Patrol 4.8 Petrol Vs 3.0Turbo Diesel?

Submitted: Sunday, Sep 15, 2002 at 00:00
ThreadID: 1982 Views:2257 Replies:4 FollowUps:2
This Thread has been Archived
Patrol Lovers, Can you help me decide between the lusty 4.8l Petrol Patrol and the 3.0 Turbo Diesel? I figure that they are both great off-road weapons and near equal in that test, so here are my 2 main questions:

1. How good is the 3.0 diesel when overtaking on the open road?
2. What are the "real" fuel consumption figures that owners of the 4.8l petrol are experiencing?

Thanks for your advice
Mike
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Rick - Sunday, Sep 15, 2002 at 00:00

Sunday, Sep 15, 2002 at 00:00
Peruse the Patrol 4WD site:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Patrol4WD

Ask your Q here - there are many owners that can give a view worth listening to.

Cheers

Rick
AnswerID: 6636

Reply By: Mikea - Monday, Sep 16, 2002 at 00:00

Monday, Sep 16, 2002 at 00:00
Thanks Rick, Regards, Mike
AnswerID: 6637

Reply By: sean - Wednesday, Sep 18, 2002 at 00:00

Wednesday, Sep 18, 2002 at 00:00
The 3.0 litre has good usable power and is no slug - I have one. I would suggest you take each for a long test drive and then again and again if required and decide that way. Thats what I did.

Sean
AnswerID: 6757

Follow Up By: Mikea - Wednesday, Sep 18, 2002 at 00:00

Wednesday, Sep 18, 2002 at 00:00
Thanks Sean. Tell me a little more about your testdrives and usage with the wagon. How long have you had the 3.0
Mike
0
FollowupID: 3032

Reply By: sean - Thursday, Sep 19, 2002 at 00:00

Thursday, Sep 19, 2002 at 00:00
Mike
I have had the wagon since May 2000 and done 50,000 ks. It tows well, sits all day on any speed up to 130km/h and is a very good vehicle. Use is mainly highway (I live in NT) and have done alot of dirt roads.
Economy with roof rack is around 13.9 l/100km. Towing a 16 ft poptop I get about 16-17 litres per 100km at 100 km/h and this goes down to 18-19 l;itres per 100km if I sit on 110.
Best (real world) economy is around 12 litres per 100km.
I have roof rack, BFG's and snorkel.

I am very happy with the vehicle but next time I will have another look at the 4.2 for the inherent better reliability (no electrics required to run motor). Mine let me down at 20,000 ks when the alternator rubbed through on the ac pipe and shorted the charge to the battery. The vehicle just stopped.
Also had a problem with bad fuel blocking the fuel filter that caused the engine to lose power - initially motor was coughing at higher revs then 1500ks later did not have eenought power tot drive over 100km/h. I was along way out of Darwiin and when I got there the computer could not isolate the fault. Changing of all filters fixed the problem.

I would not consider a petrol due to the range that I need. I still get 14 km/100ks over dirt and through miles of deep bulldust. Its doesnt really vary much at all. Range is very good.


Sean
AnswerID: 6778

Follow Up By: Mikea - Thursday, Sep 19, 2002 at 00:00

Thursday, Sep 19, 2002 at 00:00
Sean, Thanks mate. Your message was exactly the kind of real-world, honest info that I was after. I'm looking forward to my first test drive of the 3.0 when I get back to Australia next month. Thanks again. Regards, Mike
0
FollowupID: 3040

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (13)