Prado, Pajero or Discovery.. Purchase Advise?

Alby
Admittedly I am a Pajero owner and I know Prado outsells Pajero 5:2, but I disagree with you if you are implying Prados are the most popular mid sized 4WD in the bush.

Last time I was through Diamantina Shire (SW corner of Qld ) I noticed Pajeros were the standard shire vehicle. I noticed plenty of local Pajeros when I've been in Central Australia over the last 4 years.
Don't confuse the Land Cruiser with a Prado, certainly Toyota is certainly the most popular 4WD in the bush by a huge margin, but they are Cruisers not Prados
Where you really see a lot more Prados is in the capital cities.

I won't knock the Prado it is a fine vehicle, Red Dirt there was a thread every few months on this, the last one was only about 2 weeks ago. Perform a search on any of the 3 vehicles and you will see plenty of replies.

Mark I am not saying Prados outsell a Pajero or are any better, what I am saying is a broader statement that Toyota has the best service/ dealer coverage out of all the manufacturers and so would be the brand I would prefer to have should I need repairs done.
Out of the three I actually like the Discovery the best but do not fancy being towed to the closest major city to have diagnosis and repair of a problem.

No, I will not be towing. (apart from the occasional short trip with an 18 foot aluminium boat.)

I narrowed my search based on the extra boot space that these models have compared with some of the SUV type vehicles.

Is there something else I should consider?

What about a Territory ?

The Territory was on my original shortlist, but I started to lean towards a diesel and the new Territory Diesel is out of my budget range :-(

Disco 3-4 are good for reliability but none in that price bracket yet.

Are you talking about Jap diesels again Robin? :-)

Thanks for the comprehensive feedback Robin!

So to answer your questions...

"Why would your quest not include Patrols/earlier Cruisers for instance - is it because they may be smaller ?"

It is my understanding that earlier Cruisers would be less fuel economical in an urban environment - which in reality, would be when I'll be using the car 90% of the time.

And about Patrols - I had heard that there were some engine problems with the GU models. But I'm far from an expert. If you think they should be an option then I'm all for any suggestions.


"Your number one point was about tough and reliable - and none of the car types you listed are strong underneath, or have dual coil sprung live axles - still the best and simplest suspension system out there which the Patrols have."

I'm not planning on doing any 'hardcore' 4WDing. But just want the peace of mind that I've limited the amount of things that could go wrong if I am in the middle of nowhere.


"Point 2 is about economy - do you mean total cost of running the car - or would you forget the purchase price /servicing and just think about the weekly fuel bill, which depends on how many driven km's."

With respect to economy - I was considering servicing and, the weekly fuel bill. I drive about 600-700kms per week, of mainly urban driving


"Point 3 is about fuel type and its answer depends on usage , gas would take you around most of Australia, and is cheapest in the city (only if done right).
A week or so ago there was a thread on this site detailing many stories of $16,000 plus repairs to modern diesels from getting dirty fuel etc most of
which were not covered by insurance."

As mentioned in my other answers, the fuel type choice would mainly be to get the most economical in urban environment - a lot of time is starting and stopping in traffic and navigating the metro area.

The secondary consideration would be making sure I have the adequate fuel range when on my round the country escapade.

What is the right way to do gas?


"I wouldn't drive a car that couldn't keep up with the traffic (usually means it needs to get to 100knh in less than 16seconds. Or a car that made you loose hearing sensitivity before your time. Couldn't pass a 45 degree basic tilt table stability test. Or didn't have the braking ability to match your average sedan."

These are some really valid points and are important to me also. In particular, being able to keep up in traffic and braking to match the average sedan. Seeing as I'm often driving around in congested traffic, a vehicle that doesn't cut it in these areas would have to be off the list. I'd love to hear any of your thoughts on these points :-)

Look forward to your input

Hi REdDirt

That feedback gives us a better idea now.

30-40k kilometers is high end usage and means I would rule out my type car (4800 GU Petrol Patrol) unless on gas.

I also rule Prado's of that era because of their inherent stability issue - they are the worst performing mainline wagon on Static Stability tests (Rollover), the typical tilt table wagon range is from 42 to 48 degrees with Prado at the bottom. Earlier diesels very underpowered also.

Discoveries in that price have to be ruled out for reliability, made harder by few dealers and overly complex electronic systems - which are very hard to work on outside specialist centres.

