new 200 landcruiser

Submitted: Tuesday, Jan 15, 2008 at 20:02
ThreadID: 53526 Views:9634 Replies:10 FollowUps:38
This Thread has been Archived
hi ,all any feed back from owners off the new landcruiser 200 series. started thinking of trading into one of these beasts .are you all happy with your new cruisers
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Member - Graham H (QLD) - Tuesday, Jan 15, 2008 at 20:09

Tuesday, Jan 15, 2008 at 20:09
Heard a rumour today that some anre blowing rear main seals. Couldnt pin down if it was petrol or diesel.
Was one of those " A mate who works for a dealer in Melbourne told me" type rumours so no guarantees as to authenticity
AnswerID: 281828

Follow Up By: V8Diesel - Tuesday, Jan 15, 2008 at 21:07

Tuesday, Jan 15, 2008 at 21:07
Maybe he'd just finished an icecream?
0
FollowupID: 546192

Follow Up By: Boobook2 - Tuesday, Jan 15, 2008 at 22:18

Tuesday, Jan 15, 2008 at 22:18
Was it a penguin?
0
FollowupID: 546221

Follow Up By: Member - andrew B (Kununurra) - Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 at 09:04

Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 at 09:04
LOL haven't heard that one for a while
0
FollowupID: 546528

Reply By: Member - Shane D (QLD) - Tuesday, Jan 15, 2008 at 21:09

Tuesday, Jan 15, 2008 at 21:09
I'm not an owner, but I have heard some discontent with the double overdrive auto's not selecting highest gear until it gets to 100/110kph, making it almost useless having.
Shane
AnswerID: 281842

Reply By:- Tuesday, Jan 15, 2008 at 21:29

Tuesday, Jan 15, 2008 at 21:29
If your ego- nothing personal! - can wait 12 - 18 months you will find you get more goodies fitted as standard, especially to the diesel, KDSS, crawl control, etc.

Normal Toyota practise to provide a minimum at launch, get the early buyers, then add more as the cycle life continues to keep them coming back. Often price drops as well.

Hope this helps

Rolande
AnswerID: 281848

Reply By: Eric Experience - Tuesday, Jan 15, 2008 at 21:59

Tuesday, Jan 15, 2008 at 21:59
Lees
I know nothing about the mechanicals. but there is a big problem with the load carrying capacity. If you are in the habit of carrying any gear with you the vehicle will be overloaded and therefore not legally insured. Eric
AnswerID: 281855

Follow Up By: TerraFirma - Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 14:17

Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 14:17
WTF Eric..? How about if you overload the vehicle over it's maximum carrying capacity , that applies to any vehicle. There is no problem with the new Cruiser in this regard.
0
FollowupID: 546346

Follow Up By: Eric Experience - Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 21:53

Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 21:53
TerraFirma.
Please don't shoot the messenger. A large government department is looking for a fix for the load problem.the engineers doing the speck's for fit out for these vehicles found that with full tanks a bull bar and 5 adults on board they were over GVM. with nothing in the back cargo space. That is not a problem to Jo average because most vehicles are overloaded on trips so nothing has changed. But organisations who have to answer to a coroner if there is a fatal care about these things. Toyota may bring out a heavy rear axle one day but that is just a guess. Eric.
0
FollowupID: 546468

Follow Up By: Gone Bush (WA) - Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 22:49

Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 22:49
"A large govt dept"... and that would be...?

I hope they are looking for a fix for every other family size 4wd wagon because they all have the same issue with the load you mentioned.
I'm glad I ain't too scared to be lazy
- Augustus McCrae (Lonesome Dove)

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 546487

Follow Up By: Gone Bush (WA) - Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 at 11:20

Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 at 11:20
It's the Ministry for Silly Walks.
I'm glad I ain't too scared to be lazy
- Augustus McCrae (Lonesome Dove)

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 546541

Follow Up By: TerraFirma - Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 at 11:23

Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 at 11:23
Eric, OK your the Messenger..! How does an 8 seater with a towing capacity of 3.5 tonnes suddenly go over it's GVM with only 5 people in the car..?? Plse..? Whoever gave you the message is sadly illinformed. As has been mentioned in previous posts the GVM would be similar to the 100 series etc etc..
0
FollowupID: 546542

Follow Up By: Eric Experience - Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 at 13:57

Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 at 13:57
TerraFirma.
As Gone bush says its a common problem. The best way for you to get the truth is to get hold of a vehicle and fill the tanks and get 5 adults in plus the weight of a bull bar and then weigh it. I was told that the 8 seater did not have the second tank fitted when presented for ADR approval.. Let us know how you go. Eric
0
FollowupID: 546574

Follow Up By: Gone Bush (WA) - Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 at 14:15

Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 at 14:15
It's easy to do some basic sums to see how this would effect most family 4wds.

