The V8 Toyota

Submitted: Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 15:27
ThreadID: 83114 Views:8289 Replies:8 FollowUps:30
This Thread has been Archived
Does anybody know why the new Toyota V8's have a wider track up front as opposed to the rear track? I dont think its because of the V8 engine as the strait 6 Troopy, 75 series and 79 series has enough space/width to fit a Chev V8 straight in. It must have cost Toyota a bomb to widen the front (or reduce the rear) track.
Any suggestions??

regards...................jeff
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: ben_gv3 - Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 15:34

Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 15:34
My understanding is purely to fit in the V8. Maybe the Chev V8 is narrower then the Toyota V8.
AnswerID: 439159

Follow Up By: Member - Howard (ACT) - Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 19:05

Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 19:05
there is a good write up on LCOOL where a fellow put a new toyota V8 into a live axle 100series.
the motor couldnt sit low eneough between the chassis rails and he had to do a body lift to get intercooler under bonnet.

jeff,
you can come down and look a my new toy ,I pick up a 2009 V8 trayback next week.
cheers
Howard
Resigned to Retirement

Member
My Profile  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 711012

Follow Up By: Mick O - Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 22:52

Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 22:52
You luck boy Howard. Good move.

Cheers Mick
''We knew from the experience of well-known travelers that the
trip would doubtless be attended with much hardship.''
Richard Maurice - 1903

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 711038

Reply By: Member - Graham H (QLD) - Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 16:00

Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 16:00
Its only 5mm and the chassis width more than the track would define how wide an engine would fit.

Was also done on the 100 ser when went IFS. That chassis was 45 mm approx wider than the solid front end model.

I found out when I bought the wrong model towbar.

AnswerID: 439163

Follow Up By: redeye141 - Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 16:54

Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 16:54
Graham,

I followed a GXL the other day and the rear was a half a tyre width thinner than the front on both sides. It looked like it was crabbing down the road.

Redeye
0
FollowupID: 710998

Follow Up By: Member - Boobook - Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 17:27

Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 17:27
It's 100mm diffference, and to fit the V8.

0
FollowupID: 711000

Follow Up By: ob - Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 17:28

Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 17:28
I think you will find it is more like 50mm per side making it closer to 100mm overall and yes they do look odd when following one. Apparently they tend to wander a bit when the rear tyres try to follow the front in really loose or soft terrain.

ob
0
FollowupID: 711001

Follow Up By: Member - Graham H (QLD) - Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 17:34

Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 17:34
If we are talking about a 200 series V8 have a look here from the Toyota site


http://www.toyota.com.au/TWR/content/static/88042.pdf?WT.ac=LC200SpecificationsPDF



0
FollowupID: 711002

Follow Up By: ob - Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 17:41

Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 17:41
I think the original post was about 75 to 79 series not the 200 series

ob
0
FollowupID: 711004

Follow Up By: Member - Graham H (QLD) - Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 18:42

Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 18:42
Was a bit obscure especially when someone mentioned GXL's


0
FollowupID: 711009

Follow Up By: Mick O - Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 22:56

Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 22:56
Gents it's 100mm difference. 50mm a side. A real hassle for breaking fresh sod off track. It does look strange to. The difference in aesthetics between bog standard and 50mm spacers is pronounced.

Cheers Mick
''We knew from the experience of well-known travelers that the
trip would doubtless be attended with much hardship.''
Richard Maurice - 1903

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 711039

Follow Up By: Dennis Ellery - Saturday, Dec 18, 2010 at 09:28

Saturday, Dec 18, 2010 at 09:28
Who buys a 4WD for aesthetics? – Unless missus picked it out.
I am not joking – I have a mate who wants to buy a Troopy but the wife won’t let him.
She wants a Nissan because it looks better and rides softer.
0
FollowupID: 711060

Follow Up By: Mick O - Saturday, Dec 18, 2010 at 11:55

Saturday, Dec 18, 2010 at 11:55
Yeah you're right Dennis, who ever heard of the vehicle industry considering the look of the vehicle as one of the key priorities in marketting lol.

(entire thesis have been written about Ford and the Edsel, Leyland and the P76. God that Edsel was ugly).

No my point was made in agreeing with Ob above in them looking strange when following. Owning a 79 series cab chasis, I can tell you that the vehicle would look a lot better (and operate better in certain conditions in my considered opinion) if the rear track matched that of the front. Being recessed that extra 50mm a side, the difference in track width is particularly noticiable when looking at the vehicle.

