V8 vs 4-Cyl LAND CRUISER MEDIA HYPE

[@Treetopflyer777]

Now that’s passion right there

[@davidforbes6250]

Toyota thing dude!

[@mrme982007]

I think Matt Brand from Car Sauce said it right. If you want to have fun, if you are an enthusiast, if you want to modify it, buy the V8. Otherwise the 2.8 is the one to get - I think it’s an obvious conclusion, but it’s kinda been lost in the noise.

[@michaelmueller7962]

My impression is, he is indirectly exactly saying this - but these days we are no longer used to such refreshingly open directness and honesty.

[@deceptikhon]

I agree although there is something that is getting lost in the noise also and that is longevity.

[@gtviewer]

​@@deceptikhon Please expand on your point of view.

[@Peter-wc4kr]

With Australia’s vast distances and outback horrendous diesel prices the difference between the V8 and 2.8 turbo fuel economy will be a big consideration for a lot of people.

[@lukey6534]

Its the weight and shape of the cruiser that makes them thirsty. An inline 6 around 4 liters with a turbo would be more sensible choice. Especially for towing. Toyota probably don't make one anymore.

[@ButlerProspect]

Agree, on recent bush bashing trip a Friend with his 200 series used 150ltr of diesel why my 2010 Dmax used 85ltrs, Dmax was used to do forward scouting ( extra driving) Both vehicles towed same camper and similar load driving on same tracks in tandem With fuel @ $2.38 litre, difference soon adds up

[@terrydolle8293]

wel all the comparisons so far are a stock 2.8 vs fully loaded old series 70 series running 35s!!!

[@SteveBbb-y6d]

exactly and the over a thousand dollar a year registration cost for a v8 registration is also massively more money. I love petrol v8s but diesel v8s are stupid for a boxy old wagon or ute. You also can modify any engine and get more power, Toyota arent idiots screwing around in some backyard shed, they spend billions on research and development and the reason most of their motors are de tuned is for longevity, thats why they hold their value so bloody well.

[@whitegluestick6039]

​@lukey6534 the I6 is the perfect middle ground aswell no one would complain, except toyota slack pricks.

[@philhealey4443]

Andrew, "confusion" at 3:49. The smaller engine at higher boost pressure will ingest comparable air mass flow rate to the larger engine with lower boost pressure, burn comparable fuel mass flow rate and spew out comparable exhaust mass flow rate at comparable temperatures and volume flow rate. So for comparable exhaust pipe gas velocity and back presssure of course the diameter should be comparable. Don't let John Cadogan watch this video😂.

[@gerwigpoeschl3492]

!00% right!!! I love Andrews videos but this one..... a short discussion with somebody more familiar to engineering would have helped tremendously😉

[@guentherwilke2055]

Thanks for stating it. Intake and exhaust mass are a direct correlation to engine power. I a diesel, that number is right around 1cf/m per hp, doesn’t matter if it’s a 2.8 GD, a 4.5 VD or a 16L I-6 in a Freightliner.

[@andrewlewis5762]

You want longevity V8 for sure, let's see how long the highly strung 4 potter lasts....

[@motorsportfreak1]

V8 = 8psi boost and 2.8 = 27psi boost from factory.

[@gregbuell1009]

Ronnies Dahls V8 is tuned.... lol

[@kadmow]

@@gregbuell1009 - he needs it retuned - or another "stage added" if it struggled with that van. (As in "really tuned", not just a minor remap.)

[@motorsportfreak1]

@@gregbuell1009 Have a look at “Car Expert” channel on KZbin. They compare latest model V8 vs 2.8 under stringent dynometer and caravan towing. 2.8 wins in every category when both standard for towing.

[@patrickcannell2258]

Says it is more stressed!!

[@philipwoodhouse4736]

Finally someone making sense. It is simple physics, you will never get the same amount of explosive energy from a displacement that is 40% smaller with the same fuel source. I wonder if we are seeing a future where you tubers are held to the same standards of broadcasting accuracy as the traditional media?

[@rapalaron6348]

I'm sick and tired of that HP and newton meter 4 cylinder and V8 talk. There s only one engine that is the best for the troopy and that's the straight six 1HZ diesel engine without turbo or other aftermarket tralala. Mine is from the year 2000 and has got 280.000 kilometers without one single issue. I never needed more power than 136hp , easy acces for maintenance and to replace the timing belt (20 minutes, try that with the 4 cyl. and V8) and the 1HZ engine will last forever. Simplicity is the best, period. No issues with gear box and stil the original clutch and water pump. I'd never replaced the waterpump when i replaced the timing belt but have always a new one with me. Wow what a superb engine if you're not in a hurry.....I,m never in a hurry when driving my HZJ78 and i'll drive it for 25 more years...😁

[@dryohanamwandamd1857]

You’re right, I am addicted to 1hz 78 series Land Cruiser, is the best car has ever built, my engine 1 hz is 23 years and still running more powerful than the modern cars ,

[@rapalaron6348]

@@dryohanamwandamd1857 Right Buddy. Awesome engine and some black smoke from the exhaust pipe when it has to work hard.....

[@dryohanamwandamd1857]

I think mine will run another 40 years 😂😂

[@rapalaron6348]

@@dryohanamwandamd1857 As long there is diesel fuel for sale mate, than we swap to olive oil :-))

[@keqrou]

I looked at a 1hz non turbo 105 series recently. Main concern for my folks (I'm 16) was the lack of ABS. We just put a deposit down on a 1fz fe 4 speed auto gxl 105 with 330,000km on the clock. Talked to some experts and 300k km is well within a good range to buy, it's completely untouched, service history, original logbook and manual and doesn't even have a snorkel. That 1fz fe is a lot more comfortable, it'll go just as long as a 1hz in terms of longevity but it's also a hell of a lot more powerful. Main problem, fuel. I'm 16 and unemployed as of right now. Obviously looking for a job but 20l/100km is going to hurt the bank. But also I hear those 1hz can be a risky buy if you don't have history on it due to oil changes being far more necessary on the diesels than the petrols. Overall I'm beyond happy with what will be my car within the next 4 days. Now all I need is my P plates. So stoked to take it on it's first long trip with a mate I've had since I was a embryo.

[@colinevans3285]

Toyota should have put a de-tuned version of the 300’s V6 and the 10 speed. I would have bought one straight away.

[@holdenbrougham1056]

Yeap me too ,, come on Toyota do the right thing by your extra loyal customers put the v6 diesel in the commercial versions that do carry or tow weights , the 300 if anything should have the 4 cylinder instead, it carry kids to school or to the bus stop, and a few tow road train vans behind them

[@NickSaravanos]

I think you'd want that hot vee debugged for a few more years yet.