5 blokes @ 110kgs each = 550kgs
140 litres fuel is "about" 100kgs
there's 650 kgs as it is and that is an average payload figure.

Whack a caravan on the back with towball weight of 200kgs and suddenly it's 750kgs.

Mind you, I don't know if manufacturers calculate GVM (and payload) with full or empty tanks.

Whack on a bullbar, say alloy, at 30kgs, 6 cartons bleep etc etc.
I'm glad I ain't too scared to be lazy
- Augustus McCrae (Lonesome Dove)

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 546579

Follow Up By: Boobook2 - Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 at 15:29

Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 at 15:29
Gone Bush, the maths are correct but keep in mind that the fuel is not included in the payload figure, a full tank is included in the "kerb weight" figure. So is a nominal 75 Kg Driver.

"Kerb weight is the total weight of a vehicle with standard equipment, all necessary operating consumables (such as motor oil and coolant), a full tank of fuel, and a 75Kg driver."

I think diesel is a bit heavier than petrol coming in at about 120kg.

Payload is GVM less Kerb weight.
Given a LC 200 payload of 600kg and a bull bar of about 50Kg.

That's 4 passengers at 138kg ea working for the department. Or it could be 3 passengers at 80kg and one guy who was 210kg I suppose. ( Plus the 75Kg driver of course, Slim.)

I think the Department in question needs to look at staff weights not vehicle weights. I have a bit more on this rumour, it is the department of health and fitness.

0
FollowupID: 546591

Follow Up By: Boobook2 - Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 at 15:31

Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 at 15:31
Wait Wait Wait.

It is all becoming clear to me.

The employees are blowing the rear seals.
0
FollowupID: 546592

Follow Up By: Eric Experience - Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 at 15:43

Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 at 15:43
Gone bush.
Yes I just did the sums in case my senior engineering mate is'' poorly informed''. the tare is 2700 with 10 litres of fuel. GVM is 3300.
The full tanks adds 120 kg the steel bull bar is approx 60kg. the average ausy male is 75 kg naked say 80 clothed. so 5x80 = 400+120+50 + 2700 =2270 That leaves us with 30kg spare. add a wallet and a phone for each bloke and we are very close. Judging by the reports on these thousands of people will buy them and fill them with junk, add a van and cruise around thinking they are legal and insured. "Ignorance is bliss" Eric.
0
FollowupID: 546596

Follow Up By: TerraFirma - Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 at 15:51

Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 at 15:51
Let me tell you on the insurance issue you are opening Pandoras Box. I for one don't believe this is an issue, how long have we been overloading our vehicles according to the maths you correctly outline.? Everybody does it, correct me if I am wrong when has a precedent been set for the average family 4WD been knocked back on an insurance payout.?

The whole thing makes for interesting discussion but it's nothing new to the 200 series, we've just re-opened a very old and existing Pandora's Box.

0
FollowupID: 546598

Follow Up By: Gone Bush (WA) - Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 at 16:37

Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 at 16:37
If your insurance company is faced with all the payouts from storms on the east coast and they see a way of getting out of paying your vehicle/caravan claim because you're overloaded?

What do you think they will do?

Ever heard of a benevolent insurance company?
I'm glad I ain't too scared to be lazy
- Augustus McCrae (Lonesome Dove)

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 546601

Follow Up By: Boobook2 - Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 at 16:39

Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 at 16:39
Tare weight is different to Kerb weight. It includes coolants, oils etc but excludes fuel and driver.

Toyota's unloaded figures are Kerb weight, not tare.
0
FollowupID: 546602

Follow Up By: TerraFirma - Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 at 17:09

Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 at 17:09
Don't worry ""Gone Bush"" Insurance companies will be paying , lets not talk "possibles" rather than probables. If this were the case , and as I said before, where are the precedents..? The 200 series overloading scenario is no different to any other family 4WD overloaded.

