100 series petrol v8

the fuel economy is the problem . not the engine .
same thing with petrol patrols .
mechpete .

Do the numbers.

The saving you will buy you a lot of fuel. And should you convert it to dual fuel it will be far cheaper to run than a diesel.

Disclaimer: LPG may have limited availability and/or be expensive in remote locations.

Jim.

are the turbo diesels much better on fuel. i have heard they get about 16-17 lph

I am sorry, fuel these days is always an issue but I have done a few sums and the $15000 dollars I would save in the purchase (petrol v diesel) plus the interest on the loan makes the v8 an option to look at. If it used 8lph more that would cost $10 more ph(approx) $100/1000km $1000/10000km. $15000/150000km . I would only average 20000km per year. LPG even better. My real concern is the life span of the v8. Is it a reliable vehicle.What are the transmissions like . Is the running gear the same as other cruisers. Im not trying to be a smart ass but if there are other underlying issues then there might be justification to spend more on a TD.

My observations suggest the only significant resistance to that model is within the towing ranks - your study of the simple fuel economics is probably correct. The rise in fuel consumption when loaded up though and battling wind is often reported as dramatic in the petrols - the diesels enjoy a modest rise in the same circumstances. All depends on your travel plans too - if fuel range is an issue, you might be carrying jerries at times ?
And......have you looked over the Lcool postings ?

I have a LC100 TD and have a friend who has the same model with petrol V8.

My vehicle is primarily for outback touring and towing and it does this well with the extended range due to lower fuel consumption. My friends V8 is used for general touring and pulling a boat. It does this well with great power for the towing part. His only limitations are as said higher fuel costs and limited range. He has no problems and has learnt to watch the fuel guage.

The LC100 has no special problems in the V8 form and your sums are broadly right. If the limited range is not a problem then it is viable. The servicing costs of petrol are generally lower also so the total cost over a fair period of ownership is similar. Just a matter of matching capability to needs.

alastair

We got 286,000 kms out of GXV V8 and when we sold it I reckon it would easily do another 200,000 kms. Yes they use some fuel but when your buying them for $20k vs $70k new and they are still the same car, despite the KM's and some ageing, you are getting value for money. Direct injection GAS is the way to go if you want to save on fuel costs.

When they came out david they were touted as having an engine design life of 300,000 km average and I believe they have more than lived up to this.

In short a very good car.

I certainly considered them against the Patrol 4800 , they had lower fuel consumption but not quite the same flat torque curve and a manual wasn't available at the time

Hi,

i own a 2004 v8 petrol (auto). I love it!!! it uses 14.8-15.3 @100-105/hr on the black top with 2 blokes camping gear swag on the roof rack, ats and a 95 litre fridge full of beer and steak. on the sand the fuel use is high. i fitted a 175l sub tank and have a high way range of 1600klm safe. I cant fault the Cruiser. if you go offroad put bilstens in it that is the best mod i ever did (diff drop kit and 2inch lift). Good luck

David M2

My 2 cents worth.

I brough my GXL on LPG brand new in 2004.

As suggested by some in this thread the cost of owning a Petrol (V8) 100 over 5 year is cheaper on average to the diesel. Owning on on LPG is a lot cheaper.
Most people would agree that the 100 V8 is cheaper to run than the 4.5ltr straight 6 petrol or the Patrol 4.8ltr petrol.

The main reason people but the TD is range and fuel consumption.

I am a member of a 4WD Club and have travelled exensively in the High Country, West NSW, SA and NT, with quite a but of QLD thrown in.

I have a different view on this. 90% of the places travelled in remote Australia requires only 150 ltres of petrol to be carried. That is full tank/s and a jerry can.

There are execeptions, Canning stock route comes to mind..

Why do I say this?

One of the most respected outback travellers Vic Widman who also puts on outback Tours agrees with me...

Great Divide Tours (Click here)

Vic advises his tagalong customers on how much fuel is requred for trips. Vic has to err on the side of caution as he cannot afford customers running out of fuel on his trips.

So with the exception of the Canning Stock Route where diesels need 250ltrs and petrol 350ltrs to get to the Well 23 fuel drop.
Vic advises:-
Simpson Desert 200 ltrs petrol
Kimberleys 150 ltrs petrol
Across the Top 200 ltrs petrol
Cape York 150 ltrs petrol

So a replacement sub tank which tend to be 180 ltrs cover just about all remote Australian "outback" trips, so range is not a real issue.

Also a UZJ100 has a a payload of 767kg and a HDJ100 only 565kg
that is over 200kg extra carrying capacity. (HZJ105 743kg)

So my answer is do the math ands plan for 90% not the 10%...