[@holdenbrougham1056]

@@NickSaravanos I believe your right in the de bugger stage

[@NickSaravanos]

@@holdenbrougham1056 yeah. As a matter of principle I think never buy a new engine unless you’re on a 3 year lease and don’t care.

[@mitchell5064]

i honestly think the only reason toyota havnt put it in the 79 is the lack of supply, they cant make 300s fast enough while the 1gd has been around for a while

[@ianc7866]

no Replacement for displacement.

[@JesseePDX]

beat me to the comment

[@hedydd2]

it’s a nice glib saying that has been repeated since time immemorial when 14 litre Bentley engines output only a few tens of horses. Yet it has found to be false from one generation to the next with smaller engines leapfrogging older larger designs time and time again while needing less regular services and longevity increasing so very substantially that some of us remember up. until the late 1970’s, when the Japanese got their act together, engines would need 3000 mile old changes, points and plugs would need adjustment between services and engines and gearboxes would seldom cover 50,000 miles before a head-off overhaul and it was rare for anything to last to 100,000 miles before being scrapped. Anyone who started driving year 2000 vehicles and newer don’t realise how things have improved. How bad they were up until 1980 or so from when they improved by leaps and bounds. As an illustration of quality, up until the mid 1970’s it was common for new cars to only have six months of warranty and exhausts and batteries would seldom last the year out. By the second year, rust would bubble through panels such as the wings and door skins and sills. The Japanese and Italian vehicles would sometimes fail their first MOT at their third birthday due to structural rust. By their fifth birthday is was commonplace to see cars with great big holes you could stick your fist through in wings. The early Japanese imports were very reliable compared to European brands but were rust buckets. With today’s engines being so economical, powerful, refined and reliable, one has to wonder where all that fuel went on those wheezy old crocks of yesteryear. Was it just poured almost without control into the cylinders to be wasted in heat, smoke and noise? Even with all the lead poison added to petrol, the plugs needed gapping every 3000 miles or so and replacing every 12,000 and the exhaust gasses of even petrol engines stank to high heaven. Yes there are some mistakes made by engine designers even today but we should consider ourselves to be probably at near the peak design, efficiency and reliability of the internal combustion engine that uses fossil fuels.

[@ianweal3081]

​​@@hedydd2Oh my god, you're so correct. I recall we'd see cars along great western highway as a child with bonnets up, steam pouring out of some, broken belts, hoses shred, radiator core cracked plus many with fuel supply issues, heat evaporation etc. Reliability has jumped ahead leaps and bounds. Fuel economy also, I was constantly on the road mid 70's through to 2000's I'd have to call into fuel stations continuously to continue travels throughout my day our company had accounts at numerous servos in many towns. By late 80's economy had jumped ahead big time, I could leave work, fill up and travel all day returning home with fuel to spare. I see a review on new BMW 7 series, from Melbourne to Sydney with fuel to spare on arrival, unreal 6.6 lts per 100. That's a big heavy car. People now days don't know what unreliable is, and think if it can't get 250K it's crap. I recall knowing 100,000M (160K) was considered remarkable, nowadays that just your run in mileage. This Toyota 4 cylinder will be reliable for certain.

[@bradleydouglas]

100% that's why they don't make 2.8l diesel locomotives .. .

[@dunxy]

The milk bottle 4cyl are never going to last the km’s the v8 has already achieved. A mate test drove the 2.8 and wasn’t remotely impressed, didn’t pull close to what my slightly modified 2015 does. 3L per 100 im happy to take to own the farmers car vs the farmers wives car… If your dad drives a 2.8 Cruiser, you have two mums!

[@gen1c8rs88]

A 3.3L V6 diesel would be the best available answer. Though a 4.2L inline 6 would be mint.

[@martinarthur8928]

The 4.2 inline 6's are still common in Africa....why do you think they are better....am very curious after reading your comment as i wanted to buy one

[@chagrin2]

Because an I6 is always smoother and balanced than a 4 or V8

[@seanworkman431]

The torque is what you need and the 4.2 did a great job but I had an F100 with a 351 cui and it would drink fuel if I pedaled it hard but just cruising, loaded or not, towing or not it was good for 20l/100 but I could tow almost anything if needed and it was an old truck when I bought it still with the original engine.

[@Tedkelvin]

Yeah...the GD 2.8L as a 4.2L 6 cyl would be awesome.

[@martinarthur8928]

@@seanworkman431 you mean it had good torque even without a turbo....

[@troelsandersen9654]

Andrew, you are really, really good at doing "Rants". Please don´t stop.

[@Aussiefish86]

Longevity will be the real test for these things under heavy load and usage. The v8 is making lazy power and torque, the 4 banger is highly strung as it’s already running at high boost pressure. If you ran the v8 at a comparable boost rate with supporting modifications it would blow the smaller engine out of the water but sacrificing reliability. Same story with the ford 3.2l 5cyl vs the biturbo 2l. I’ll take a mildly tuned larger capacity engine every day of the week.

[@commonsense-grs]

So the 200 LC V8 engine is unreliable then.

[@sleddogsam]

I generally agree with all you have said but Toyota is not really in the business of intentionally putting out an engine that will be so over boosted that it will compromise their own reliability requirements. I suspect that the 2.8 stock internals have been fully engineered for all that boost.

[@Aussiefish86]

@@commonsense-grs not sure where you pulled that from. The 200 is still not highly strung and is still detuned from factory.

[@MattBlack6]

Every time I see the highly strong argument I laugh at the person's poor understanding of how engines work.

[@MattBlack6]

Everyone in the world always says that Toyota engines are under stressed and that's why they last so long. But obviously that does not apply to the 2.8 litre because then it will not fit your small minded Theory

[@khalilismyname]

Well said 👏🏻 For me I am a sucker for a V8 😅 especially if I know the same vehicle comes with 2 engine options I will always lean towards a V8. But that’s just me 😂

[@TheJordsd1]

We pulled a trailer with a fully grown white rhino bull,from the Western Cape to the Eastern Cape in the stock V8. It was a dream. That rhino weighed 2.2 tons

[@NathanKingOverland]

Wow!

[@mrgsho-l7m]

Fantastic, how often would you do that? And how nice would you be if your vehicle broke?

[@craigdavid6668]

@@mrgsho-l7mI move at least 35 Rhinos a fortnight, it’s more common than you think mate.

[@seapanther53]

Were you moving your mother-in-law in with you? 😂

[@tsubadaikhan6332]

I'm not sure this is the typical use of the vehicle that Toyota would have taken into account when they designed a new model....

[@Velvethunter]

I guess thats why i didn't see any 4 cyl at the tractor pull on the weekend 🤷

[@DougFear]

I think it was Ronny who did a side by side towing comparison where the 2.8 still beat the modified V8, by a long way. Don't know what the mods were but it was a no contest. What about another side by side comparison Andrew? I would be very interested in that video. I am a V8 fan all the way but modern tech will probably win this one I think.