This whole topic has gone way off focus here, I think the question was , would somebody buy a 200 series..? The answer off course is yes, it all got clouded when we got a list of issues with the 200 series, when in reality there are no "REAL"issues.

From blown seals to overweight government workers, otherwise known as "SEALS" the 200 series will prove to be a fine vehicle if you have the freight...

0
FollowupID: 546604

Reply By: Gone Bush (WA) - Tuesday, Jan 15, 2008 at 23:14

Tuesday, Jan 15, 2008 at 23:14
I have a 200 series diesel GXL with KDSS. There are a lot of posts on a lot of forums presenting a huge amount of DISinformation. Information which is not only incorrect but it is stupid and reflects very poorly on the Poster.

Load Carrying Capacity. Nothing wrong with it and similar to the 100 series, GQ/GU Patrol etc.

The only thing blowing a seal is another seal.

5th and 6th gear overdrive. The gearbox "learns" how to behave from its driver. Press test vehicles have been thrashed and the gearbox says I will hold the revs higher than normal so I won't change into OD until late, ie, above 110kph or so. Mine is driven mainly by my wife and it changes into overdrive at highway speeds and sits happily on 1650rpm.

One poster on a caravan forum said that the KDSS suspension is rubbish when a van is hitched up because the headlights end up pointing at the stars. For goodness sake, the KDSS is all about wheel articulation, not load carrying capacity. The springs do that. And in that regard the 200 is no different than a 100, or a GU, GQ or any 4wd wagon produced over the last 20 years. All the rear springs have to be assisted or replaced to carry a load.

This post actually got a respondent demanding that govt agencies should step in because Toyota is telling lies to the public. PUH-lease.

On LCOOL a poster said he's heard that the V8s are blowing up. A respondent with brains rang BritZ and they said they have over 200 of the new diesel V8 cruisers and there has not been a single problem other than the hirers rolling them (!!).

I originally had a VX on order but wanted the subtank and could quite happily do without the sunroof and leather so I downgraded and got one of the few GXLs that came with KDSS already fitted.

As I said, it's my wife's vehicle (I have a 70 series trayback with the TDV8). She went out of a Ford XR6 Turbo and just loves the Cruiser. It's gold so I got her some personal plates which limit me taking it out (HONEY BUN).

All in all, lees fishin, if you want to get a 200, go for it. You will not be disappointed. Don't listen to the ill-informed rumour mongers.
I'm glad I ain't too scared to be lazy
- Augustus McCrae (Lonesome Dove)

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

AnswerID: 281866

Follow Up By: wdric - Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 01:45

Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 01:45
Nuff said
0
FollowupID: 546253

Follow Up By: Kev & Darkie - Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 06:42

Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 06:42
HONEY BUN??

Your just wanting to drive the 200 now with those plates LOL

When are you trading the 70 series for the F150?? Next year??

Cheers Kev
Russell Coight:
He was presented with a difficult decision: push on into the stretching deserts, or return home to his wife.

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 546261

Follow Up By: Boobook2 - Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 07:27

Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 07:27
I don't own one yet but have one on order and have researched the 200 a lot, here and overseas.

Gone Bush is right. almost all the criticism if based on "I heard from my Aunty's hairdresser" type stuff from people who don't own them. The people who own them are over the moon and or have some legetimite gripes.

The GVM / load issue is a storm in a teacup. Sure it is not much but as Gone bush says it is basicaly the same as a 100 or GU. Only way around it that I can see is buy a Landrover 110 which can carry a ton.

RE the second tank both LRA and longranger are currently developing new aux tanks with capacities from about 50l to 180l.

I trawl the forums and have never seen any seal issues apart from the one in the video below.

My review would be

Awsome 4wd, very safe, unbelievably quite on the road, great articulation, real pleasure to drive, and tons of space. Good range of accessories due in Feb / March. I have seen it off road in videos and the TC and KDSS works a treat. If you can get the diesel , do.

Downsides are bloody expensive, departure angle sucks, off road tyre selection for 17" is a bit limited atm, possible (solvable) issues with larger tyres at front, and mine is still in a factory.