3lt diesel GU Patrols do have generic engines issues and must go to.

Australias favourite touring wagon (recent magazine claim), the 4.2lt diesel GU Patrol is non-auto.

From your list the Pajero comes out on top (check your happy with its engine noise levels).

However I would consider 2 other cars.
Getting older now, but the 80 series TD with the later IHD-fte 125kw diesel auto is probably the car I think fits your criteria best.

I also consider the 4800 Patrol GU on gas - gas isn't for me because I need max range and power, but it fits your requirements well, these cars are seriously good, don't test drive one unless your prepared to be hooked.

Its main advantage over the Cruiser is only that for 30k you can get much more recent models and is one of few cars today that you can do most of the servicing yourself.

Gas - Can be an issue, ensure its a vapour injection system, and please ensure that the condition of the head and valves is known.

"“inherent stability issue"? Oh god here we go again...

Just because it’s lower than others doesn’t automatically make it "an issue". Obviously more likely to tip over but what is this risk for most drivers under most situations. How have you determined this risk as being an “issue”?

At what angle does this "inherent stability issue" disappear, 43°, 44°, 45°…? Why does the “issue” disappear at the angle you choose? Some detail would be nice.

Also does a Prado (not sure what model) really flip over backwards when driven straight up a 42° incline as indicated in a diagram you posted a few months ago? Are you sure these are not recommended maximum safe working angles and not the “tilt angles” you suggest (though side tilt angle is probably close).

Do lifted Patrols (or any car for that matter) with larger tyres have any "inherent stability issues" or are they immune?

Cheers
Greg

Greg , good morning , what are we going to do with you - you have
mixed up some stuff.

No one , me toyota etc have reffered to Prado's flipping over
backwards at 42 degrees. ( The hill climbing spec just means the car
stops, usually running out of power/gearing.)

The seperate 42 degree tilt table results come from Toyota brochures and you
seem to question them, so how can we have a spin free discussion on the
derivatives of this data ?

Some people may wish to put children in some of these cars and they
need to have good information so they can make informed choices.

Its a great day here in Dandenong this morning so I have dug up some figures to make you smile.

That hill climb figure of 42 degrees is only 39 for most Patrols (sorry not mine)
so here Prado beats Patrol by 3 degrees.


Image Could Not Be Found

Hello

More like what are we going to do with you :)

Sorry - I have those pics from one of your previous posts but in the absence of any "official" description associated with them I had to guess what all the angles actually refer to - just find it strange that one would refer to the car tipping on its side and the other to something totally unrelated. I also found it strange that both angles are identical – hence my guess they were some sort of recommended maximum safe working angles. Do you have the page of the brochure that describes what these angles/pictures refer to? (Not that I don’t believe you :)

Anyway - I am not actually disputing the tilt figure. I am happy to accept 42° as the "tilt angle". What I am bemused by it how this equates to an "inherent stability issue" that you bring up every time someone mentions the word "Prado". Nothing wrong with mentioning the spec (everyone should be aware of what their care is capable of) but as mentioned in a previous thread I think you maybe overstating the significance of this one technical specification (in this instance at least).

So - Back to my main questions –

How have you determined this risk (tilt angle 42°) as being an “issue”?

At what angle does this "inherent stability issue" disappear, 43°, 44°, 45°…?

Why does the “issue” disappear at the angle you have chosen?

Some detail would be nice or at least some sort of risk assessment compared to other vehicles used for the same purpose.

The risk of rollover exists for all vehicles not just those with tilt angles of 42° or less. I just cant see how a 42° tilt angle (Prado or any other vehicle) equates to a "stability issue". 42° is a limitation...and not necessarily an an issue. I am guessing, but figure almost everyone when in a 4WD situation manages this risk (consciously or unconsciously) at a level well below 30° as the serious scare factor kicks in at about this point (apparently).

Conclusion - limitations/risks associated with 42° tilt angle are easily managed in most circumstances as it is a threshold that would rarely if ever reached by most people and therefore it doesnt equat to an "stability issue"- however I could be wrong and any information showing that 42° represents the "stability issue" threshold welcome.

Cheers
Greg

Hi Greg

I believe the various Prado figures (offical brochures) are linked in via the following site.

http://toyotacustomerstory.blogspot.com/

This is a well documented story of someone who believes there car rolled over
far more easily than it should, at low speed, and that this was not the result
of any 4wd situation.

