jackaroo v gxl cruiser ulp fuel consumption

Submitted: Thursday, Aug 21, 2003 at 16:22
ThreadID: 6732 Views:2457 Replies:12 FollowUps:12
This Thread has been Archived
Starting to narrow down my choice of my forby upgrade.
After looking at diff models in the yard, I'm not going to consider the
explorer any morel, despite the few good reports on them, I find
the finish poor, the room in the back might be long but the height is
unusable! I can stand bent over in my old jack and that's what I want.
Hence jackaroo v cruiser.

Next time your looking in a Ford yard go and check out the movement
of the front and back plastic bumpers! This is a new model too!

To my original query.
After doing the search for info I find that the fuel consumption for petrol
for the two are pretty much the same.
The reports have been on average ~ 20L/100km city driving

If this is the case why go a jackaroo?
I'm looking at around $25K mark, I have seen . . .
1998 Jack SE Auto 110K km $26K push it down to $24K
1997 L'cruiser GXL 40th ann. 80 auto 123K km $32K prob get this down to $28/29K

the later would be worth the extra $3/4K
could do more mods and have access to more aftermarket goodies.

Also the weight of the jack is 1950kg stock
the cruiser is 2183kg stock
the difference of two of my mates in the back!

happy to hear from anyone, in particular those who
have owned both.

cheers
wolf

Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Voxson (Adelaide) - Thursday, Aug 21, 2003 at 16:35

Thursday, Aug 21, 2003 at 16:35
I am so discusted in 20litres per 100km i am selling my 4x4 for a diesel..... Are you sure you wont fall to the same sword?

Also the lack of distance from my fuel range.....

I cant even give it away........_____________________________________________

_____________________________________________
AnswerID: 28614

Reply By: dogart - Thursday, Aug 21, 2003 at 16:42

Thursday, Aug 21, 2003 at 16:42
Voxson hi,

Yes, this is starting to be another consideration that is edging
it's way into my considerations!

I've never had anything to do with diesels or ever driven one.
I notice alot of diesel cruisers blowing heaps of smoke as they take orf.
They seem pretty noisey. If something goes wrong with motor
I've heard that it's big bucks.
I like to have a bit of go off the line too.
And the price for a good low km diesel is pretty high thus
putting me back in the low/mid 90's models.

cheers
AnswerID: 28615

Follow Up By: Member - Peter [SA] - Friday, Aug 22, 2003 at 12:37

Friday, Aug 22, 2003 at 12:37
dogart, dont think that the petrol motor is CHEAP to repair. After owning a diesel I cant see myself going back to a petrol vehicle.
Cheers Peter
0
FollowupID: 19975

Follow Up By: Member - NOBBY - Friday, Aug 22, 2003 at 20:11

Friday, Aug 22, 2003 at 20:11
Dogart.. I have been over on Moreton Island for two weeks and have just caught up with the site. My Jack, on sand averaged 21l/100k ( for two tanks full , soft sand 50% of time). On the highway I get 11-12 and around town 15-16. I don't know where you got 20l/100k but I would reckon if that is right the car would have been driven at Bathurst. I could not be happier with my Jack ( touch wood)
0
FollowupID: 20027

Reply By: Member - Bill- Thursday, Aug 21, 2003 at 17:45

Thursday, Aug 21, 2003 at 17:45
Wolf,

I'd question those fuel numbers, I've had a '98 Jack (3.5) and done trips with blokes in 80 petrols. There is no way they use the same juice, not heaps less, but something like 80-85% of the cruiser. The IZUZU 3.5 has all the fruit to make it efficient (coil pack per plug, variable intake runners etc etc) that most of the others are just catching up to. It was rated the most efficient in it's class when released in '98. Like most petrol V6's fuel consumption is a factor of how it is driven.

If you get the tape out you'll probably find not a big difference inside either.

IMHO these are both vehicles with deserved excellent reputations, the Jack is probably a better handler on the road, the cruiser in the really rough stuff. I doubt you would be unhappy with either and I'm sure no one would talk you out of either. It may come down to what you can find for price and condition.

Regds

Bill
AnswerID: 28620

Reply By: dogart - Thursday, Aug 21, 2003 at 18:21

Thursday, Aug 21, 2003 at 18:21
Thanks Bill,

Another consideration is resale value.
The landcruisers hold there value very well.
I have seen a few concerns from jackaroo owners in this forum
regarding the imminent fall in resale for the jack due them being discontinued.

The extra $3/4K for the cruiser would probably be made up when I go to sell it,
maybe not that much but you can see where I'm going.

cheers
wolf
AnswerID: 28627

Follow Up By: Member - Bill- Thursday, Aug 21, 2003 at 21:37

Thursday, Aug 21, 2003 at 21:37
Wolf,

Few would argue, a 80 in equivalent order to the same age Jack for an extra 3-4K is value. The again, 3/4K is a lot of Jack accessories. IMHO, either way you'll be miles better off than an Explorer

There are a lot of urban myths around though, eg:

If Crusers hold value so well, how come you can get one for only 3/4K more than a Jack? The spread was a lot more than that new. I think you will find the % depn on most popular 4bys about the same once you factor in "options" like alloys and air.