My advice is
a)drive it
b)check out lcool where *owners* make comments
c)ignore all " I heard" and carrying capacity posts unless they come from an owner.
d)buy your bank manager a nice red.
e)Press hard with the pen on the form, there are 3 copies.


Re the 6th gear issue, It is hard to say unless you have one for an extended time, as Gone bush points out with the AI you are bound to get higher shift changes in demo vehicles (I for one have the foot pinned to the floor a lot in a test drive). But I think there is something to the issue. I think on a good day it just slips into 6th at around 100k, on a bad day 110 - 130. Jury is out for me. I do know it was still on 1500 - 1650 rpm at 100 - 110k when I drove it after doing a few 0 - 100 and 80- 120 tests.
0
FollowupID: 546268

Follow Up By: Gone Bush (WA) - Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 08:47

Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 08:47
Kev, I know, HONEY BUN. It's sad the things we do.

As far as the F150 goes, yep, I'd trade 'em both tomorrow.
I'm glad I ain't too scared to be lazy
- Augustus McCrae (Lonesome Dove)

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 546290

Follow Up By: Member - Tim - Stratford (VIC) - Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 09:11

Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 09:11
Gone Bush,

Good write-up, and no, I'm not going to mention the no plates :-)

Just compared the 200 GXL TTD -vs- Patrol ST Auto re capacity. The Cruiser is listed as 600 to 670kgs carrying capacity depending on options.

The Patrol ST Auto - 600kgs and the Manual 605kgs.

Reckon everyone would be overloaded these days!

(weights taken from Nissan and Toyota Web sites)

Tim
0
FollowupID: 546299

Follow Up By: Pavo - Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 09:35

Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 09:35
I also want to post some facts.

Gone bush says "Nothing wrong with it and similar to the 100 series, GQ/GU Patrol etc." when mentioning the weight capacity.

Boobook2 says "Sure it is not much but as Gone bush says it is basicaly the same as a 100 or GU. Only way around it that I can see is buy a Landrover 110 which can carry a ton."

I just want to add some more information - facts, not misinformation. The Discovery 3 in TDV6 form (I just chose this model for the example) can carry around 750 - 870kg depending on configuration. I got the figures using the TARE and GVM weights from LandRover's website.

The Prado can carry 730kg-930kg depending on config (once again, using Toyota's specs).

So some misleading posting has been done above to imply there are no other options or that the 200's capacity is similar to other vehicles.

I'm sure it's an awesome vehicle so I don't want this post to be classed as one of those 'stupid' posts, but I had to post some more facts.

Pete
0
FollowupID: 546305

Follow Up By: Gone Bush (WA) - Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 09:48

Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 09:48
No such implication in my post at all Pavo.

All I said was this:

Load Carrying Capacity. Nothing wrong with it and similar to the 100 series, GQ/GU Patrol etc.
I'm glad I ain't too scared to be lazy
- Augustus McCrae (Lonesome Dove)

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 546310

Follow Up By: Gone Bush (WA) - Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 10:00

Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 10:00
As a matter of fact Pete, I think your post is really off.

Mate, I don't want a Forum argument but for you to say that Boobook or I implied that there are "no other options" than a 200 series is crap and "that the 200's capacity is similar to other vehicles", well it IS.

I mentioned 100 series, GU & GQ Patrols, Boobook mentioned Landrover 110. Heck you even quoted us.

Where are the implications in our posts that you seem to see as misleading?
I'm glad I ain't too scared to be lazy
- Augustus McCrae (Lonesome Dove)

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 546315

Follow Up By: Pavo - Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 10:45

Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 10:45
Firstly, sorry. My post might appear as if there is some tone - it's definitely not my intention.

I didn't say that you implied there are no other options (I wasn't specific in my response, because I was replying generically to both of those quotes), but boobook2 did. Sure, he mentioned the 110, but as the 'only way around it'. I just wanted to show 2 other cars which are midway between the Cruiser/Patrol and the 110. By not including those options, to me, was an important omission. It's pedantic I know, but there was another way around it, other than the 110.

The only reason I included your quote also, was because you included 'etc' after you mentioned "100 series, GQ/GU Patrol". I know it's being pedantic, but the 'etc' to me was important because it is saying the the 200 is comparable to the 100, GU/GQ and other 4wds. And to me, it's not comparable to the Prado or Discovery and while you didn't specifically state those two vehicles, the 'etc' does imply a broad range. Well, to me it does.