I bought mine for myriad resons and I'm not disappointed. Looks even uglier now that I've finished it, bloody great lump of a thing. Tell your mate to get the Troopy. May give him a chance to get out by himself more often ha ha.

Cheers Mick
''We knew from the experience of well-known travelers that the
trip would doubtless be attended with much hardship.''
Richard Maurice - 1903

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 711078

Reply By: Rock Ape - Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 18:26

Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 18:26
Jeff,

The arse end of the utes were left the same and the fronts widened 100mm to accommodate the V8.

Guess they will change it sometime, maybe.

Have a good one.
AnswerID: 439169

Follow Up By: Member - Trouper (NSW) - Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 18:47

Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 18:47
Thanks Rock ap, thanks all, I guess it must be for the V8 but it's still amazing they needed to widen the track that much !!

see ya ........................jeff
0
FollowupID: 711010

Reply By: Member - Phil G (SA) - Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 19:47

Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 19:47
Gday Jeff,
Yeah, Toyota were under pressure to replace the 1HD-FTE motor by Dec 2006 because of emission requirements.

Because they had the market cornered, their solution was to do as little as possible and shoehorn the V8 into the 78/79series, which meant widening the front of the chassis and keep the rest of the vehicle unchanged. Its not uncommon to have a narrower rear track but 95mm difference is a lot.

I'm still of the opinion that the previous model HDJ78/79 is a better vehicle - a well proven reliable factory TD 6 cyl motor, and no probs with track, oil consumption, common rail injectors etc. Thats why I'm hanging on to mine, when normally I would have upgraded by now.
AnswerID: 439179

Follow Up By: fisho64 - Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 20:03

Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 20:03
I dont think there is actually a hell of a lot the same? I think the panels are all different, chassis different and front end different, doesnt leave alot?
0
FollowupID: 711020

Follow Up By: ross - Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 20:12

Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 20:12
Phil,any idea if they will ever widen the rear to match the front in coming models?

0
FollowupID: 711021

Follow Up By: Dennis Ellery - Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 20:49

Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 20:49
Don’t get your nuts into a knot about the extra 100mm at the front.
It’s a magic truck, tough as nails with stacks of grunt.
0
FollowupID: 711023

Follow Up By: Member - Phil G (SA) - Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 21:13

Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 21:13
Gday Fisho,
with the 2007/08, Cab, dash, suspension, brakes, diffs, gearbox, transfer, wheelbase, payload, rear chassis, were the same. Front chassis was widened, wider front track and they dropped in a V8.
With 2009 model airbags were added, so dash was redesigned, and I expect some chassis changes.

ross,
don't know when a 70series replacement will happen

Dennis,
I agree with you about the track difference. But its the teething problems of the V8 that stop me upgrading - oil consumption, and injector failures that can hole the pistons. I'm sure Toyota will sort it eventually like they did with other motors in the past. Also the V8 has the same fuel consumption figures as the 1HD-FTE, and the torque figures are very similar so I am reluctant to upgrade yet.

Cheers
Phil
0
FollowupID: 711026

Follow Up By: Rock Ape - Saturday, Dec 18, 2010 at 07:24

Saturday, Dec 18, 2010 at 07:24
Phil,
one of our Toyota fitters, (did his time at Toyota and a good few years at Toyota) so he has some pretty good contacts. His info is the injection system is from the 90s and old hat, whoever informed him has said an upgrade is coming so we will see. The gearbox seems to be the toughest Toyota has made in the cruiser ute range, not one vehicle has had a box problem.

Aircon condensers, aircon compressors, alternators and starter motors the big ticket items that are costly to replace. Losing engines through coolant loss has been fixed with low water alarms.

Not a Toyota problem but our ute recently was accidentally filled to the brim with oil when the fitter answered the phone and left the oil fill on, he drained the excess oil and fired it. Result one broken engine, oil had got into the turbo pipe and hydrauliced the motor.

Have a good one
0
FollowupID: 711049

Follow Up By: Member Brian (Gold Coast) - Saturday, Dec 18, 2010 at 07:47

Saturday, Dec 18, 2010 at 07:47
Phil,

I see you tow a Tvan... Ours has just turned One Year Old and has about 12,000 k's on it! What a brilliant camper!!