Sounds like you are on the right track, good luck with it.
0
FollowupID: 19918

Reply By: Truckster (Vic) - Thursday, Aug 21, 2003 at 19:59

Thursday, Aug 21, 2003 at 19:59
Jackroo and Cruiser are 2 totally different class cars!

If the jackaroo gets that bad a fuel as a cruser, I wouldnt consider it. The motor is smaller, so is the car and storage space etc, the cruiser would be better value. But I think that those fuel figs are wrong.

YMMV
AnswerID: 28639

Reply By: Williewags- Thursday, Aug 21, 2003 at 21:07

Thursday, Aug 21, 2003 at 21:07
And the Jackaroo has about as good a resale value as a Discovery.....ie very poor.
I,d go with the Tojo.

Willie

Fitzmaurice River NT
AnswerID: 28649

Follow Up By: pathfinder - Friday, Aug 22, 2003 at 09:35

Friday, Aug 22, 2003 at 09:35
personally I think poor resale value is a good reason to buy either a second-hand Disco or Jack. Unlike with Lada Nivas, the poor resale of these vehicles has more to do with perception than reality. For example, most of the quality problems associated with Discos are niggling problems rather than major mechanical problems (such as big end bearings, front diffs and fifth gear problems in some model Cruisers). Therefore for $10-15K k, you could get a good 1990s Tdi and the fuel savings over a Cruiser (even in diesel form) will give you the money to fix any niggling problems. You also get a vehicle that is just as capable offroad, handles better on-road, and has much cheaper parts than a Cruiser. Of course, a GQ Patrol is probably the best vfm highly capable and reliable second-hand 4WD, but I can't get past the comfort and handling of the Disco. I think Cruisers were a strong, good vfm 4WD in the 1980s; unfortunately Toyota are now cashing in on this reputation with excessively priced vehicles and spare parts...
0
FollowupID: 19951

Reply By: Member - Allan - Thursday, Aug 21, 2003 at 23:16

Thursday, Aug 21, 2003 at 23:16
Wolf, If you are looking for a vehicle that you plan to keep for a while, don't get something that might not suit. Resale value is one thing but also consider changeover costs (stamp duty) etc. I would rather go for a 80 series which was couple of years older but low km's & diesel rather than a later model petrol. There are still some good value 94 - 95 models out there. They did not change much between 94 & 97. Cheers
Allan
AnswerID: 28678

Reply By: jackablue - Friday, Aug 22, 2003 at 08:25

Friday, Aug 22, 2003 at 08:25
Im not sure where you are getting 20/100km city driving for a jackaroo. I have a 98 se petrol & the worst I have got was 15.98 & the best being 13.13 city driving. Iv'e been calculating out my fuel since october last year & trialing which service stations offer the best economy.

Regards

Jackablue
AnswerID: 28702

Follow Up By: dogart - Friday, Aug 22, 2003 at 12:59

Friday, Aug 22, 2003 at 12:59
j/blue

these figures come from the posts I have read on this site.
I'm sure you will have a few comments re your figures from other
jack owners, they are pretty damn good.
If these fig's is what you get all the time, can I buy your car!!!

So hows your jack, any probs or advice.
0
FollowupID: 19977

Follow Up By: jackablue - Friday, Aug 22, 2003 at 14:10

Friday, Aug 22, 2003 at 14:10
Haven't had any probs so far except from water coming in from the antenna wire which I siliconed up. Iv'e had it for 2 years, bought it off a mate stock standard. I Go away regularly & have added a few extras, bull bar, ipf lights, cb radio, dual battery, cargo barrier, fridge etc. Like I said Iv'e been doing my own little fuel comparison, thats why I know exactly what my consumption is.

All the best

Jackablue

0
FollowupID: 19983

Follow Up By: dogart - Friday, Aug 22, 2003 at 14:14

Friday, Aug 22, 2003 at 14:14
j/blue

I've got the 84 LS jack, same prob with antenna!
I love the jack and will prob end up getting another.
I was amazed at some of the reports about economy
that's why I asked the question.
Have you done anything suspension wise?

thanks

wolf
0
FollowupID: 19984

Follow Up By: jackablue - Friday, Aug 22, 2003 at 14:34

Friday, Aug 22, 2003 at 14:34
Have been looking at it but still toying with ideas. suspension lift, body lift, larger tyres etc, Iv'e been reading stuff on here for ideas. I don't want to really stiffen the front end to much. Try to keep all tyres on the ground.

Regards

Jackablue
0
FollowupID: 19988

Reply By: Willykj - Friday, Aug 22, 2003 at 14:14

Friday, Aug 22, 2003 at 14:14
Hi,

Just a comment on the quoted fuel consumption.