I hope that I have cleared it up a little. I have seen a lot of your posts on the 200 and I can see you put in a lot of effort to be accurate so I don't want to make it appear as though I don't appreciate that effort. When I said "So some misleading posting has been done above", that might have been a little harsh so I apologise for that, but my only intention is to bring out even more facts regarding the load specs.

Thanks,
Pete
0
FollowupID: 546324

Follow Up By: wdric - Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 12:44

Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 12:44
If we forget what the specs on the paper say for a moment.

If all the OE members were given the chance to stand in line and be given a vehicle to go away on a trip with 2 or 4 people, and tow a 2.5 t van for 50% of the time. Which line do you think would be the longest if the vehicles were a 200 series, GU, Prado and land rover (and any others which are sold in Australia)?

I know which line up would be the longest.
And I know which line up would be the shortest.
Not sure about in between though.

A forum is a forum, but when it comes to making a serious decision on a purchase, that’s a bit different and the sales figures in 12 months will ultimately show which car has got the nod.
0
FollowupID: 546331

Follow Up By: Gone Bush (WA) - Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 13:40

Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 13:40
Thanks Pete, I climbed out of my pram a bit fast too.

Maybe we can continue this with a beer or two around a campfire sometime.

cheers
I'm glad I ain't too scared to be lazy
- Augustus McCrae (Lonesome Dove)

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 546339

Follow Up By: Robin Miller - Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 13:42

Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 13:42
Hi BooBook2

Just noting your comment about great articulation , do you know of any hard data like ramp figures etc that support this.

In my checking I got the impression that they aren't as good as 100 series with live axles however I can't find any real data other than testers comment so far

Robin
Robin Miller

Member
My Profile  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 546340

Follow Up By: Boobook2 - Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 15:48

Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 15:48
Hopefully i can address 2 issues in one post.

Firstly to Pete re GVM and Payload.

you said "I didn't say that you implied there are no other options (I wasn't specific in my response, because I was replying generically to both of those quotes), but boobook2 did. Sure, he mentioned the 110, but as the 'only way around it'. I just wanted to show 2 other cars which are midway between the Cruiser/Patrol and the 110. By not including those options, to me, was an important omission. It's pedantic I know, but there was another way around it, other than the 110."

The point is that Lees Fishin asked about the 200 and there was a post saying "there is a big problem with the load carrying capacity".
To put a perspective on this, it is about the same as most other vehicles in its class and I specifically mentioned the 100 and the GU.

You then chose to quote PART of what I said ie 'only way around it' ...is a 110.

However what I SAID is "Only way around it that I can see is buy a Landrover 110 which can carry a ton".

Sure I didn't mention an exhaustive list of carrying capacities. I could have included Kenworth trucks if I intended to do that. I have never considered a PRADO, Disco 3 etc so I didnt look em up. Perhaps if you are so upset about it, you have left out a few too.

All I wanted to do was help a guy who asked a question and was being misled IMHO.


0
FollowupID: 546361

Follow Up By: Boobook2 - Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 15:57

Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 15:57
Oops I forgot to answer Robin's question.
Robin, what I am going on is

a) there was a demonstration that a good friend went to at Werribee. It was an internal Toyota pre release demo.

They had a mogul about 600mm high ( about)

They then drove a IFS 100 over it with the front LHS wheel on it.

The Landcruiser's rear LHS wheel was about 5 - 6 inches off the ground.
Then came a Nissan Patrol GU, it's rear wheel was about 2" off the ground.
Lastly a 200. It always had 4 wheels on terra firma.

My friend said he would not have believed it if he didn't see it for himself. That is impressive. They claimed this was due KDSS effectively disconnecting the sway bars.

There was no live axle 100.

I havn't seen any hard data other than that. Everything is is subjective. I have read that it has 200mm better travel at the back with KDSS and 30% better at the front than a IFS 100 whatever that means. ( It would be hard to be worse than a 100 IFS)

Thats it I am afraid.
0
FollowupID: 546364

Follow Up By: Robin Miller - Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 16:36

Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 16:36
Thanks BooBook2 , thats useful information - most of the 4wd mags seem to have given on doing real tests.

