 38 cents = $7.60-$9.50 per 100km
A damn sight cheaper than a diesel. When purchasing a new vehicle you should consider all options.

Dave
0
FollowupID: 323037

Follow Up By: Truckster (Vic) - Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 22:53

Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 22:53
Mygu, you have to do a lot of klms before you reap the $3000 it costs to install a LPG system.
0
FollowupID: 323071

Follow Up By: Wil - Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 06:13

Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 06:13
Fuel availability is the biggest issue in the countryside...:)
Cheers
0
FollowupID: 323095

Follow Up By: uppy - Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 10:24

Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 10:24
Truckster , stick to the Lada ,Because you wouldnt be able to handle the 4800,Also what did the 4,2 deisel do in the same test?.And how much is a turbo with a inter cooler cost.Your balance reply please
regards uppy
0
FollowupID: 323118

Follow Up By: gonebush - Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 10:53

Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 10:53
As for a 4.8 petrol .........the 3.0 l with Dtronic has exactly the same torque (420nm) and the torque is what you want. On gas, the 4.8 torque will be below the 3.0l. Gas might be 38cpl in the city but what about out where we all want to be, even if it's available at all?

And lack of range becomes a real issue.
0
FollowupID: 323124

Follow Up By: mygu4500 - Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 12:41

Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 12:41
Around 20,000km to break even with fitting lpg, mine was already installed when I purchased the car. Would not buy a petrol GU without gas fitted.
Range 350-450km gas(92l) + 150km petrol not a issue with me
Fuel availability around Australia not a problem unless you are talking about the middle of Simpson etc. Price of Gas in country areas is more expensive but so is all fuel.
0
FollowupID: 323138

Follow Up By: Truckster (Vic) - Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 15:51

Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 15:51
Uppy, you do stand up comedy on thursdays? LMAO..

Couldnt handle a 4.8? LMAO PYHOOTCF

Turbo with intercooler, $3000 for turbo, $200-3000 for an intercooler, your point is? 4.8 will still USE more fuel than a diesel..
0
FollowupID: 323163

Follow Up By: uppy - Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 18:18

Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 18:18
Truckster, My point is that you still have not supplied the information regarding what a 4.2 deisel would do in the same test.My point is with a 4.2 deisel you need to add 3000$ for a turbo and 3000$ for a intercooler.Thats a lot more that 3000$ for a lpg set up ,or if you just want to run on petrol just add a long range tank 1000$.Also the same maginze made the 4.8 4x4 of the year.One should not right of a vehicle just because it drinks more petrol that i drink beer.Regarding being a stand up comic , With all the material you give me i should make a living out of it .Looking forward to your informed reply
kind regards uppy
0
FollowupID: 323182

Follow Up By: gonebush - Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 18:39

Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 18:39
A range of 350 - 450kms and up to 600 km combined (and less by say 25% if towing) is a real issue for some. If you don't get too far from the beaten track then that range is quite ok. However there is a lot of WA and over into NT and SA where gas is not available so those areas are out. Such restrictions and limitations on a pretty sizeable and interesting chunk of Australia certainly don't suit me.
0
FollowupID: 323185

Follow Up By: mygu4500 - Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 19:54

Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 19:54
I agree the range would be a issue with some people, but when buying a new or s/hand vehicle you have to be honest with yourself where and what you want it to do. At the moment lpg suits me fine, its cheap to run and maintain, it certainly dosen't restrict us to where we want to go in Australia.

Cheer Dave
0
FollowupID: 323195

Follow Up By: Truckster (Vic) - Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 21:51

Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 21:51
Gang.. Im sure the new TD6 is turbo intercooled, so needs no turbo and intercooler to do that.

also a normal 4.2 is more than good enough for most people, and gets 11-14/100 regularly compared to 20+
0
FollowupID: 323207

Reply By: Truckster (Vic) - Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 19:10

Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 19:10
4.2 by 23023984028340928304923042934098 miles.

if your a squillionare and can afford a massive fuel bill go the 4.8 petrol.

Go a Lada before the 3.0...
AnswerID: 61547

Follow Up By: jemm - Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 19:29

Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 19:29
We are definetely not squillionares, if we were we wouldn't be here now
We'd be out n about with our bums on Broome beach. Mind you Burleigh ain't half bad just don't like crowds

Jemm

0
FollowupID: 323027

Follow Up By: Truckster (Vic) - Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 19:30

Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 19:30
read here.
http://www.exploroz.com.au/Forum/View.asp?ForumQID=13397
0
FollowupID: 323028

Reply By: Peter McGuckian - Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 20:31

Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 20:31
There are lots of 3l owners out there who are very pleased with the towing capacity of their Patrols. I think you'll hear from some of them shortly. Don't believe all you here from those T drivers. I was talking to a fellow traveller at the weekend who had just spent 2 years on the road. He had the 3l Patrol and a large Windsor van. He averaged about 16l/100k, had done 90,000k and had no problems at all. I'm just clocking over 50,000, tow a camper trailer and find the car performs just great.