[@BriscoelabMN]

I think that Ronny’s surprise said it all. The 2.8 is just better for nearly every use case. V8 sounds better though :) Ronny also does more miles in a year than Andrew does in 3+. He knows about longevity since he doesn’t flip his trucks after a couple trips. He tows regularly and drives his vehicles harder. This isn’t a knock against ASP and his channel. Still great. Just the truth. Get which you prefer!

[@malcolmL995]

I watched Ronnie’s comparison as well but don’t think it was a fair comparison. Would be interesting to see what the 76 was like with the same size tyres and load as the 79

[@magicalvortex]

Highly strung engines seldomly outlast a tractor engine. It wasn't a level playing field. Bigger engine, bigger bearings and engine components, longer life expectancy. That's why trucks have big engines, not small ones, carry the load at long distances. The 2.8 would be ok as a Toorak Tractor around the city.

[@maxKporter]

People seem to forget that the v8 is limited by the 5 speed manual. If you watched ronny dahl"s video you will have notice that he said that in 3rd gear the engine was not operating in the powerband, it was revving too low. and in 4th gear it was revving too high which is also not within the powerband. Not only that but the diff gear ratios are also different on the v8. A better comparison would be to give the v8 the same 6 speed auto from the 4cylinder and change the diff gear ratios to match the 2.8 4 cylinder and also put the same size tires.

[@malcolmL995]

@@maxKporterand carry the same load

[@KevinJ682]

So pleased to see someone saying it as it is. I'm not a fan of small block high power because it has to affect longevity.

[@twentycentpiece]

Well said 👍

[@lllllukeify]

in ranger land..... the 3.2 goes forever, the high boosted 2L variants, blow intercooler end caps, rubber intake pipes under high pressure.... theyre shit!

[@adventuretimephotos2423]

​@@lllllukeifywhat? the 3.2 ranger engine is known to be one of the most unreliability and prematurely failing engines ever created in the 4wd world.

[@mitchell5064]

@@lllllukeify what are you smoking lol, the 3.2 and 2.2 ranger engines are horrenous. by far the most commonly replaced motor in our workshop. the 2.0 are alot better, even better than the new 3.0 v6

[@lllllukeify]

im smokin tyres and diesel with my 3.2 bud! egr dont count as engine failure, just bypass the shit.... and heroes buy the 3.2 and drive them like shit contributing to that failure rate, plus one of the most sold engines, theres heaps out there... and ive just never had trouble with mine its awsome.. had a hilux and a dmax at work and the 3.2 smoked them both? thats all i got to go on... 320K on the clock, never missed a beat, service well, drives in the country whole life, purring along at a dollar ten, twenty fourty... its awsome?@@mitchell5064

[@Joftaky]

OMG, finally a genuine opinion without all the hyped biased media influence. My respect for you has completely elevated!

[@JimsCS2]

He's 100% wrong

[@Joftaky]

@@JimsCS2 😂😂😂

[@CraigG21]

You may want to watch Ronny Dahls towing video with the new 2.8L vs his tuned V8. The 2.8L was able to maintain speed towing up a grade while his tuned V8 dropped ~10kph.

[@hieuphan4264]

Because the 2.8 is auto. Use the 2.8L manual in the hilux and do the same towing test and you will be suprise 😂

[@angelotsi849]

@@hieuphan4264 Since Toyota do not make a 70 series with a 4.5 V8 auto, then there is no comparison. How much does it cost to do an auto conversion on the V8? $25k plus? I agree that the auto being able to run with the torque converted unlocked was the reason the 2.8 did so well but the only valid comparison is V8 manual vs 4cyl auto.

[@PhillipBear-w1w]

You're full of it mate,V8 is a slug,get used to the idea. Even modified it is a joke,proof that burning heaps of fuel doesn't produce power

[@reubs91]

He did one pass and that was it, he needed to double check it. TBh looks like he can’t drive for shiz

[@timeout3532]

He also runs on 35's (as I do) which is a real performance killer.

[@Sausagedoglife]

One thing I find interesting about the 2.8 4 cylinder is if you add two more pistons of that size you get 4.2 litres. So Toyota got the pistons size right they just stopped two short!!

[@michaelkeenan6668]

Well said. The 2.8L is also bolted to an 8 speed auto and very efficiently mapped to changes gears and get the most out of the 2.8 power & torque based on throttle position etc etc. Try putting a 8 Speed auto behind the 4.5L V8 and see how good it performs. Its has been done and is in quite a few 70’s already.

[@DJTrumpMAGA]

8 speed auto? What you been drinking?

[@michaelkeenan6668]

@@DJTrumpMAGA sorry i meant 6 speed, but the same principle applies with the more gears and auto tuned to make best of the engine

[@michaelkeenan6668]

@@DJTrumpMAGA Note that there are 8speed transmissions being put behind the 4.5 V8 in Australia which are producing impressive performance numbers. Toyota just needs to catch up with 2 extra gears. Haha….

[@axelsol89]

@@michaelkeenan6668 yeah it's a pretty unreal combo I want to see the 2.8 vs a 4.5 8 speed I think everything would be a different story the V8 becomes a absolute weapon 🤘🏻

[@antechinuz]

Let’s face it if they had an auto V8 version from factory no one would buy the 2.8 but an auto is hard to pass up these days.

[@francoiseverton2516]

Andrew, your last words hit the nail on the head and all that people have to do is take it to heart and do a self study of their needs. "2 different engines for 2 different applications, both brilliant for their application"

[@mallacey7621]

I take the V8 any day

[@johanvandenheever5170]

With Auto box…Yes…🥇

[@effigy42]

@@johanvandenheever5170auto is for women and desexed men

[@tsubadaikhan6332]

Bear in mind fuel prices are only ever going to go up. But, if you're always towing or carrying heavy loads, it still may make sense.

[@dhanu347]

i subscribed to him sometime back for two reasons 1) He always has a different point of view and it really gets you thinking 2) I just love it when he rants... its so passionate 😀

[@beornbayliss9586]

That was indeed quite a rant!! Well said though. I’ve had the same concerns over the last handful of years about how modern dual cabs will last, and how Isuzu up until recently, have not change their engine much for many years. It being a detuned light truck engine that is arguably one of the more reliable engines going around.

[@B.D1111]

THANKYOU, enough said.

[@ClayTallStories]

Love my 2024 79 series V8.

[@overland_adventure_nz]

Well said thank you. With my engineering (Motorcycle Engineer with years of experience building racing engines) background it did not make sense that a smaller engine could possibly perform a lazy bigger engine. I’ve purchased my first V8, plus the V8 is the only option with manual transmission which I much prefer.