I have a 99 Jack SE 3.5 L petrol & have kept spreadsheet since day 1. It has now done nearly 90K & my overall average consumption is less then 16 L per 100km. I am a city driver who does a fair amount of 4WD (including sand) and who tows a 17ft poptop van - including many months around Aussie. So most of my work is hard on petrol use.

On "normal" city driving I get around 15L/100km but on a highway trip down to 11/12L/100km without towing.

I am extremely happy with my Jack - cant say about the Cruiser.

Regards, Willy
AnswerID: 28737

Follow Up By: dogart - Friday, Aug 22, 2003 at 14:18

Friday, Aug 22, 2003 at 14:18
Thanlks Willy

I like what I'm reading.
I;ve read that the jack is fantastic for stability on road when towing,
and they were comparing jack/prado/paj.
How's yours?

cheers
wolf
0
FollowupID: 19985

Follow Up By: Willykj - Friday, Aug 22, 2003 at 14:31

Friday, Aug 22, 2003 at 14:31
Hi Wolf,

I have now towed my van for around 25K with the Jack & I cant fault it. The van is extremely stable & it has never given me any worry. It is a single axle van & I only use 2 bar uplifts. On the highway I run at around 100 kmh when safe. It has also been on many dirt roads towing including the full Birdsville Track - just a standard pop top. The van has never swayed or anything.

Trust this helps,
Willy
0
FollowupID: 19986

Reply By: yarda - Tuesday, Aug 26, 2003 at 11:39

Tuesday, Aug 26, 2003 at 11:39
The Jacks are hard to beat, Overall build quality and design is good, and made in japan to boot. My 98 Jack 3.5 Manual gets around 14- 14.5 driven hard around town or in the scrub, and around 12 - 12.5 normal use. last year I took it up to visit my sister in FNQ during summer From my home north of melb, loaded up with heaps of gear to camp along the way, and sitting on 120kph on the highways on hot days of around 37-40 degrees with the aircon on , it didn't miss a beat and returned fuel figures of 11.5 - 12 litres per 100 ks. I purchased mine from the Gov't auctions with 80,000 k on the clock for $19k in mint condition!! it now has racked up 135k and hasn't missed a beat. I fitted a Unifilter foam element and Iridium plugs and noticed a good improvement straight away, future plans include adding a second airbox and intake to give more filter surface area and less restriction, stainless custom headers and 2 1/2 inch exhaust with straight through glass pack mufflers. The ecu will need to be reset after this or i will possibly even fit a unichip and give the full dyno treatment.
I can't justify the extra cost of a cruiser until I need that extra bit of space.

Go the Jack and you will never look back, Brad
AnswerID: 29173

Follow Up By: dogart - Tuesday, Aug 26, 2003 at 12:47

Tuesday, Aug 26, 2003 at 12:47
Yarda

thanks for the info.
It looks like I'm heading for a Jackaroo.
When you look at the price for the year and model you can get
it's tsill a good buy. Cruisers are too expensive for the year.
I'd ge getting into a 97GXL cruiser or a 99 SE/Mont Jack.
If I can get one for ~20K that would ge even better,
then I'd go out and spend 5K on doing it up.

Re your air filter options.
I've always thought, is it possible to get a diesel bonnet
(cos they look so damn cool with the a/intake) or just got one of
the air scoops. Do some plumbing and turn it into a ram inlet.
Has this or can it be done? Not sure but it would be interesting.

cheers
wolf
0
FollowupID: 20323

Reply By: yarda - Tuesday, Aug 26, 2003 at 13:43

Tuesday, Aug 26, 2003 at 13:43
Hey Wolf, The vent scoop on the TD is for passing air through the intercooler core only, It would be possible to use a scoop to ram feed the air box but you would have to be very careful about any water splashes coming across the bonnet, so it would not be suitable for a forby. The reason i am going to open the intake up even further is that when you give it a good free rev under the bonnet you can see the airbox suck in slightly, so there is an obvious negative pressure and restriction in the standard airbox system. As for the exhaust there is a restrictor inside each side of the collector pipes which i assume is there to minimise a resonance in the stock system, Bruce Garland makes custom headers which give around 20 kw increase and i suspect they dont have any sort of restrictor in them. If you can get any footage of the past few years Finke Desert race in the NT there is one part where The Garland Jackaroo is belting down a sand track doing 7000 rpm in 5th gear which was about 220 ks from memory, oh what a glorious sight and sound..

Good luck with your choice, Brad
AnswerID: 29184

Follow Up By: dogart - Tuesday, Aug 26, 2003 at 14:22

Tuesday, Aug 26, 2003 at 14:22
What about a snorkel set up as a ram feed?
0
FollowupID: 20327

Reply By: yarda - Tuesday, Aug 26, 2003 at 15:58

Tuesday, Aug 26, 2003 at 15:58
Yeah, the design of most snorkels will give you a slight ram effect, and properly sealed and installed will also allow you to go swimming. But you do have to drill and cut a lot of holes in the guard to fit one. My set up will have both air pickups high in the rear of the engine bay with a self draining cold air feed. Brad
AnswerID: 29218

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (13)