:-))


Cheers

Brian

0
FollowupID: 711052

Follow Up By: Member - Phil G (SA) - Saturday, Dec 18, 2010 at 09:54

Saturday, Dec 18, 2010 at 09:54
Gday Rockape,
Thanks again for your good information.
Yep the gearboxes were fine behind a 430Nm motor, but speculation was that one reason the manual was not offered on the 200series was that it won't handle 650Nm. But like you say, the H150F gearboxes are the strong part of the driveline - the weak bits are the clutch (so easy to smoke it) and the diffs.

Gday Brian,
Yep we went soft and bought a second hand Tvan about a year ago. We'll still swag it for the harder trips, but have used the Tvan a fair bit this year and its a pretty comfortable way to travel.
Nicely engineered and well built.Mine is a 2003 and we are the third set of owners who plan on treating it hard! Its already seen more of Australia than I have :-)

Cheers
phil
0
FollowupID: 711065

Reply By: Member - Marc Luther B (WA) - Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 21:45

Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 21:45
Hi Jeff

I am currently using a V8 Toyota Trayback from a hire company, and so far I have found it to be rubbish on the soft stuff. I was seriously contemplating buying one, but that will not be happening anymore.

Cheers
Why travel overseas, you could travel Australia your entire life, and not see it all.

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

AnswerID: 439187

Follow Up By: gbc - Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 22:39

Friday, Dec 17, 2010 at 22:39
I've had the same info from a park ranger mate who drives them on Fraser.
They tend to squirm all day in the sand, and there is a distict lack of off boost torque compared with the last model.
50mm wheel spacers would make the lack of torque more livable though if in sand a lot.
0
FollowupID: 711034

Reply By: Flynnie - Saturday, Dec 18, 2010 at 00:17

Saturday, Dec 18, 2010 at 00:17
The V8 79 series is a vehicle that nearly never happened. As I recall Toyota was going to drop the 79 series 6 cylinder vehicle from the Australian market as it could not meet the Euro IV emission standards that were coming. No replacement was planned. There was a fair bit of coverage of this in the motoring press some years before the V8 was released.

Toyota Australia did some intense lobbying of Toyota and a bits and pieces concoction was done to slot the V8 into the 79 series. It works a lot better than would be expected. Not perfect but pretty good. They could have done a Nissan and slotted in some asthmatic 4 cylinder. Wonder what the gripes would be like if they had done that?

The lack of widening of the rear track is a disappointment but is not really a big deal. The low mounted alternator and vulnerability of the electronic control units to water are more important issues. The poor rear brakes are more of an issue to me than the rear track which I regard as a non problem. The poor rear brakes were also on the previous model.

The sensitivity of the fuel injection system to poor fuel and contamination is a worry. As I understand it, the injection system is a Denso system that Toyota uses as do a lot of other vehicle makers. Hopefully Denso will have more rugged and better systems in future.

Will things improve? Maybe one day a new rear axle will be fitted, maybe not. Maybe one day a new more industrial type motor will be developed and marketed but I could die of old age waiting. Maybe Euro IV will go away and we can get the old 4.2 six back? Unfortunately no. Euro V and VI are on the horizon and Euro V vehicles have been appearing in our market for a while now with even fussier and more complex systems.

If I had bought a couple of years earlier I would have gone for a six in preference to the V8. But in 2009 there was not much choice. Despite looking I did not find any good condition second hand sixes around. As each year goes by the number remaining gets fewer and fewer.

Advantages of the V8 are rarely spoken of. It is more powerful than the six. It appears to use a little less fuel. It has a wider front track and is a little less inclined to roll. You can also buy a new one.

I have one and am happy with it.

Flynnie
AnswerID: 439200

Follow Up By: Member - Anthony W Adelaide - Saturday, Dec 18, 2010 at 01:32

Saturday, Dec 18, 2010 at 01:32
i have just upgraded my work ute from a hilux tray top to a 2008 79 series V8 and although it has only been a week and it has been mainly city driving, I love it. Mainly for its raw power and the way it gets it to the ground.