[@michaelbaylis1631]

as an actual engineer, I feel the need to point out a smaller engine can absolutely outperform a larger lazy engine. Capacity has some correlation with power output, but there are far more variables that can increase power than pure capacity. Simply have a look at the old 7L behemoth engines used in some of the American saloons. An F1 engine is 1.6L. A GTR is 2.6L 6 Cycl An STI is 2.5L 4 Cyl The engine design, compression, boost and timing can provide efficient and reliable power, and still not be overly stressed. engine 'stress' can be designed out which is why some blocks handle power and boost, and some can't handle more than 7 psi. the more you know 🤷‍♂️

[@overland_adventure_nz]

@@michaelbaylis1631 Hahaha, yes, small engines can help perform large capacities easily, but life is always shorter. Also, a number of people have said that the new 2.8 out performance the Hilux with the same engine, and this is probably down to lower gearing. I am actually a motorcycle engineer by trade with years of building racing engines In motocross and road racing. So it’s nonsense at 2.8 is superior to the V8 engine that in the land cruiser 70 series is detuned its designed use. The same engine was in the 200 series and had far more power. I also actually drove in Europe preproduction tour coaches and had to report back to the manufacturer. This is when the manufacturer decided to tune an engine to suit its needs because when it had the full power it would overheat easily on hills with a full load of passengers and luggage. I put down an engineering background because really who cares when you’re fully qualified someone always thinks I know more .

[@magicalvortex]

Not be "overly stressed", but still stressed. Would you consider that the engine is just the block and not everything else around it like the turbo. Engineering 101, hit a piece of steel hard enough, for long enough, and it will succumb to fatigue. We couldn't find steel with the right mechanical properties to do certain jobs because they didn't exist. They were either to hard and brittle, or too soft and would fail. Got to go for a compromise, and life expectancy always fell into the equation. @@michaelbaylis1631

[@Luke-rt9gy]

well said @@michaelbaylis1631

[@kadmow]

@@michaelbaylis1631 - yes the peak pressures an engine can handle are knowable, exceed these you will destroy things - until then, tune away... Is 70psi too much for an LS?? lol... (time always tells - science, math, engineering) (By "stress can be designed out" - meaning, there are good blocks and bad blocks, top fuel billet blocks have more meat for "engineering" reasons - horses for racetracks.)

[@Joe-cu4hi]

After I finish this video Andrew I’m going into the garage and giving my Tundra 5.7L a kiss and patting it on the tailgate 😅 thank you for your enthusiastic thoughts its much appreciated

[@magicalvortex]

From a general engineering perspective, you are absolutely right Andrew. Bigger bearings and heavier engine components equates to a longer life expectancy, and more power capable. Hit a piece of steel hard enough for long enough, and it will eventually succumb to fatigue. There is now way a 4 cylinder engine would outperform an 8 cylinder engine on a level playing field. If the 4 cylinder was de-tuned to an equivalent level to the 8 cylinder, it would drive like a tractor. The fact that it drives like it does, one has to question it's longevity, only time will tell. 8 cylinder engines have always traditionally been preferred here for a reason, they run cooler at long distances on the open road, which makes them last longer, i.e. not highly strung like the 4 cylinders which tend to run hotter, affecting longevity. 4 cylinders are ok for city driving but 8 cylinders are better for touring and cross country driving, otherwise the trucking industry which has been established for a long time, would all have smaller engines.

[@brandonedwards4398]

Agreed. It does seem a big straight-six would be the best compromise between power and longevity. I think more manufactures would go straight- six if packaging was easier (especially on transversely mounted engines).

[@jayd3931]

Considering the 4 cylinder is in the Hilux and the Prado, the longevity has already been established.

[@scott13april]

Also worth remembering that the v8 is basically 2 banks of the d4d motor from the 4 cylinder so basically the same technology just running under less load

[@Luke-rt9gy]

no lol @@scott13april

[@mitchell5064]

@@jayd3931 and now massive coaster buses lol.

[@MikeJones-mz5ig]

This hilarious. Ten minutes of apologies for the v8 shortcomings. A great ad for the ( now superceded) 2.8.

[@apauldumeg2166]

Here in Baguio, Philippines our taxi cab is toyota Innova detuned 2.8 and we use it everyday we average 300+ km a day mix city driving uphill and down hill no issue at all odo meter was 300k+ and counting.

[@robertd4468]

A smaller displacement engine will always burn more fuel than a larger displacement engine when under the same load. It has to do with fuel specific gravity. I studied this when I went to college for my aeronautical degree.

[@kadmow]

Specific gravity or BMEP - maybe you came across that... *Specific gravity makes fuel float on water - you know 0.85g/L. (Or I missed the dead pan satire..Down like a balloon of lead - lol....)

[@philhealey4443]

Heck, there will be more variables than you can shake a stick at. Specific fuel consumption will be highly linked to parasitic losses including bearing friction, piston friction and power consumption in oil, coolant and cooling fan fluid pumping loads. Before varations in compression ratio, bore to stroke ratio, scavenging performance and valve overlap effects and BMEP is investigated, including implications on injection timing, flame propagation (Wobbe Index etc) and the efficiency of the turbocharger and intercooler process. It's a bit simplistic to be able to say with any certainty that the smaller engine will be less efficient and use more fuel for the same load.

[@oggyoggy1299]

Sure you did.

[@Bigsoot7393]

Yeah well these aren’t planes mate

[@bill5300]

I watched a tow test with 2 tonne on a designated circuit. Similar performance and almost identical fuel figures. This means the 2.8 four cylinder is burning through twice the fuel per cylinder as the V8. It's working hard and will not last as long as a V8. A few tweaks to the V8 exhaust and intake as well as a remap and Bob's your mother's uncle. You will have a much nicer car.

[@pantoqwerty]

Ronny’s hill tow test is interesting in that the 2.8 did it better than the V8

[@bill5300]

Yeah, I watched Ronnie's, was a bit hard to compare the 2 considering he was running 35s and had a few engine mods too. Car Expert did a test with standard cars so were comparing apples with apples.

[@steeevo0136]

Hang on, isn't Bob your mother's brother ? Just sayin' 🤪

[@ianweal3081]

Hang on, similar performance, you're not serious. The 2.8 out accelerated the V8 under continuous load. Connected to he caravan (3.5T), the 2.8 reached and maintained continuous operation, the V8 couldn't maintain continuous operation, almost halting having to go back to 1st gear twice on the main incline. It was a decisive victory to the 2.8. Fuel economy was recorded under those extreme continuous loads, not per usual towing as in the caravan towing. My V8 76 drank fuel towing, my son's 2.8 Prado sniffs fuel in comparison towing his van. The 2.8 may have consumed more fuel, but at least he achieved a circuit with time to spare over the V8. Interestingly, the 2.8 achieved better results than the Prado 2.8 tested just weeks earlier. In that test his van was 2.8 tonne as he was testing against a Jeep that was limited to 2.8 tonne & Prado 3 tonne. Nothing similar in it, the 2.8 was a clear outright winner.