Sounds like its up there with the GU , at least with KDSS , and you could always still manually disconnect like with the GU anyway
if you didn't get KDSS

Robin
Robin Miller

Member
My Profile  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 546374

Follow Up By: Boobook2 - Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 at 07:22

Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 at 07:22
Robin take a look at this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_v5SIXKGa0

It looks like a advertorial type thing for the UK market.

Front wheel travel 640mm
Rear wheel travel 690mm

It would be interesting to see how that compares to the 105 and GU, and how it translates into ramp tests.

It shows how KDSS works, Also shows some UK only options like AHC etc.
Also some interesting footage of testing in Aust, US and Oman.
0
FollowupID: 546507

Follow Up By: Robin Miller - Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 at 08:06

Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 at 08:06
Worthwhile Watching that video BooBook2 , it certainly explains the system.

Looks to me like wheel travel is much the same as GU, and more flexible because you don't have to get out and disconnect swaybars.

Once I played with the primitive Nissan kdss type remote disconnecting swaybars , and while it worked well they only
allowed the axle to drop an extra 30mm, but this meant that RTI as least got to 600 + which I believe is needed for general aussie conditions.

Thanks for pointing video out

Robin Miller










Robin Miller

Member
My Profile  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 546514

Follow Up By: Boobook2 - Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 at 09:53

Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 at 09:53
Robin,
I must admit that it is hard to believe that the 200 articulation could get close to the GU. At the rear yes, but at the front it would be an achievment.

As you said, it would be really interesting to have a mag do a real world back to back test, under their conditions.

In my mind though,there is enough evidence that it is a lot better than a IFS 100 and maybe nearly as good as GU or a rigid 100. That is good enough for me for what I do. Add in the TC which is digital and acts quickly, and I think it will be more capable out of the box ( except for approach and departure angles). There is a video of the Aust motor show launch where they had 2 wheels off the ground and it kept going without hesitation, so even if the travel is not as good, it is not as much as aproblem as the 100 in my view.

Disclaimer. This is all my view and while I believe it to be accurate, if the reader doesn't like it stiff bleep . I have not researched every single 4wd for back to back relative comparisons and don't really intend to.

0
FollowupID: 546534

Reply By: Boobook2 - Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 06:53

Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 06:53
Video re blowing seals

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=radqC4aTz0w
AnswerID: 281876

Follow Up By: Gerhardp1 - Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 13:29

Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 13:29
I like that - should be posted in Friday Funnies, it's much better than the cut and paste of American drivel that gets served up :)
0
FollowupID: 546337

Follow Up By: Member - John (Vic) - Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 15:06

Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 15:06
Very Good :-)
VKS737 - Mobile 6352 (Selcall 6352)

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Position  Send Message
Classifieds: Water Tank 55 Litre

0
FollowupID: 546352

Follow Up By: Boobook2 - Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 at 20:13

Thursday, Jan 17, 2008 at 20:13
It cracks me up every time I watch it.
0
FollowupID: 546631

Reply By: Gronk - Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 14:01

Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 14:01
Of course they are all happy with them....I would be too if I could work out how to lay my hands on 80+ grand
AnswerID: 281929

Reply By: TerraFirma - Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 14:27

Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 14:27
The poor old 200 series is already suffering the following syndromes.

1. Tall Poppy Syndrome. (Usually res for Porsche/Ferrari drivers)

2. Jealousy Syndrome.
(It's not fair he should have one, so knock em)

3. Rumour Syndrome
(Every man and his dog has heard something sometime, but nobody can ever prove it..!)

4. Knit pickers syndrome
(Oh and a bit of dust crept into the cabin , can you imagine that.?

5. Oh what a feeling syndrome..!
(You'll only know that after owning a Toyota for many many years)
AnswerID: 281935

Reply By: Member - Pesty (SA) - Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 15:34

Wednesday, Jan 16, 2008 at 15:34
Roachie should be getting his in the near future, and then we will be on daily updates as to how good they are.
But then after 15 years of nissan's anything would put him on cloud nine!!!

Cheers Pesty
AnswerID: 281945

Reply By: lees fishin - Friday, Jan 18, 2008 at 07:24

Friday, Jan 18, 2008 at 07:24
thanks to all that replied! . i,ll be looking into these before i make my mind up. thanks again
AnswerID: 282207

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (14)