On tyres - If your in Melbourne, FTG Nissan charge $400 to put 275/70 BFG ATs on the car.

Peter
Peter
VKS Mobile 1906

Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

AnswerID: 61568

Reply By: Member - Captain (WA) - Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 20:47

Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 20:47
Hi Jemm,

I replaced my 80 series diesel 6 months ago and went through probably the same dilema you are now facing. After a LOT of test driving Nissans and TD cruisers and a whole lot more net research, I went the 3.0TD Nissan.

There are a mountain of posts regarding the 3.0TD Nissan engine failures, but ALL the piston failures refer to the series 2 engine. There has yet to be a SINGLE case of series 3 piston failure and this engine has been on the market nearly 2 years now (any failures would have started to surface by now). So, i was confident on the durability of the engine IMHO.

Many simply cannot see past cubic inches and cannot fathom how a 3.0 can outperform a 4.2. But things like high pressure fuel rails, 4 valves per cyclinder and a myriad of sensors soon level the playing field. Take a drive of the 3.0 and then the 4.2 and you can easily feel the better vehicle.

I also do a lot of towing (1.6ton off-road van) and find the 3.0 absolutely fantastic. I have fitted a Dtronic though to make up for a lack of torque just off idle. But now, it is great (and thats in a manual, an auto would make even better use of the Dtronic). Ask other owners who have towed with both, they all prefer the 3.0 over the 4.2 and thats with no Dtronic (note - heresay only here, I have not towed with a 4.2TD Nissan)

Just don't discount the 3.0TD because of the one-eyed die hard knockers (but I too would not buy a series 2 3.0TD, same way I would not buy a pre-94 cruiser 80 series TD due to their engine problems - but post 94 TD's are the benchmark for performance and reliability, as the SERIES 3 3.0TD's are starting too!!!)

Bottom line is, there is no right or wrong answer to your question. I have now done nearly 17,000kms and could not be happier with my 3.0TD. What ever vehicle you decide on, I'm sure you too will be happy.

Cheers

Captain
AnswerID: 61571

Follow Up By: Member - Captain (WA) - Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 21:06

Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 21:06
Forgot to add my fuel economy figure, I average 11.5 l/100kms around town and 15.7 l/100kms in the country towing at 100km/hr. Worst fuel economy was close to 20 l/100kms when sitting on 100km/hr into strong head wind on hilly country.

I have not had a country run without the van, but would expect figures around 10.5 l/100kms. These figures are corrected for my 285/75 tyres. I have recorded all fuel for all my vehicles and am meticulous with my fuel records.

Cheers

Captain
0
FollowupID: 323054

Follow Up By: Truckster (Vic) - Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 15:55

Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 15:55
"There has yet to be a SINGLE case of series 3 piston failure and this engine has been on the market nearly 2 years now..."

Ummmmmmmmm

What about here?
0
FollowupID: 323165

Follow Up By: Member - Captain (WA) - Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 19:33

Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 19:33
Hi Truckster

A 2002 model with 60,000kms - assumed a series 2 but will stand corrected otherwise.

Cheers

Captain
0
FollowupID: 323191

Reply By: Member - Roachie- Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 21:58

Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 21:58
Jemm,
Back in October 2000, I decided to upgrade from a 1993 RX 4.2 Patrol with safari Turbo, to a new GU.
I trotted in to the Nissan dealer and asked what was the story with the current range. The only demo he had that I could try was a 3.0l auto. I HATE auto's (but freely acknowledge their significant attributes) and I was sceptical about how such a small motor could push around such a heavy truck for 500,000klm. Anyway, I drove it and, yes, it went like a shower of sheet!!!
The driving position was comfortable etc. I went away and did some research on claimed performance.........
3.0ltr claimed 116 kw and 354nm
4.2ltr claimed 114kw and 330nm
However, when I looked at the torque CURVE of each vehicle; different story. The 3.0ltr hit peak torque around 2800 (from memory) and then dropped off.
The 4.2ltr hit peak torque at 2000 and carried this figure right through the rev range.
That was the 1st reason I chose to pay the extra dollars for the 4.2ltr
The 2nd reason was (ironically) the fact that it didn't have any computer/electronics that it would rely on. Okay, I guess there's some wizardry in the CD player and ABS etc......but nothing that, when it stuffs up (and it will!!) is gunna leave me stranded in the most inhospitipal of places.
SUMMARY (in my opionion)....
3.0ltr is a great "town" car and goes VERY well (at least the series 3 does, anyway)
4.2ltr is THE best touring vehicle for the outback..........bar none!!!
Now, as for fuel economy, my figures probably won't be of much use to you. Since buying it new in 2000, I've done an "indicated" 125,000klm. The speedo is out around 8%, so the true figure is around 135,000klm. However, based on the odometer (incorrect) figures, I've been getting an average of 15.63litres/100klm.
Bear in mind that if the 8% error is taken into account, this figure would be around 14.4litres/100klm. Still not real flash, but then realise that the flaming great roof rack was fitted within the 1st week and has been on ever since. I estimate (from experience with my previous GQ which had rack I used to take off regularly) that it soaks up about 10% of fuel economy. Therefore, it would be fair to say I could get around 13litres/100klm if I took it off.
Tyres........
I got conned big time here, when I bought the truck. As somebody else mentioned in one of the above replies, I decided to fit BFG's from new. The Nissan bloke didn't want to know, but said I should strike a deal with a tyre place myself. I went and saw the tyre bloke and he said "Mate, I'll do it but I can't give you much for the Duellers.....it'll take me months to flog them, so I'll drop the price of the BFG's by $100- each. Okay, best I could do in a small country town (Cooma, NSW). The Nissan bloke took the Patrol to the trye place and I went and picked it up and paid for it that afternoon. I had previously noted a 2nd hand 2.8ltr Patrol in the lot of the Nissan place.....tyres looked pretty shot.
Presto, when I went to collect my brand new truck; there was the 2.8ltr with brand new Duellers (you know; the ones that would take "months" to flog!!!)
Anyway, off the soap box to go and get my medication.
Good luck with whatever you decide to buy, mate.
AnswerID: 61577

Follow Up By: Member - Captain (WA) - Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 22:26

Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 22:26
Hi Roachie,

The 3.0TD max torque of 354 Nm is at 2,000 rpm, the SAME as the 4.2. Below 1,500 rpm it is pretty lame (pre-Dtronic), but after 2,000rpm, its just as flat as the 4.2.

Now fit the Dtronic and the old MAX torque is now there at 1250 rpm - yes, it makes that much difference. The new max torque is now 420 Nm, an absolute ball tearer, and makes for fantastic towing.

I hear your concern about all the electronic gizmos, but even the good old faithful 4.2 TD now has an electronically controlled fuel injection pump. You just cannot get away from "progress".

Remember 10-20 years ago and all the "old timers" were bemoaning how electronic ignition would never last and points were "easily" repaired in the bush? Well, who would even contemplate a new vehicle with mechanical points these days. The electronics on vehicle these days are pretty much taking over!

But I would be FAR more concerned about simply losing my key!!! Even the old 4.2 TD cannot be started without the factory key now. Lose that in the bush and you really are cactus!!! No amount of hotwiring will get any new vehicle going these days.

Also, is is so rare for an engine to fail (ANY brand) in the bush, but at the same time ALL brands suffer tyre failures and this is perhaps the most common reason for a stranding.

Besides, no-one these days will EVER have the isolation like say Len Beadell did in his day. Worst case scenario, we break down (engine, tyre, front diff if 100 series;) and we call up on sat phone or HF and give our precise location by GPS. All that fails we flip the switch on the EPIRB.

Roachie, I can fully understand your liking of the old dinosaur and it is a great reliable vehicle. But while reliability used to be a real life and death situation, the reality of that is simply no longer true for us 4WDrivers. I could never imagine you behind a 3.0TD, but hopefully we can catch up in the bush one day and over a beer crap on about the merits of the new 4.5TD Nissan (simply a 3.0TD with 2 more cylinders!!!) and the passing of the 4.2TD.

Cheers

Captain
0
FollowupID: 323065

Follow Up By: Member - Roachie- Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 22:46

Thursday, Jun 03, 2004 at 22:46
I'll look forward to that day Captain.....my shout!!! LOL
What you say makes a LOT of sense.