[@bill5300]

You're talking about a different tow test. Car Expert used a 2t load and standard cars, not a modified troopy like Ronny.

[@undahdaskin]

I appreciate the honesty Andrew, its dissapointing to see so many of the other "experts" on youtube gloss over these details and just spew out what toyota has paid them to say. Thank you

[@bobw9297]

WE run a V8 touched up to a little over 450 hp pulling a 20 ft trailer and we have gone coast to coast in Canada and average over all 14 lt per hundred .

[@stevespatrol]

Do you get the V8 diesel in Canada?

[@bobw9297]

no we don't get any of the good trucks @@stevespatrol

[@davidweber4984]

Off the showroom floor the 2.8 is better than the 4.5. The 4.5 needs money spent on a tune and exhaust which voids any powertrain warranty.

[@tosgem]

Off the showroom floor the 4.5 makes 1kw more power, running at lower temps and able to last 20 years with minimal servicing, higher tolerance for engine oils. The difference comes from the gear box. If you spend $10k on both motors the v8 will have twice the hp.

[@unna1996]

@tosgem so spend almost 100G for the v8 and then have to spend another 10 k to be able to beat the 4 cylinder ... okay keep adding .

[@tosgem]

@@unna1996 mate, on carsales I'm seeing 2.8's in the low 90's and V8's in the mid and high 90's. The price is not that much different. And both are a ripoff. But that's not even the point I was making. The v8 idles along, producing the same hp in a detuned state as the 2.8 does at a much higher stage of tune, running 28psi of boost. You don't buy the V8 to beat the 2.8 in a drag race, I'm just saying it demonstrates the difference in the engines that you can tune the v8 up and get 300kw out of it for $10k, where as that power is unatainable for the 2.8, at least for anywhere near that price. The V8 would be cheaper to build a 12s quarter mile car out of than the 2.8. But that is not the point of these vehicles!

[@lawrenceproctor8613]

have to disagree with the V8 idling along. If you have actually used them in the field loaded as I have with National Parks and RFS you have to ring the V8s neck to get them moving and to keep moving. Not to forget they sit at 2500rpm at highway speeds which drinks fuel.@@tosgem

[@tosgem]

@@lawrenceproctor8613 you're talking about gearing issues. Look at the temps the v8 runs at under loads compared to the 2.8 (Hilux or Landcruiser)

[@pablomax9376]

Wait, you are telling me that you tuned your V8 and it is somehow better than your stock, untuned 2.8 engine? Who could imagine such a thing!!

[@itslev4404]

⬆Commonsense would think that. but all these comments tend to argue😂

[@ChristineKenyon]

Not surprised. Thank you Andrew for the info!

[@user-gf3mu5uc8j]

Thank you for your logic! I have said countless of times to morons that you can get some serious performance improvements with the 4.5 v8 with some mild tuning. The 4.5 V8 diesel can easily handle more because of it's advantage of extra cylinders and capacity over the 2.8 four. A proper tune and decent exhaust and intake system the 4.5 v8 is another beast of its own.

[@commonsense-grs]

You shouldn't have to spend another fortune on the engine after spending a fortune on the car in the first place. Also, as soon as you do mods on the engine, your warranty is gone. Make the car what the people want in the first place, but not Toyota.

[@Luke-rt9gy]

i would like to know what this magic tune is that gives these crazy increases with no proof and bugger all supporting mods. what's your theory behind why the 4.5 can handle more because of extra cylinders and capacity? bigger is not always better. facts are the 2.8 has well and truly outperformed the4.5 in almost every aspect of testing. what you beleive means nothing against evidence.

[@hartzland7658]

​@@Luke-rt9gyMate even if the thousands of people who own & mod these things tried to convince you of what you can get out of them you still wouldn't believe them. So pack up your 4 pot screamer & go watch something you might have a clue about.

[@Luke-rt9gy]

@@hartzland7658 lol i beleive in evidence you beleive whatever your told. most people exaggerate. for example some people like yourself pay people to change oil on your vehicle, come home and put comments on youtube implying others have no clue.

[@alastairc.5219]

Auto vs Manual I hear all of the hype, however youtube seem to be ignore how much difference the auto makes to acceleration (in addition to gear ratios). Andrew spot on, V8 for longevity, 4 cylinder for economy.

[@default9740]

I currently have three 70 Series: a 1KZ78 (1995), a V8 76 (2012), and a V8 78 (2021 Troopy). The oldest and newest are stock. The 2012 V8 76 has a module remap. Major performance difference over the newer, stock V8 Troopy. Especially when towing. That said, the fully coil sprung, 3.0L 1995 1KZ Prado is the most comfortable to ride in, even with 8 adults on board! Horses for courses.

[@stevenwoodbridge5389]

I have the 2.8 79 and comming from a V8 its worlds apart. Towing,performance on the road etc etc . New technology has now shown the v8 where its place is .

[@TheSerafinwit]

Basically he's saying that the 2.8 in standard is better that the v8 standard.

[@4xoverland]

got it in one

[@rich7447]

I'm a previous owner of a 350 hp/650 lb ft L6 diesel and I am refreshed to hear your perspective. I'm currently waiting for a 500hp/1200h lb ft 6.7L diesel and can't comment on the performance until I get it.

[@martinarthur8928]

Was it a Toyota diesel.... if yes.... what is your opinion on it

[@rich7447]

@@martinarthur8928 Cummins diesel and I loved it. I don't think Toyota makes a diesel with that much torque.

[@keithbeaty3292]

Exactly!!!! At last a common sense discussion on this topic. There is always a price to pay for extra power. In this case it will be a shorter engine life and less pulling power under high load👍

[@magicalvortex]

At the moment the 2.8 is nice and tight, wait till the honeymoon is over, LOL.

[@Brettj77]

​@@magicalvortexyou know this engine has been out for ages towing vans and boats, for those that don't want the shit rig that is the 70 series

[@jimbojumbo-os1np]

@@magicalvortex Some of the 2.8s have already crossed 400,000kms. They have more power than the slight detune the Landcruiser's get too. I think this is all just people being afraid of change. I could understand if they were swapping with a new engine or something but its tried and tested at this point and just as reliable as the v8.

[@gary412222]

I've have a 2018 76 . I'm getting just on 10lt per 100km . Yes that's what I'm getting. Yes careful driving and the engine is stock standard. Pulling a 2.5ton caravan I got 14lt per 100 . I love my v8 wagon.❤

[@4xoverland]

that is really impressive.

