Rodeo 2.8 turbo reliability/economy

Submitted: Saturday, Jan 13, 2007 at 02:44
ThreadID: 41164 Views:13188 Replies:6 FollowUps:5
This Thread has been Archived
Comments please, both good and bad.
Are they problematic gas guzzlers , or was I just lucky?
As Stephen M asked me, (and I couldn't answer), , were there good and bad years?
Ours was a '94 model. Disasterous turbo lag. All else superb. I stop. JH
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Member - Jeff H (QLD) - Saturday, Jan 13, 2007 at 02:53

Saturday, Jan 13, 2007 at 02:53
Damn! I've done it again.
The above post referred to the reliability/economy of the 2.8L Rodeos, TF series perhaps?
Thanks for your patience. Dumbo.
AnswerID: 215052

Follow Up By: guzzi - Saturday, Jan 13, 2007 at 07:18

Saturday, Jan 13, 2007 at 07:18
Jeff,
The turbo lag is pretty bad on these from the factory, however it is easily fixed.
They will benefit from a 2.5 inch exhaust with a free flowing muffler and an adjustment to the boost aneroid on the fuel pump.
The aneroid adjustment supplies more fuel in the lower rev range, this produces more exhaust gas which spins up the turbo quicker which supplies higher boost at lower rpm. Combine this with a free flowing exhaust and you all but eliminate turbo lag and driveability is what it should have been from the factory. It will also give around another 11KW at the rear wheels.
In normal driveing this doesnt effect fuel economy to any great extent, still around 9.5 to 11 ltr to 100 km, sand driveing or heavy towing is around 13 to 13.5 ltr 100km.
As to your other question regarding reliability, mines a 1994 and so far so good. Ive had it 5 yrs and only changed things like wheel and axle bearings, radiator due to damage/age, hoses,brake pads/shoes and the clutch, clutch master and slave cylinders and CV boots.
Nothing out of the ordinary for a 13 year old truck with 220,000km on it.
I'd call it reliable.

pete
0
FollowupID: 475343

Follow Up By: Member - Graham F (QLD) - Saturday, Jan 13, 2007 at 08:46

Saturday, Jan 13, 2007 at 08:46
Hi Jeff,
When I first got my 96 D/C 2.8TD I always reckoned it was a bit like your 94, the way you have described it.
I ended up putting a 2 and a half inch system, a snorkel and an intercooler on mine, that made quite a difference.
I then had the fuel pump resealed, and when came back it was worse than before the add ons, Bloke who did job reckons he didn't change any settings.
So i percerviered, ended up taking it to another bloke, he made a small adjustment and holly molly what a rocket and what p----d me off was at the time i was passing it on to my young bloke.
For Steve M, Your wife will have no troubles with leg room mate I'm over 6 foot and we've travelled Thousands of K's in the Rodeo.
Cheers with Beers
Franga
0
FollowupID: 475349

Reply By: handy - Saturday, Jan 13, 2007 at 07:57

Saturday, Jan 13, 2007 at 07:57
had a 96 mod for 5yrs and i only had trouble with the centre bearing on the tail shaft. i used to load it right up and flog it on big trips and never gave a wimper.
only reason i sold it was to pay for a new 4stroke outboard.
AnswerID: 215057

Reply By: furph - Saturday, Jan 13, 2007 at 08:41

Saturday, Jan 13, 2007 at 08:41
Rcecently went out with a R/E agent to look at a rather rough/steep bush block. His Rodeo is a current mod. trayback (3.0ld ?)
Access was through a fairly deep river crossing and that is where I noticed the first indications of its limits. In 1st H it "surged" badly over rocks and needed 2nd.L to negotiate what in a Pat./LC would have been simple. Then in the steep stuff it was almost a total disaster. Without turbo boost the engine simply bogged down, 2000rpm and on boost it had rocks flying out the back and very erratic forward travel with plenty of "pig rooting" (range of gears used)
There was 3 on board (me in the middle) not much to hang onto and a very uncomfortable day out.
My assessment, they look better than they are.
AnswerID: 215059

Follow Up By: Member - Graham F (QLD) - Saturday, Jan 13, 2007 at 09:45

Saturday, Jan 13, 2007 at 09:45
Hay Furph
The hammer maybe the tool that does the damage, but its the person holding the handle that makes it behave the way it does.

Cheers with Beers
Franga
0
FollowupID: 475359

Reply By: big fella - Saturday, Jan 13, 2007 at 11:33

Saturday, Jan 13, 2007 at 11:33
hi jeff my rodeo i have had for 5 years now and could not fault it. I was told on good advice by a 4wd mechanic and tour operated that it would be better than a hilux non turbo at the time as they have a little more get up and go.my wife and i traveled from perth back to sydney over 4 months wiyh no hassles
I have put taller tyres on it and had the speedo recalibrated an about the only thing i would like to do now is put a locker in the front and then i know i would be able to go any place the patrols or toyotas can go at the moment i can only go 90% of the places

Regards BigFella
AnswerID: 215089

Reply By: Member - Jeff H (QLD) - Saturday, Jan 13, 2007 at 13:43

Saturday, Jan 13, 2007 at 13:43
Thank you for your responses; so far so good.
Special thanks to Guzzi - if only I'd known! Still, may help others. Jeff.H.
AnswerID: 215104

Reply By: mike w (WA) - Saturday, Jan 13, 2007 at 22:05

Saturday, Jan 13, 2007 at 22:05
No problems with my TF except for the abuse that I have caused it. On my second now, 2002 2.8 Td, 155k on the clock. Only major repairs has been a new starter motor (ingress of water), brakes, and the injectors (due to wrongful diagnosis by mechanic). Some other small bits here and there such as thermo fan for aircon, brake pads etc. Turbo lag, I guess so, havent driven too many other turbo vehicles so I wouldnt really know the difference (except for a wrx tweeked to run 16psi boost with in cab boost controller- WHAT A CAR TO DRIVE :))

Gets on average 9.8-10 km per litre normal running, and gets down around 8ish on heavy going. Recent trip at xmas, fully loaded with steel canopy, camping gear, included 600km bitumen, and 200km sand work with tyres at 18psi, avg fuel consumption for trip was 8.2km per litre.

Previous rodeo was a 96 2.8 Td single cab. Good vehicle, traded in for the 'family sized rodeo' with 320k on the clock. Replaced on that starter, front bearings, clutch brake master and a few little bits. Turbo ran at 12 psi (factory is 10) and boy was it sweet. Enough get up and go to pull out, and overtake in 5th gear at 100km+. I will get around to doing it in the current rodeo, need to get around to installing a boost gauge first.

Friends 94 ran at 16psi from 100k, engine required rebuild at about 390k- not bad run when the engine is not designed to run at those pressures.
AnswerID: 215165

Follow Up By: Member - Jeff H (QLD) - Saturday, Jan 13, 2007 at 22:43

Saturday, Jan 13, 2007 at 22:43
Mike, sweet news. All reports are, so far, as I'd hoped.
We bought the 3L same time as your second 2.8 (apparently). Fortunately we seem to have a transition model, more old than new.
Will MM to you sometime.
Thanks for your input. Jeff H.
0
FollowupID: 475462

Follow Up By: mike w (WA) - Sunday, Jan 14, 2007 at 20:47

Sunday, Jan 14, 2007 at 20:47
2002 wa sthe year of the transition. I had the option of the 3L, but ummed and arged due to it being a new engine, new model.
0
FollowupID: 475574

Sponsored Links