Cheers, mate
0
FollowupID: 323069

Reply By: horrace - Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 06:59

Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 06:59
OK, Now think about this...
I bought a brand new 100TD(manual) over the internet from a dealer in Brisbane (sci-something!)and it was cheaper than the Nissan 4.2 you are looking at!! YEP, it was brand new, in fact i even ordered it with a few extras from Japan as i was not picking it up for a few months.
My point is, dont think you are priced out by a Toyota! shop around.
100TD with sunroof etc for 64k = bargain!!
AnswerID: 61608

Follow Up By: Goona - Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 10:37

Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 10:37
How is 64K cheaper than a 4.2t @list price of $58 999 with air con
0
FollowupID: 323123

Follow Up By: Truckster (Vic) - Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 15:56

Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 15:56
Dont ruin his glee....
0
FollowupID: 323166

Reply By: flappan - Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 10:07

Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 10:07
Seems a reasonably common theme here.

The 3.0TD will do the job , but to get better torque low down . . . fit a Dtronic.

The 4.8 Petty Patrol will tow the van with ease at any posted limit , but that "ease" comes at a price . . . the fuel bill. Cost in LPG.

The 4.2 TD will do most of that , without doing a thing to it.

No real right or wrong answer , pure personal preference.

I like the 3.0TD's , but my concern is a small motor in a large vehicle, and in this case, towing a large van.

I have a 4.5 Petty Patrol , and love it. I can tow anything I want , and sit on the posted speed limit , and easily pass the vast majority of 4wds (diesels AND petrols) at any given time. This of course hurts the hip pocket.

I personally think the 4.2 TD is the "business" for a variety of reasons.
AnswerID: 61635

Reply By: Steve Mc - Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 10:48

Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 10:48
Hi Jemm The new 4.2TDi Patrol 114Kw & 360Nm not 330Nm, both will use about the same amount of fuel towing the van, the 4.2 will be thirstier until it runs in, it will have to do 25000 to 50000ks to achieve this.I have owned 6 of them as a long term vehicle you can't beat the prehistoric 4.2

My 2 BOBS worth ??
Cheers Steve
AnswerID: 61650

Reply By: TCM - Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 14:20

Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 14:20
Jemm I have a 2003 4.2TDi and tow a 1500kg car trailer regularly - I get about 14L/100km without it and about 16L/100km with it - Thats at about 120km.h (yeah I know I have a heavy boot) and you get significantly better economy if you knock 20ks off that speed.

Captain - I fully agree with Roachy - the 4.2L is a far better tourer then the 3.0L yes the latest version of the 4.2 does have some extra electronics on the fuel pump but its only timing control and anyone with basic mechanical knowledge (as I've seen on here, Roachy has in spades) could bypass it. The 3.0L is a good bit of gear don't get me wrong, but its designed for Europian conditions (read, good fuel, access to a mechanic every 30km) not for Aussie conditions - where you get fuel thats been absorbing water and dirt in the bottom of a tank for six months 2000km for anywhere with an ECU analyser.

JMO -
cheers,
Daniel
AnswerID: 61682

Follow Up By: Member - Captain (WA) - Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 16:25

Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 16:25
Another post by a NON 3.0TD owner trying to justify spending ~$6K extra on a 50's designed engine.

As for being a better tourer, it does not tow as well (power wise, as the bodys are identical) and has worse fuel economy. Is the supposed relaiblity what makes it better? You convienetly ignore other posts regarding a 4.2TD already had 2 turbos and about to get its 3rd. What about the harmonic balancer that has issues around the 90,000km mark (been a few of those before too). While the 4.2TD has had FAR less reliability issues than any engine I am aware of, it is NOT perfect.

Your statement of needing a mechanic every 30K is laughable (OK, its tongue in cheek) but then you add anyone with basic mecahnical knowledge can bypass the timing control on a 4.2TD is just false. No timing control on a diesel (mechanical or electrical) and it will simply not run across the rev range. If you remove the electrical control, where do you find the mechanical control to replace it !!! Or do you simply leave the timing at a fixed postion (and destroy the engine!!!)

Then to add to your ignorance you talk about ECU (Engine Control Unit - an electronic chip) analysing fuel. What the!!!! Just to fill you in with the problems with water in diesel, its the FACT that water cannot easily pass thru the injection nozzles. The 3.0TD has an injection pressure nearly 3 times that of the 4.2TD. This means the nozzles holes are smaller and more sensitive to water in fuel. But, the 4.2 also does not like water in fuel, its just that the nozzle holes as so relatively large that the water passes thru easier (but any water in fuel causes nozzle wear). Dirty fuel normally blocks the fuel filter and starves the engine of fuel. Simply changing the fuel fiter will usually get you going again until it blocks again (you do carry a spare fuel filter for your 4.2TD?). Run ANY diesel on dirty fuel for long enough and you will need a new pump and injectors before too long. But it has nothing to do with the ECU.