[@gary412222]

Yes .I bought it second hand from Toyota Cairns 2 years ago with 91K . Was a ex rental. Only fitted a DWIZ back axle track correction and catch can .( Ps I'm also an ex RSA expat 20 yrs)

[@timfenton2446]

Old man yells at clouds

[@bbqcrew1]

In the 1920s Rolls Royce made a magnificent 7l six cylinder engine that was used in the Silver Ghost. It is a work of art, that produced 50hp. Times change, and none of us would want that engine in a modern car. Getting worked up about changes in technology is pointless. V8s are great engines, and it seems that the 2.8l is a well developed evolution. If you love the V8, enjoy it, but technology will continue to evolve, and for good reason.

[@cleemensassmannshausen8354]

Depends on what you expect: the 7l engine will easily run over one million km, the 2.8 will retire after 300‘000km… No pros without cons….that‘s technology…

[@bbqcrew1]

​@@cleemensassmannshausen8354 fair point, but it's not simply a matter of kw/litre. Lots of factors at play, not a simple conversation for the comments section

[@diggerman8337]

This guys a bit intense

[@mb3558]

Bit of an old 👵 👜

[@l-n-s356]

Im fine with my 3.0 4cyl 1KD prado thank you 😊

[@JohnTregaskis]

Me too.

[@chrisandshazza01]

I did the Canning Stock Route in a shorty40 running a boosted 6.5l Chev V8 intercooled TD. Exhaust was ahhhhh about 800mm long from the turbo being a side pipe. Loved that vehicle. What memories, love my V8’s and Barra turbos. Would I go the 2.8 over the V8???? Everyday of the week🤘🤘

[@benchadwick1754]

I love your energy and enthusiasm. if I close my eyes whilst listening I could almost say you are the long lost South African brother of David and Richard Attenborough.

[@gullf1sk]

Imagine if they made a 1.8 turbodiesel, it would be even more doubly betterer than the v8, if you follow the logic of people who think that physics took a break when the 2.8 came out

[@MaCcAM40a3]

This is such a contradictory comment, the 2.8 also flows far better than the 1VD, has a far more efficient intake and exhaust and deals with heat far better. Just because you have more displacement doesn’t mean you’re going to have a stronger, more reliable or powerful motor. A motor that is going to burn less fuel, at a far more efficient rate than a bigger motor is going to last longer and perform better than a bigger less efficient motor, especially when you looking at casting qualities of key components. You need to get your mind out of the 80’s

[@gullf1sk]

@@MaCcAM40a3 So Toyota, on purpose, put an outdated version of the v8 in the landcruiser, because there is no reason why the 1vd cant have an intake and exhaust as efficient as the 2.8. All things being equal, the v8 is superior. There is no replacement for displacement.

[@MaCcAM40a3]

@@gullf1sk except things aren't equal, thats the point. Ofcourse displacement in an identical motor will beat out a lesser displacement motor. But that is never the case, we look at real world situations not imaginary bench racing in your mind. Not my fault you all fan boy over a motor which is poorly developed and done cheaply because its only offered in 2 markets around the world.

[@mitchell5064]

@@gullf1sk the 1vd was outdated 10 years ago. 1gd is a better engine. period, its allready been proven since its come out over 7 years ago

[@oggyoggy1299]

You must be hoping for the 9 litre V16 and the wonderful benefits that’ll provide.

[@davidruslan3533]

Really appreciate this! All the hype about the 2.8 had me questioning whether I made the right decision to get the V8, which after almost two years since signing on the dotted line, is finally in my garage. But this hits the nail on the head and I won't be letting go of that V8.

[@mark-ni5fv]

I also met another bloke about the same time who was towing a caravan with his Toyota V8 diesel engine across the Nullarbor and hit a head wind and had to pull over for the night because he could actually see his fuel gauge needle moving and his dash told him he was averaging 27 litres per 100 klms !

[@TheTripleDubya]

Not unheard of for any tow vehicle in a headwind.

[@JimBob-vb8oz]

Pfft amateur. I get that every day in a petrol 105 series 🤣🤣🤣🤣😭😭😭😭

[@PhilipMakowski]

@@JimBob-vb8oz your grandchildren thank you for doing your part in cooking the planet

[@TheTripleDubya]

@@PhilipMakowski the whole planet runs on carbon, some of us want to help.

[@JimBob-vb8oz]

@@PhilipMakowski I’ll think of that while I’m eating my baby whale steak tonight

[@Goose_JB74]

Andrew, compare apples with apples. Stock vs stock or tuned vs tuned. Car will always feel better after a tune vs a car with a factory map.

[@procwave]

Thanks Andrew... finally someone said it! :)

[@chriskitchener1129]

I just wanted for Mitsubishi 3.2ltr diesel to be up-tuned instead of the de-tuning it was subjected to. The Triton military standard 'Canter truck' drive train equipped dual cab only needed a chassis upgrade and up-tune from scratch, to enable the 3.5 t towing of your 22' van. No, the extending of the existing chassis was not good enough by a long shot. Mitsubishi almost had it right.

[@johnossendorf9979]

As the old saying goes and still holds true, "There is no replacement for displacement". Also IMO the is no replacement for a manual transmission .

[@swatt7]

So the majority of world's major heavy truck manufacturers are all wrong in having switched to automatic transmissions?

[@johnossendorf9979]

@@swatt7 That's not my problem 😁!

[@williambennett6526]

So educational and wonderfully passionate. Thanks Andrew.

[@bryanseidel4564]

Ronny dahl did a good test which shows the 2.8 is a better vehicle for towing, also Bullet off Road in sydney proved it as well. Buying a 70 series on the showroom floor and just going ahead and using it, the 2.8 is far superior to the V8....i get it, people love buying cars and modifying them but stock for stock...never late in a 2.8

[@magicalvortex]

Maybe Ronny Dahl is having buyers remorse and is wanting to flip it at the best possible price. Who wants to buy the 2.8?, the Toorak Tractor.

[@toyotadiesel4970]

That test was not fair, 35 VS 31, different weight, auto vs manual, also who knows the real power of Ronny's so called "tune", i've seen plenty of bad tuneups, or abused tuned engines that perform worse than stock.

[@philg2468]

Bullet's 4 cyl uses more fuel towing (18-20 L/100k) than my V8 gets with a slightly bigger van (16-17L/100k). He does fang it though.

[@espkh1549]

@@magicalvortexmy house is in toorak… I ain’t never gonna drive japs cars …have some self esteem buddy

[@4WHEELSHOP4X4]

Thanks for you appreciation, nice comparison 1GD vs. 1VD-FTV, go ahead great work.