It further goes on to explain how brochure information, on which they purchased the car was misleading.
It then goes on the explain in detail the failure of protective saftey systems.

This is just representative of other info provided previously on this site and
not by me.



On some specific points you ask me E.G.

"How have you determined this risk (tilt angle 42°) as being an "issue"?
At what angle does this "inherent stability issue" disappear, 43°, 44°, 45°.?
Why does the "issue" disappear at the angle you have chosen? "

There is no specific point at which risk dissappears, it simply gets less & less
the higher the tilt angle is !

Sort of like fuel consumption, there is a range for a class of vehicle.
My car is at the top - so I call it bad !

For rollover angle the Prado is the worst in its class, hence we also call it bad !
(other classes of car are worse e.g. Troppie's)



I presume you accept the previously supplied report links like
http://www.monash.edu.au/muarc/

These demonstrate two key points (Tell me if you don't accept)

Point 1 - Large 4wds are a high rollover risk (3:1 over cars)

Point 2 - Rollover angle is the key measurement of this risk and known as
Static Stability Factor.




These things have consequences -
Running out of fuel is embrassing not life threatening.
A Rollover is quite different.

Hence the better the info we have the better we can take preventative action.
So I do my best to find out things like fuel use in remote areas etc , not so
we can brag about how good/bad it might be but simply so that I don't get caught out.

In the case of the Prado tilt table figures, well shooting the messenger will make no difference to the rollover angle (although putting the body on the floor might help).

A better stratergy is to to consider the data carefully and work towards a solution.

ESC - now mandated in Victoria, and on the 150 Prado series, significantly reduces the problem for highway use (but not low speed 4wd).
(American recall versions excepted - due to late control system activation)

Hi
Couldn’t find links …but doesn’t relay matter.

Not disputing rollover angle and how it is related to rollover risk. Just wonder how you have rated this risk and decided to label 42° as the point representing an “inherent stability issue”. Just because it’s last in the small list of vehicles you've chosen is not enough to draw this conclusion in my opinion.

Whatever vehicle specification you choose to compare will result in a listing from “best” to “worst”. One make/model has to come last. I suppose a simple conclusion that can be drawn that requires no other thought is that “last” = “bad”. They could in reality all be bad…or maybe they are all OK i.e. no significant difference.

Is 42° really so bad as to require a label of “inherent stability issue” when the message should be that all Large 4WDs have an “inherent stability issue” that must be taken into account when using for you intended purpose?

Obviously some are better (in theory at least) than others but I am still not sure the difference in risk between the vehicles in question, in the real world, is so significant that warrants a special label for the "Prado", especially when there are 4WD vehicles that have lower tilt angles and therefore potentially higher risks in certain circumstances.

Just had a thought – what’s the rollover angle of a motorcycle ? Now that’s a vehicle with inherent stability issues :)

Bugger – have to do some work…

Cheers
Greg

Geoff , thats a reasonable question - why "inherent stability issue”.

Those are my words , and while you may not agree , you can be sure that they are not made lightly nor without reason.

Note your link issue , I attach two bits from the Muarc document (monash uni police vehicle rollover study)

Done in a rush so not all I's dotted, but I hope these help.

Inherrent implies built in , hard to remove etc , lowering C of G is not like changing some shocks etc. Indeed the Prado's are softer underneath and the instinct of 4wder's is to raise the car for protection making the issue worse.

The data below has two vehilcles in it that approximate closely the Prado and GU Patrol.

The prado match is item 5 , the landcruiser 80 series with a 42.2 degree rollover angle.

Note - 80 series are normally 45 tilt but this is a modded police car hence the 42 degree figure.

Item 10, ford divy van 48.3 degrees is almost same as GU at 48.

Note- Statement on text above - stabilty factor is excellelant rollover match.

An interesting observation is that the shape of the curve changes at around 45-46 degrees.
I.E. Rollover risk rises more rapidly below 45 degrees.

Elsewhere in the document its stated that rollover risk of Patrol to Cruiser is ratio of about 3:1

I.E. from 48 degrees to 42 is 3:1 change in risk level.

This is pretty heavy stuff and I do not know why - but appears aligned with human factors - what humans can easily cope with - beyond a certain point it
just gets hard to handle.

These are statistics from real accidents using trained police drivers.








