Tuesday, Dec 04, 2007 at 20:13
Well I wouldnt put it all in the van as there are both weight and space restrictions.
Also some stuff is much easier carried and accessable from the back of a 4by. Dont fancy running back to the van to get a drink out of the Waeco.
I wasnt comparing the two. I was stating why the people changed and the car was only 4 months old. Admittedly a bad choice.
The original post was asking about towing a van of the same weight as
mine.
I would therefore suggest a Cruiser or a big engined Patrol would be a safer tow vehicle than the Kia.
Also it is much less stressful on both the vehicle and the driver if you are towing in the mid range of capacity rather that at the extreme top end of it.
A bit like a fully loaded Mini trying to keep up with a V8 at 100kph. The Mini would be ringing its guts out while the V8 is just cruising. Which would last the longest???
To me reliability and comfort is a bit more important than outright economy.
Also in the remote chance I might need attention to the Cruiser, parts service and dealer availablility is a big factor as in this day and age of electronics etc, staying with the mainstream can be advantageous. Eg Neighbour dinged a mag wheel on the Kia Took 4 days to get one freighted out.
Plenty of Cruisers around to borrow or buy one off.
Its horses for courses and everyone is different but I had a 3.0 Patrol and bought a van which was 100kg too heavy so had to buy the Cruiser and I couldnt be happier.
Much better to ride in, goes better ( bigger motor) Not a lot heavier on fuel considering.
Servicing costs are similar within reason, most diesels have more expensive service costs so presumably the Kia is the same especially with a hitech common rail with much closer tolerances etc. Just my rant for the day
FollowupID:
538670