It really feels sure footed both on blacktop and gravel/dirt. I have never noticed the difference in track widths and I dont really care because it does'nt seem to detract from performance. Turning circle is a downside though. As far as the fuel system is concerned I would think that as long as servicing is on time and filter changes when required it should give good service. I am still on the first tank of fuel so have no consumption numbers yet but its done 550k on 3/4 tank so that is encouraging.

As far as the alternator and electrics are concerned, is that something to be wary of with deep water crossings etc. ?

Cheers
Wooly VKS-737 Mobile 0058

Member
My Profile  My Position  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 711047

Follow Up By: Dennis Ellery - Saturday, Dec 18, 2010 at 09:19

Saturday, Dec 18, 2010 at 09:19
Hi Anthony
We put ours through a lot water on crossings on the Old Telegraph Track up The Cape 2 years ago.
It hasn’t missed a beat for me in two and a half years and 65000ks (half that towing a 3 ton van).
With the old skinnies in very soft sand, it had a mind of its own and didn’t respond to the steering well (this might have been accentuated by the diff locks). Even so with skinnies and the V8’s torque it out performed a lot of other 4WDs with wider tyres. I now have 265 wide tyres and its steering in soft sand can’t be faulted. Oil problems on the 70 series V8 were due to faulty seals on the turbo’s oil scavenger – If it consumed more than 1 litre of oil per 8000ks Toyota replaced these under warranty. You will see a lot of waffle originating from non Toyota V8 owners. More chaff than wheat.
Regards Dennis
0
FollowupID: 711057

Reply By: Gone Bush (WA) - Saturday, Dec 18, 2010 at 01:14

Saturday, Dec 18, 2010 at 01:14
I had Snake Racing spacers fitted to my trayback when I had it. They certainly cured the narrow rear track but the thing that worried me the most was that, human nature being what it is, it was inevitable that the nuts holding the spacers on would never get checked because it meant taking the wheel off first.

I took them off.

Here is a small example of modified 70 series and models that are available overseas.

Image Could Not Be Found

Image Could Not Be Found

Image Could Not Be Found

Image Could Not Be Found

Image Could Not Be Found

Image Could Not Be Found

Image Could Not Be Found

And, Yes, that's the V8 inside this Shorty..... !!



Image Could Not Be Found



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

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

AnswerID: 439203

Follow Up By: Member - Anthony W Adelaide - Saturday, Dec 18, 2010 at 01:40

Saturday, Dec 18, 2010 at 01:40
Hi GONE BUSH, What do you think the benefits were of spacing out the rear wheels? Do you think its safe to use spacers that big?

Cheers, Wooly
Wooly VKS-737 Mobile 0058

Member
My Profile  My Position  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 711048

Follow Up By: Gone Bush (WA) - Saturday, Dec 18, 2010 at 09:14

Saturday, Dec 18, 2010 at 09:14
The vehicle is capable of some real twitchy movements on gravel with a narrower rear track. The spacers will counter that tendency.

However, they are illegal for anything other than OFF raod use and the point I made above is really valid. If you don't torque them up to the correct setting (210Nm) you will worry about them forever.

If you have your vehicle dealer-serviced and it involves the wheel bearings you need to take the spacers off yourself before the service because you will always worry about how tight they are when you get the vehicle back.

In short, too much of a pain in the proverbial.

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: 711056

Follow Up By: OREJAP - Saturday, Dec 18, 2010 at 12:34

Saturday, Dec 18, 2010 at 12:34
Found this for what it's worth on the Pajero Web site. Comments were from a Tojo L/cruiser ute driver. They do like a big drink & not all that powerful either!!!

I somewhat agree on that. My work car is a Turbo Diesel V8 Landcruiser. I was really disappointed when I first drove one - they're gutless! My Pajero is a firecracker compared to it - and much more economical at that.

With the speed limit's at 130kph on the highways here in the NT you really have to push the cruiser along to get up that high. Not to mention they really suck the juice, I do nearly one of the 90 litre tanks (use about 75-80 litres) over a distance of 270km's. That is sitting on 130kph, but still excessive. The Pajero only does roughly 35 litres at same speed/distance.