[@philipwoodhouse4736]

Finally someone making sense. It is simple physics, you can never get the same amount of explosive energy from a displacement that is 40% smaller with the same fuel source. I wonder if we are seeing a future where you tubers are being held to the same level of broadcasting accuracy as the traditional media?

[@fourocker]

I feel that long term history will show the 2.8 as a mistake, it may well end up plagued with issues because, it's lifespan will be much shorter as you've said and I must agree with you, the 4.5 ltr inline six in my 80 series is such a lump, thirsty and lazy but still going solidly and smoothly, it simply isn't stressed,

[@JimsCS2]

You can get 700nm out of the 2.8 easily without increasing boost over stock. Comparing modified to stock is stupid

[@cenzofrisina6517]

💯

[@SeanSteggs]

Best you look at Ronny Dahl towing comparison. He’s been a V8 owner and tourer for ever. He does side by side tests and the 4 leaves the 8 for dead.

[@Luke-rt9gy]

im sorry to say but i have seen hard facts and statistics that debunk most of the points made in this video, you have no stats or facts to back up any of the claims you are making and you are putting far to much value on a tune for the 4.5. i deal with a large volume of these vehicles , tunes and un touched , both platforms and i can tell you the 2.8 is the far superior engine and box. the idea that the 2.8 is "high strung" therefore unreliable is also here say and baseless.

[@riaanm6596]

FINALLY!!!!! Someone is making an honest comparison and not saying what Toyota wants you to say!! Well done for standing up and blowing all the V8 killer comments out the water... Must have been difficult speaking up against some of your colleagues you know personally and even after owning the new 2.8 Troopy yourself. Standing up for the old V8 by calling a spade a spade!! Well done Andrew.

[@gureno19]

The only replacement for displacement is high boost. But with high boost comes high temperatures and high wear.

[@nigallukas3113]

V8 all the way ❤❤❤❤

[@Bigcountry_littlelegs]

The auto with its torque converter is doing the heavy lifting with the 4cyl in its performance

[@jefftheaussie2225]

No doubt about that and I wonder what the diff ratio is too.

[@Bigcountry_littlelegs]

@@jefftheaussie2225 diffs are same or maybe 4.3 instead of 4.1

[@DabDabGoose]

You would need to look at the Blocks of both as a whole, alot of newer Toyota stuff has came with much thicker cylinder walls on the smaller turbo engines which allows them even in smaller displacement packages to handle significantly more boost, of course when it comes to pistons and the like both can be changed but the block it self is the one thing that can't.

[@motorsportfreak1]

Have a look at car expert channel on KZbin. They compare latest model V8 vs 2.8 under stringent dynometer and caravan towing. 2.8 wins in every category when both standard for towing.

[@TheGump007]

Because the 2.8 comes from the factory in a much more highly tuned state than the V8. Better exhaust, more gear ratios to use, 27psi of boost compared to the 8psi of the V8, much better air intake for the size of the motor.... the list go's on and on. Apply the same highly tuned state to the V8 and it would be a lot better than the 2.8.

[@TwoTubesADV]

That may be but Andrew is saying stock V8 is vastly under tuned and just needs a tweak to be hands down a better engine. 2.8 is already highly tuned to get the performance it does and has no room for improvement (much)

[@speeeddmonx]

You are 110% right on the $$ with your common sense and intelligent commentary..I am a BIG FAN..I APPRECIATE your common sense approach!!!!❤

[@TheMidrev]

Aussies used to say, nothing sounds like V 8. And that’s the truth in many ways. If I have 100k to purchase the vehicle and another 100+k to modifying it surely I can dig in for extra six bucks per 100 kms to feed the beast.

[@Tom-lf8hx]

When you measure your EGTs it has to be pre turbo, so you really tell how how it really is, after the turbo/dpf etc it will be colder

[@shaunspies1108]

Thank you Sir, for breaking down the logic so that mere mortals can understand it. I am so sick and tired of magazines spewing rubbish, that is totally accepted as gospel, by people I thought had logic. How on earth can 4 cylinders, with almost half the capacity, ever outperform a V8?

[@davidmilledge221]

At 500k the little motor would be buggered

[@reubs91]

So will the rest of the car… by 500k on any landcruiser you would have replaced/completely overhauled every single part - unless your just highway driving.

[@pwhappy1]

I have a 1995 1 HZ 80 series .It has been everywhere, (Anne Beadall highway Canning, Googs track, and on the dirt throughout ; NSW, QLD, SA and WA ) , tows a fully loaded 1 ton brick with the original; gearbox, (with some syncros. wearing out) diffs, starter motor and transfer case.I blew an engine as a result of a workshop error. The most recent drama was a head light relay fixed for $100 over easter by the old bloke auto sparky in Port Augusta. I am very proud that I will enter the crematorium (horizontally) well before the 80 series wears out. @@reubs91

[@CraigBarron-qx9bq]

The question might be, what risk is Toyota mitigating with the 2.8? It's probably more about the Government's emissions fines/taxes....

[@hawk3356]

Do you have any thoughts on those 8 speed auto swaps going in the v8?

[@johncunningham4820]

The V-8 should have dual air intakes and a Front mounted intercooler plus twin 3 inch exhaust . The bad fuel figures are BECAUSE the damn thing can't breathe . However , Toyota is discontinuing the 1VD engine .

[@JackieY-i3i]

I would disagree. I sold my 22 Troopy for the 2.8 and have also owned several V8's as has Andrew and feel I'm well placed to comment. The 2.8 is far better in all respects, far far better towing and load carrying. I think we need to remember what Andrews job is here too. He's a KZbinr targetting a controversial topic between the new 70 series engines and is (in my opinion anyway) jealous of Ronnys success in the same media business and thus is targeting his comments and videos. If the 2.8 was so bad, Andrews mate Sean at Mission 4x4 wouldn't have his current V8 on Carsales for 185k to sell it and buy a 2.8. I'd say Andrew @4xoverland is just chasing likes and controversy for the sake of likes and views, as this is his job.

[@garyball5095]

We will see how long the 2.8 engine lasts over time my old 1984 landcruiser ute did at least 1 million kms

[@chrisbadenhorst1609]

Yes I drove 6 x v8s and the 2.8 in its standard form overshadows the v8 in its, std form . If both are tuned to same spec the 2.8 will still eat a v8! Fuel economy is, 100% better, the auto gearbox is a game changer. I jyst got my 76 wagon in 2.8 auto, and it surprized me beyond expectations! The normal person do NOT drive around with 650kg of wood in their car!! I bought this cruiser as my everyday driver, and so far it is phenomenal. Stop firvmcing ur biased opinion on people. U suck!

