nissan patrol 4.8 stl for towing a caravan/boat

Thanks Beatit,
How big is the weight of.. whatever you tow, and what sort of consumption do you get over long (1000km+). say Townsville to cape.

Sorry for the delay I'm currently on hols in Cairns. I've towed my camper trailer approx 1500Kg for 14,000 K to the Kimberley and back via the Simpson to average 4.2 overall. Towed my Bushtracker to Peak Hill (over 1,000) to do a little better. The BT would have been between 2500 to 3000Kg.

Kind regards

"Cruiser is a much more comfortable car to travel in" can you elaborate on that as I never travel long-distance on Cruiser
( lc100 or lc200?). ??

100 and i got 6kpl towing 2.8tonne Brisbane to Yamba in a hurry was up to 120 in places.

Checked prise of conversion : 4900 - 5500 Is it expensive or a norm? couple of LPG places sad there,s no kits for 2008 gu.?

Price for a injected LPG in Melbourne is around $4500.

$4900 (I'm assuming you live in Townsville) sounds OK.

The Old Man's is the old style "mixer" system and he has had one backfire which blew the top off the airbox.

It's all about economics. Work out the cost to fit it, L/100 km on LPG versus diesel and factor in the cost of each fuel. Then compare the purchase price of, say, a 100 series TD. Add it all up and work out what works best for you. Take into account how long you plan to keep the vehicle.

I say compare the 100 series because I believe that is the only viable option with the required power and torque to do the job. IMHO either of the Patrol diesels are vastly underpowered to tow that size van adequately.

Others will differ. If you are happy to grind up hills at 40 km/h then a Patrol diesel will work.

The 4.8 on LPG towing a 21 foot van at 100 km/h will use 30 to 33 L/100km.

Cheers,

Jim.

I agree with you jomahk you need a vehicle with loads of torque down in the rev range not up high like a petrol engine.

Compare the diesel Patrol against the Jeep and the Disco:

Patrol 4.8

180kw @ 4,800rpm
400nm torque @ 3,600 rpm

Disco 3

2.7l V6 common rail diesel
440nm of torque @ 1,900 rpm; 140kw

Jeep

3.0l V6 common rail diesel
510nm of torque @ 1600 - 2400 rpm
160kw @ 3500rpm

Much better fuel consumption out of both the Disco and Jeep and both will do a better job of towing a big van, big torque down low is a necessity, particularly when towing something with a few tonne of weight.

Hi Roscoe

The 4800 patrol has a wider powerband and better torque down low than most of those figures you quoted - its also only the latest version that have dropped torque to 400 all the early ones to 2006 I think had 420.

What makes them good though is that they don't have to wait to come "on turbo" - the 400nm torque is there down to 1000 rpm and they rev out to over 5000rpm.

They have no hope to match the diesels consumption figures though.

Robin,

It's interesting that to 400nm is there at 1,000 revs in a petrol engine. According to the Nissan site it's not there until 3,600 rpm.

The Jeep has a Variable Geometry Turbo (Merc engine though) which basically means the turbo is working at idle so there is very little turbo lag.

However, since I put a sports system on the vehicle matched with a K&N air filter I've found that with this type of turbo if I start off by a light touch on the accelerator enough to get the vehicle moving then jump on it there is no lag the acceleration is instant.

As a matter of interest I've been using the new BP Ultimate Diesel fuel and it seems to have made a further improvement. I've only put a couple of tanks through the engine so far but according to the engine management system it seems to be consistently using .3 of a litre less per 100k @ 110k on the highway to Brisbane.

I did use the premium 98 petrol in the 4.7 V8 I previously had and I consistently got 100k more out of a tank.

Hi Roscoe

the 400nm at 1000 only refers to the 2001-2006 ones with 420nm not the lastest shown on site, its a very flat response but not that good.

Sounds like yours is working well with the new fuel - should get my uni-chip retuned with 98 fuel to actually or at less the readily available 95 as I could use the extra range.