Hi,
Can someone please tell me what the cab noise level is like whilst driving a Landcruiser.
I have a Nissan Patrol with a diesel 4.2 non turbo motor. It has done 700,000 kms and although
I don't intend parting with the vehicle I intend looking for another vehicle next year.
The Patrol is totally reliable with the 4.2 but is rather noisy inside. I would not like to buy another Nissan since
they replaced the engine originally the 2.8 then went to the 3.0 litre both of which I don't think get great reviews.
Just wonder how the 4.2 Toyota Land Cruiser would compare re- cab noise . I would appreciate any info anyone could provide and or even engine sizes in the landcruiser range.
Thank you
Alan

Which 4.2 Landcruiser?

The late model troopie and utes were probably on par with your Nissan for noise, especially the NA engines since they needed their neck wrung more. But the 70x models are built to a purpose not to a comfort level. My 100 with the FTE turbo motor is quiet until I wind down the window to listen to the turbo stereo. It’s a very refined car for its age and size

Alan

You can probably interpret the following ute information for your wagon. It is a bit tongue-in-cheek but with the wagons I think the only choices (apart from trim style) are the engines as the Toyota and Nissan look the same, drive the same - very good - and if you sit in them you have to look for the name on the steering wheel to see what you are driving.

I have had Patrol utes as my everyday car for several years with the odd Landcruiser thrown in.

Apart from a 105 Landcruiser wagon a couple of years ago which I kept for 3 months because it was unbelievably gutless with the non-turbo engine unlike the old petrol 80 series quite a few years back which was great.

The thing I like about Patrol utes is they are so much nicer to drive than a Landcruiser ute. They ride and steer very nicely while the Landcruiser is like a truck to drive. The other Landcruiser downside is the narrow track and they are very skittish at speed on gravel roads, particularly when loaded, compared with the wider track Patrol. We rent a Landcruiser every year for the Postie Bike Challenge outback rides so I get to do 5/6,000 km each year with the latest model, about 1/3 on dirt. I have had some exciting moments with a 500l fuel tank and three postie bikes on the back.

As you say, the 4.2 Nissan engine is a beauty and I was a bit wary changing to a later 3.0 because of power and reliability doubts. I was in for a bit of a shock as the 3.0 engine has considerably more power than the 4.2 and they really get up and go. The fuel consumption is probably 20% better as well. If you look at the torque curves there is nothing in it either although the 4 cylinder is achieved at higher revs.

The 4 cylinder Nissan engine family got a well deserved bad wrap when they first came out in the GU and Navara with timing chain failures, hence the "grenade motor". Nissan solved the problem by redesigning the engine within a couple of years and the mean-time-between-failure is now slightly better than the Landcruiser (both are very good). You need 2006 onward. People like to mouth off about the Nissan engine perpetuating the myth without knowing they are talking about a completely different animal.

The Landcruiser V8 was an absolute disaster when it first came out with hundreds of brand new vehicles having engines replaced for failure due to oil problems in the first 50,000 km yet we don't hear what a pile of junk they are. Their fuel consumption is still atrocious but Toyota fixed the problem the same as Nissan.

There are as many Patrols out there as Landcruisers with 400,000 km on the clock and still going strong.

Both vehicles are tough, reliable machines and apart from the above comments it is a bit like the Holden/Ford argument.

My opinion only.

Lang

I have a CRD ZD30 patrol, GU4 and my partner has a 4HZ (V8 petrol) landcruiser 105 series, both wagons. Except for the power delivery of the V8 Cruiser I would drive the Patrol every time. Prefer the seating position and general feel of the car and it’s far less skidish on the dirt as Lang said despite the Cruiser having independent front suspension. As for cabin noise it’s much of a muchness. I also like that you don’t pay Toyota tax on the Patrols.

In saying all of this the Patrol is for sale and the Cruiser will go not long after it.

Hope that babble helps in some way.

A couple of years ago I needed to replace my 1989 Patrol traytop 4.2 na diesel, which was close to 500,000 km and mechanically untouched and still OK. Considering I bought it second hand and towed a 3,000 litre goose-neck boom-spray with it for 9 years, I looked for another Patrol and ended up with a 2004 4.2 turbo diesel. The motor was OK but didn't get up and go like I expected, so I got an after market turbo and 3" exhaust fitted, which helped.
I asked around about the 3 litre common rail which has a bad name and was told by a diesel injection specialist that the problem is injectors. If the injectors are serviced every 100,000 km all will be fine. If not they will gradually over-fuel and cause overheating and damage to the alloy components, hence the common saying "cooked the motor". I agree with Lang that the Nissan/Toyota debate is very much like the Holden/Ford carry-on, so in the end it is up to personal choice.

My brothere s got a 1995 6 cyl petrol cruiser station wagon............got it dirt cheap new,cause the dealer had to sell a quota to get diesel utes......anyhoo,hes had it since 1995,its started to leak oil and use oil down the stem seals......he uses 15/50 oil to stop it smoking............he likes it that much ,hes going to buy a new petrol motor on the taxman before he retires.His missus is into draught horses ,and they aint light Done 500,k,and IMHO all it needs is the seals done .Ithink its the last one with the solid front axle.

Last solid front axle cruiser wagon was 2002 105 series.

Could be the last one with the "big" front axle.

Jarrod.

Yes, I think the 105 was the last solid leaf spring front axle. They were mostly the Plain-Jane edition for the mines and Government work with the double rear doors.

There is almost total agreement in all the 4x4 forums - very, very, rare! - that the solid front axle is far superior to the coils for serious off-road operations.

I took my 105 across the Simpson, although that could hardly be called serious off-road operations, and noticed no better ability than the coil Patrol I had taken across a year earlier. The lack of power in the 1HZ engine had me putting the Gumtree ad on line at Roma on the way home.

Lang

Lang I think you have some confusion over the Landcruiser nomenclature. All 105’s had a coil sprung live axle front end. There are NO 100 or 105 series of ANY kind with leaf springs.

As for off road ability, you MAY be referring to the IFS front end in the 100 series as compared to the 105. Anyone who says the IFS is shit off road for all but perhaps the .1% of hardcore off-roaders is full of it and hasn’t got a clue. Another case of the usual “it’s different and new so it must be shit” brigade. I have punted my IFS Landcruiser over all kinds of terrain and not only has it done it with similar levels of ease to a live axle, but the ride quality is FAR superior.