[@jimbojumbo-os1np]

@@garyball5095 People need to look up what they're even arguing about, this isn't a new engine, its already over a decade old with high km examples.

[@Livingfor4wding]

I'm so so glad to hear all of what you have just said and we know it's the truth they are different engines suited to different applications.

[@brownhairydog6472]

It's funny watching this debate unfold. Fans of the V8 (and I include myself) carry on about longevity and performance potential through upgrades. An objective view of the four pot would note that it's not only decades ahead in technology development but also fitted to millions of hiluxes which go forever so have proven reliability. This is like comparing an old Holden 308 to a modern for cylinder turbo which produces three times the power and maintains reliability. Of course a V8 always win the soundtrack battle..

[@cosmosdaniel4791]

I'm definitely happy for your generous open honesty Andrew on the comparison of the 2.8 diesel engines and v8 4.5 diesel engines- thanks for your opinion and options on the these two diesel engines but still love the v8 4.5...

[@antonionunes998]

So, Andrew, do you think Ronny Dahl is being Toyota sponsored to promote the 4 cylinder?

[@markbroad119]

I don't daily but regularly drive my 7,500 '95 F250 powerstroke. After adding 100hp with a tuner and 4" exhaust without mufflers,I can get 19 mpg. Before the tuner it wouldn't get over 14-15. A very detuned truck from the factory Internal combustion engines are air pumps. The more and quicker you can get air through it the more power you make

[@Mookiemadskillz]

Ronny got His depends all bunched up 😂

[@BEACHV8]

Truth is a bitter pill for most. Thanks for an intelligent, fact based video. I’m accosted when I fill my V8 Y62 and I reign myself I from 2 answers. 1) it’s a V8 so if you can’t afford it by an exploding vehicle.. 2) 33inch tyres and mods…my dream car..

[@sleddogsam]

If this is your conviction…let’s see the evidence. Ronnie’s evidence based testing actually shows the opposite of what you think. Prove it with numbers, not subjective opinion

[@ianweal3081]

Further to Ronnie's testing, go over to Car Expert where he puts stock V8 against stock 4. No-one can say it's because of weight, tyres, or anything else but the 4 cylinder absolutely smashed the V8. V8 having to go to 1st gear just to pull van up incline 4 cylinder pulls well on. We all know you can tune a V8 but that comes at further cost where you can get into a 4 cylinder from dealer and just get into it. Should you want, it can be tuned also bearing in mind it already performs better than the V8 it doesn't require a extensive tune to still outdo a tuned V8. Car Experts tests clearly takes speculation out of it, 4 cylinder clearly better option.

[@rhystekely5622]

Interesting to see Andrew say its harder to get more power out of the smaller engine. I can see his logic. But modern turbo engines respond well to a tune and the addition of a down pipe etc to help the turbo flow. Squeezing power out of an NA is always harder, doesn't matter the size.

[@kadmow]

- none of the comparisons here are NA.

[@rhystekely5622]

@@kadmow My bad, I forgot the V8 was turbo.

[@terryc47]

Well done Andrew, totally agree. Especially with size of air intake. Smaller engine does not require a larger volume of air, because the hose size used match the supply required for size of the cubic inch of the cylinders It has to fill, and all points in between. One could liken it to.... imagine filling a 20 liter bucket with a 12mm garden hose [1/2 inch] (standard size in Australia) fills it okay. Now try filling a 40 liter bucket with same hose. Slower, takes a long time. But increase the size of the pipe from the supply source (i.e. pipe out on the street) to 25mm [1 inch] Now fill the 40 liter bucket. Fills it a lot easier and quicker. Yes the analagy given is liquid but when it comes to current flow through obstacles, the arithmatic is all very similar. Its comes down to understanding molecules being drawn passed restrictions.

[@banjomaisey9050]

It is common Dog F##K no substitute for cubes no matter how you try and sell it. Well put Andrew..

[@DJTrumpMAGA]

He didn’t say no substitute for cubes, he said they are designed for different applications.

[@philipmann9548]

This makes me so glad that I have kept my 1994 4.2 l 6cyl 5 speed manual that I bought in 1994. Just clocked over 700000 km. I have never had a serious problem with this car. Never been garaged, Washed monthly. Serviced fastidiously every 10000 km.Permenantly carrying 850 kg as is my daily drive and weekend workhorse. It has never let me down. I have a great mechanic whom knows and cares and a great body man whom also knows and cares. We love our iconic troopie and can’t thank Toyota enough for building such a wonderful old girl for us. 10 points to Peninsula 2 and 4wd and Classic Customs for fastidiously caring for my faithful loyal old girl. Yes she is slow but I’m never in a hurry and she returns 10.5 l per 100 km hwy loaded. Love it

[@afriquelesud]

Andrew, readjust your mind. Very few people want "a build". We neither have the time, nor the skill, nor the resources to spend a small fortune on a truck, only to start adapting it. Get a reality check: we want stock standard trucks, that we can get into and do a good day's work. Your hobby is to "build." That's not our interest. And, like Mr Cadogan, the unnecessary rants are unpleasant. Maybe that's why you get ridiculed on many 4x4 enthusiast forums. Please allow the vast majority of people to be very normal, regular people with average needs. We need reliable trucks that can deliver, out there on the farm, the mine, maybe up the Caracal Route or Gomorogh Pass. That won't require silly lift kits (that doesn't give greater ground clearance in the first place) and we won't need a "build" for going to Garaghab. Please consider how your extremism and incessant negativity affect others. We know you can do better. Just try harder to be more compatible with those around you. Please. Even my wife goes hiding in a closet when she sees you on KZbin. We need practical reviews, not irrelevant rants. Between Joe and yourself, you make Toyota, 4WD and Australia look bad. I already avoid anything from Down Under. Change your pitch. Listen to what your critics sing in a chirus, reflect. Mature.

[@chir0pter]

No

[@fatmanoverlanding]

V8TD 70 series fans just all nodded in unison to Andrew's rant. 😁

[@Treeesmith]

Drove the 4.5 tdv8 for a while with a chip bin and chipper, 3t empty, 4.3t with chipper, pulled like a train even loaded. Stopping the front wheels from locking up was a far bigger issue than grunt

[@4WDG]

Well said. I have a 2.8 GD6 AT hilux and it’s gutless when fully loaded. The AT gearbox does the 2.8 no favors. I would love a V8 just for that engine grunt and if your conservative driving figures are correct then it’s a win-win for me. Love your work ASPW!!!! 🏆

[@DutchieTranskei]

The BEST explanation EVER!! My 2016 V8 will play with ANY 2.8 Landcruiser....... I am not downing the 2.8 - however, do not compare it to the V8

[@garryxaba832]

Thank you so much for the video sir! I feel better now, knowing that someone out there shares the same feeling about this V8 killer nonsense.