Sunday, Jun 10, 2012 at 12:28
Whoa up, Isuzumu - did I say the HJ75 was a better tow vehicle? What I said, and what you interpreted my statement as, are two different things.
I just said, the Ranger/BT-50 is a far cry from the HJ75. What I meant by that, is that there's vast difference in the two vehicles.
The HJ75 is a low-tech old plugger that is built like a tank - and most are still going, even after 500,000 or 600,000kms.
The Ranger/BT-50 is the latest high-tech alternative offering in the 4WD range, and it's producing a vast amount of power from a whole lot less cubes.
It's chock-a-block full of electronic sensors, switches, controls, and ECU's.
It's got a mind-boggling array of safety features and vehicle control systems designed to stop idiots from killing themselves - at a quick glance:
Reinforced passenger cell utilising high-strength steel
Dynamic Stability Control (DSC)
Hill Descent Control
Hill Launch Assist
Trailer Sway Control
Adaptive Load Control
Roll-Over Mitigation
Traction Control System
Emergency Brake Assist
Emergency Brake Light feature
Anti-Lock Brake System (ABS)
Gravel Road Logic
Airbags: driver and front passenger (all models)
Airbags: side curtain airbags (all models except XL Single Cab Chassis where these are optionally available)
Airbags: side thorax airbags (all models except XL Single Cab Chassis where these are optionally available when fitted with bucket seats)
Seatbelt pretensioners and load limiters
Thatcham Category 1 volumetric alarm system
Pedestrian protection features
Now, I've no doubt, jumping into a new
Ranger or new BT-50 from a HJ75 is like jumping into the cockpit of a Boeing Dreamliner after you've been fluttering around in a Tiger Moth.
I've no doubt the new Ranger/BT-50 is a pretty impressive piece of equipment, and serious numbers of people are shelling out the big bickies, to get the feel of being behind the wheel of the latest and greatest in technology that Ford/Mazda can offer.
However, my question is simply this. Virtually all vehicle manufacturers are extracing vast amounts of power from much smaller engines. They're rating up their towing capacities substantially to beat the "opposition".
They're adding mind-boggling amounts of electronic technology to create supposedly safer vehicles.
The bottom line is; are they asking too much of too little in the power and towing depts? We've already seen Nissan drop from a bulletproof 4.2 6 cyl back to a 3L 4 cyl that produces more power than the 6.
The result has been a serious shortening of engine lifespan and an increase in catastrophic (and very expensive) engine failures.
The question has to be asked; with a vehicle chock-full of delicate electronic devices that are prone to failure once a few connectors get corroded - is this really the vehicle you want tp plow though window-deep rivers in? - or take into the remotest areas of Australia, where the dust is choking, the heat makes you gasp? - and the only fixes available, are the old fallback positions of a roll of wire, some electrical tape, binder twine, and a pair of lockjaw pliers?
I've always been a lover of the KISS principle. The less you have to go wrong, the less there is to let you down, when you're 983kms NNW of
the Black Stump.
We forget that people used to belt through the backblocks on roads that we now describes as "tracks" - in Model T's, Ford A's, old WW2 Chevies, FJ Holdens, Vanguards, gutless old Pommy chariots, and God knows what else - and they were nearly all 2WD!
The Redex rallies of the 1950's saw every road-going 2WD vehicle on the market pounded around Australia in record time - on roads you'd now consider to be mostly 4WD-only.
We've come a long way - but I often look at todays offerings, and wonder how much more reliable are they than the stuff of the 1940's and 1950's?
We've been conditioned to believe that we NEED all this electronic technology, when I believe that only a fraction of it is needed - and most of what is installed in todays vehicles needs beefing up anyway, because it's not as robust as it should be.
And yes, I do have substantial vehicle and towing experience, from my first 4WD, a secondhand 1963 Series II tray top petrol 4cyl Landrover in 1967 - with which I regularly towed a 2.75T, 30' caravan.
Since that time, I have owned Landcruisers of nearly every model (traytop, troopy and wagon from, 1977 to current) - and I've owned and towed a substantial number of vans from 18' to 30' - plus heavy duty tandem car and traytop trailers, and plant trailers up to 3.5 tonnes.
I've covered
well over 2,000,000kms in the 46 yrs I've had a licence, and I possess every class of licence up to road train. I think I've had a bit of experience.
Cheers - Ron.
FollowupID:
763283