Image Could Not Be Found

Image Could Not Be Found

Geoff - who the hell is Geoff?

At last some cold hard facts (well at least for when you lose control while driving along a road of some sort) - food for thought nonetheless....5th out of 13 isnt that bad:) Obvioulsy more inherenty unstable vehicles out there beside the Prado but if 42° or less is where the line is drawn in the sand for labeling a vehicle inherently unstable so be it.

Im off to the shop now in my Prado - wish me luck....hang on..on second thoughts I think Ill take the wifes ex police VY Commodore :)

Cheers
Greg

Sorry Greg

Had to bash thru a few posts and planning documents today and got a bit mixed up.

RedDirtFootprints if you like the Discos, see if you can find a 2004 discoTD5 the last of the 200 Series.
Then go and talk to Kevin at Rover-Tec in Welshpool and get him to inspect the vehicle.
Also if posible talk to the last owner and get the service invoices and books.
I have a 99TD5 ES and I have had only two major problems one was the head and the other was the auto gear box - the gearbox was my fault. To many people think back to the early 200 series Discos and the problems they had. I should also point out that these problems should now be fixed. My consumption around the city is between 10 - 11 litres per100km. Manuals are slightly better. Mine is also chipped.
Every vehicle brand has problems have a look at the tojo and nissan sites. You also have to realise that landrover has lead the way with new inovations and the others copy.
BMW and Ford only bought them for the technology.

Tony

Hi Tony S, Thanks for your input.

As I alluded to in an earlier post, I am a huge fan of the discovery. I really like the aesthetics of the vehicle, both inside and out. I can also appreciate the innovation that Land Rover vehicle include.

However, there are a number of concerns I do have about the Discovery:

1. According to redbook.com.au, the acceleration (0-100km/h time) is 17.1 secs. I'm thinking this could be a little slow for my liking. I don't want to have to be putting the engine under more stress than necessary to keep up a pace that I'm comfortable with.

2. Are the servicing costs more that one of the other options? (Toyota, Mitsi, Nissan)

3. There seems to be a huge number of people who rate the Discoveries as being unreliable. This is not really a debate that I want to get into. What does concerns me is what I would need to do should I have any sort of mechanical failure when on my travels. Will I need to flatbed the vehicle back to the nearest capital or major city? This could blow the budget for the whole venture.

Sorry for the delay RedDirtFootprints, have been having a few problems with an insurance company.

The 200A,s is upgraded ECU compared to mine. It is also reprogramable.
If you do a sensible apgrade again there is only a minor stress factor. That repair mob I spoke about earlier has them. Also, it may have already been done.

I recently had a service done together with a check underneath, as I was going away.Cost from memory $360 odd. That was the two oil filters, Synthetic oil and drive shaft grease up. Labour is the killer.

As long as it has been seviced regularly, and the known problems attended to you should not have any problems.

How fast do you want to go for heavens sake?
I have a auto and tow a 2 ton van. I can sit comfortably on 95/100 day in day out in lockup. The only time I go back to third is a steep hill. Then I don't really have to just habit to protect the auto.

Email me on - margntony@bigpond.com - if you have any futher questions.

Tony

Thanks GimmeeIsolation, I agree that safety should be an important consideration. Which vehicle would you recommend based on safety? What features in that vehicle make it safer? Is the difference considerable?

I've noticed that the 2005 Discovery 3 is substantially more expensive than the 2004 Discovery. For a difference in only 12 months, this price difference seems a bit excessive and probably puts the Discovery 3 outside of my price range, unless I get a vehicle with really high kms.

Unless there is something that inspires me to pay an extra 30%, and in return would save me some $ in the long term, I wouldn't be able to justify the extra expense.

Should also mention that I don't drive a Subaru or a petrol either by the way.
I drive an SR5 diesel 2 seater auto ute.

Hi Fatso,

I currently own a Subaru Impreza and it's a really great car. My sister also own's a 2010 Forester, which is a nice car too, and my Mum has an Outback. We have become a real Subaru family.

But after zipping around in my little Impreza for a fair few years now, I'm feeling the urge to own a car that satisfies my blokey side.

The other thing is that I'm 6'4 tall and I even find my sisters forester a little cramped. The seat just doesn't seem to go back quite far enough. I have no dramas with my little Impreza for most of my driving, but for longer trips it becomes a bit small. So I would rather err on the side of spacious.