Toyota Ute 4.5 V8......151 KW NT 3.2 Diesel Pajero........147KW

" " 430 NM Torque. " " 441 NM Torque. @ 2000 RPM.
@ 3200 RPM
TARE WEIGHT.....2045 Kg. Kerb Weight.......2324 Kg..............Love that car

Peak torque for V8 Toyota @ 3200 Revs....Pajero Peak Torque at 2000 RPM
0
FollowupID: 711083

Follow Up By: Member - Redbakk (WA) - Saturday, Dec 18, 2010 at 20:20

Saturday, Dec 18, 2010 at 20:20
Orejap....it is a Toyota thing....we luv em m8....Paj's are good too...what ever you choose...what ever rocks your boat.

But I don't think I will be towing my 2.5 ton van at 130 kph...nor 100 for that matter.....and fuel....if you are going to worry about it maybe you shouldnt be driving.

Nah...luv me troopy and plan on getting another.

.
0
FollowupID: 711135

Follow Up By: Member - Phil G (SA) - Sunday, Dec 19, 2010 at 22:15

Sunday, Dec 19, 2010 at 22:15
"Peak torque for V8 Toyota @ 3200 Revs....Pajero Peak Torque at 2000 RPM"

hehehe - what do you expect on a Paj forum......try 1200rpm for the Toyota vs 2000 for the paj
0
FollowupID: 711270

Follow Up By: Member - Anthony W Adelaide - Monday, Dec 20, 2010 at 00:30

Monday, Dec 20, 2010 at 00:30
That sounds more like it Phil G.

If OREJAP thinks that the V8's are gutless then he must have extremely limited experience to draw conclusions from.

His firecracker would go off with quite a bang trying to keep up with V8 in any conditions
Wooly VKS-737 Mobile 0058

Member
My Profile  My Position  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 711275

Follow Up By: OREJAP - Monday, Dec 20, 2010 at 08:48

Monday, Dec 20, 2010 at 08:48
Hi Phil G & Anthony W, The two boys from South Aust. I will wait half an hour before sending this so you boys can catch up with us Victorians!!! Ha Ha Ha......sorry boys only joking!!! Just for your info Anthony in my job I have driven most 4 WD's in 40 years including Toyota. They are a very good vehicle & exceptionally well made. The article I found was a posting on the Pajero Club of Victoria web site NOT mine!! It was posted obviously by a Pajero owner who works in the NT & he has expressed his view on the over rated Toyota ute. I have driven the Tojo V8 in single & twin turbo form & whilst the GXL twin turbo is a great vehicle the workmate is certainly an agricultural vehicle. But then again I would consider it if I was on the land & could use tractor fuel and all my running costs claimed on the business. I could use it on the farm & for recreation too!! As far as work utes go (which they were built & named) they are a splendid vehicle IMHO. As a family, general tourer & state of the art package 1/10.
0
FollowupID: 711281

Follow Up By: Member - Anthony W Adelaide - Monday, Dec 20, 2010 at 21:52

Monday, Dec 20, 2010 at 21:52
Hi OREJAP,
its a bit hard to differentiate between your comments and the article you are quoting from in your previous post, but now I hear you are from the dark side I fully understand your frustration.

The V8 traybacks are a bit agricultural for sure but they are solid and go hard all day, just what you have a ute for. If you want a family tourer or state of the art package you would no doubt opt for a 200.

I have been driving mine mostly around metropolitan Adelaide and got fuel consumption of 12litres/100km which is quite acceptable. Usually carry about 500kg of tools and glass rack so ride is much better than no load at all.

Big plus for me is its a fully tax deductable vehicle which doubles as a great camping/travelling 4WD for recreation. (and its got heaps of grunt)

Cheers




Wooly VKS-737 Mobile 0058

Member
My Profile  My Position  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 711343

Reply By: Member - Oldbaz. NSW. - Saturday, Dec 18, 2010 at 13:00

Saturday, Dec 18, 2010 at 13:00
Those that drive them sing their praises, & I guess you have to, fancy paying all that cabbage & not liking the thing. I only had my first drive last week & have
to admit that donk is something else, although I felt I had to give it big throttle
to really make it come alive. The rest of the thing left me cold..pathetic drivers
seat is still there. The rear skipped all over the rough gravel road when empty,
but was better with half a ton of masonry aboard. For that $$ I want a decent seat, a safer ride & a vehicle that looks like it was designed this century. I
look forward to trying sons chopped & trayed 200 series..obviously already
available O/S...........oldbaz.
AnswerID: 439234

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (9)