Look, I like a good debate about the relative merits of any vehicle. But when false facts are tossed in, it gets up my goat. Roachie simply does not like all the extra electronic gizmos that come with the 3.0TD, and I respect that, its his opinion.

But to say the 4.2TD is a far better tourer is just not supported by the facts IMHO. Yes, the 4.2TD has the runs on the board for reliability, but ask those who have owned both a 3.0TD and a 4.2TD what they prefer to tow with. Fit a Dtronic to a 3.0TD and it simply runs rings around the 4.2TD, particurlay when towing. So, it boils down to the reliability issue.

I fully acknowledge that the series 2 had issues with burnt/holed pistons, but the series 3 has none of these issues. There are other problems (EGR springs to mind) but no more common than other faults in any other engines. But others will prefer the proven track record of the 4.2TD and that is fine, there is no right or wrong answer here.

I could have easily purchased a 4.2TD Nissan (or 100 series 4.2TD for that matter) but I felt the 3.0TD was the right combination at the right price. I could not justify spending extra $$$ on the 4.2TD when it did not go as well as the 3.0TD or even get as good fuel economy. And as I was satisfied with the 3.0TD reliablity, why go the 4.2TD?

As for the price difference, Nissan is simply making huge profits on the 4.2TD as the engine tooling, R&D etc... has been paid for many times over. Even the intercooler comes off the 2.8TD, not the larger one on the 3.0TD. But wait until the replacement 4.2TD engine arrives, will have cost many millions/billions to develop, but will hardly be a price rise thanks to all those buying the 4.2TD now and funding the development cost.

I will stop my ranting and get off the soap box now that I have got this off my chest. And apologies in advance if I have offended anyone, but I just got all fired up (must be my red hair!!!).

Cheers

Captain
0
FollowupID: 323168

Reply By: TCM - Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 14:43

Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 14:43
By the way ANY mechanical injection diesel can be started without the key its only diesels with EFI that can't ;) getting the steering lock apart with out buggering the column would be much more difficult :)
AnswerID: 61686

Follow Up By: Member - Captain (WA) - Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 15:12

Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 15:12
The steering lock isn't the problem, its the fact that the ECU will not operate without the key, including the 4.2. No key and no go!!!

Its older models with only mechanical fuel injection that can be hot wired once the steering lock is bypassed. Gee's, even thiefs no longer hot wire cars, they simply take your keys.

Cheers

Captain

0
FollowupID: 323159

Reply By: TCM - Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 16:39

Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 16:39
The ECU in a 4.2TDi only controls pump timing and it can only change it within a very narrow band (its basicaly a slap stick solution by Nissan to reduce emmisions) The motor will run with it disconected. If you disconect both the battery and alternator, move the pump stop valve to the run position and roll start it, a new GU 4.2 will run without the key in the igniton a 3.0LTD or 4.8P on the other hand won't.

I have no problem with the 3.0Ls (My sister in law and a number of mates own them) but there is absolutly no doubt the 4.2L is more "bush repair" friendly. In addition a modified 4.2TD will produce the same if not more power then a Detronic fitted 3.0L, but it will do it with a far bigger margin of saftey. (But its more difficult (read costly) to do then plugging in a piggy back ECU)

If I was going to sell the truck in 5 years or if I didn't do regular trips away from help I'd have bought a 3.0L (They are far cheaper afterall), But FOR ME it was an easy choice to go for the 4.2L.

At the end of the day Jemm needs to work out what is important. Both motors will do the job, its in the finer details that they vary.

Cheers,
Daniel
AnswerID: 61705

Reply By: Baz (NSW) - Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 17:30

Friday, Jun 04, 2004 at 17:30
de'ja'vu !!!!!!!!!!
AnswerID: 61714

Reply By: Snatchem - Sunday, Jun 06, 2004 at 12:04

Sunday, Jun 06, 2004 at 12:04
So jemm did all those posts answer your question?

Snatchem
AnswerID: 61929

Follow Up By: jemm - Sunday, Jun 06, 2004 at 12:13

Sunday, Jun 06, 2004 at 12:13
absolutely
bought 4.2 st patrol
Now just cant wait to pick it up.

I posted a thankyou to everyone the night we bought

Jemm
0
FollowupID: 323336

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (13)