Anyone drive a HILUX?
- Thread starter visual
- Start date
Have a land cruiser diesel which has clocked nearly 700K. Hardly replaced anything on it and starts first time every time. My opinion of toyota commercials in general is that they are excellent reliable vehicles, especially the diesels. Turbos tend to use a bit more fuel if you boot them, but generally you get better mileage from a diesel. Do the usual checks to see what the actual vehicle is like but I think you should do ok with it.
- Joined
- 14 February 2005
- Posts
- 15,306
- Reactions
- 17,549
We've had quite a few different utility type vehicles at work, comments as follows.
Note that all of these are cab/chassis vehicles fitted with our own design (not manufacturer supplied) tray. It's a fairly standard flat tray design with the addition of a mining truck style guard over the roof, load retaining pins on the roof and rear "hurdle". Actually there's quite a few of these on the roads in Tas now since the tray manufacturer seems to be offering our design to others. We should have patented it...
Note also that these vehicles are leased for two years and then replaced. They get a bit of a workout since we have a legitimate need to drive over obstacles which would make the average driver worry about damage to the vehicle (but we have no choice...). Also we have an added electrical load (used intermittently) of approximately 10 amps. We also do quite a bit of normal highway driving. All of these vehicles have been serviced by the relevant dealer at intervals specified by the manufacturer.
The verdict?
Mitsubishi Triton. No problems with the 4WD model at all. V6 petrol engine but the fuel economy is not good, over 15 litres per 100km. We did have problems with 2WD petrol (4 cyl engine) models some years ago - ground clearance too low for our needs (ridiculously so with a heavy load), annoying whistles around the window when travelling at highway speed and a burnt out alternator. Another section of our organisation has used turbo(?) diesel models and to my understanding the on-road performance is quite good.
Toyota Hilux. We've had several 4 cyl petrol Hilux vehicles (2WD) around 1999 - 2001. Zero problems with reliability or build quality (outstanding) but the rear suspension was far too "soft" for carrying heavy loads (ie half tonne loads plus the tray itself or towing a single axle trailer) which created safety hazards with very light steering. We became sufficiently concerned to arrange the test of a fully loaded vehicle on the skid pan at the police academy with alarming results. Fuel consumption for the petrol 4 cyl (2.7 litre) model was about 13 litres per 100 km. We do not have any Hilux vehicles at present but I note that the design of the present model seems similar to the Holden Rodeo in terms of ground clearance, suspension and so on so I would assume that the soft suspension issue probably doesn't apply to current models. Another section of our organisation had problems with poor on-road performance from a non-turbo diesel model.
Holden Rodeo. Various irritating quality problems though no actual breakdowns. Windshields snapping off in strong winds when the vehicle was parked, repeated clutch problems (the same drivers have had no similar problems with other vehicles), every such vehicle apart from the present one has had the battery "errupt" spilling sulphuric acid everywhere, various rattles etc. On the plus side the actual performance of the vehicle in use has been very good, no issues with driveability etc and it carries heavy loads very well. The build quality issues were with late 1990's 4 cyl versions and have not appeared in our current 6 cyl vehicle. We got an auto this time to avoid any clutch issues. Fuel consumption (petrol) I don't know but to my understanding it's similar to the others.
Holden Commodore. No problems in use, carrying loads etc but various build quality issues. Window winder fell off on the first day, repeated rear brake problems (meaning that the hand brake doesn't work at all) and now the power steering pump sounds seriously crook. Fuel consumption (petrol) around 16 - 17 litres per 100 km.
Ford Falcon. Absolutely the best performer in use, carrying heavy loads etc and very car-like to drive. They do have various build quality issues however. The most ridiculous of which is that if the door is opened from the inside and someone outside lifts the door opening handle before the inside one is released then it breaks the lock and there is no way to keep the door shut (apart from rope...). Also one (of 3) had a diff failure after about 10,000 km. Seat belts are a problem too - all have had problems with the belt failing to retract. In the interests of safety we have insisted on complete replacement of the seat belts rather than repair. Ford have acknowledged (after taking 3 months to get spare parts!) that the diff failure and door handle issues are a common problem. The replacement diff has had no problems so presumably the quality issue there has been rectified(?). I am told by a courier company owner that there are issues with brakes being expensive to maintain on various Ford commercial vehicles - apparently the discs (not just the pads) wear out excessively. We have not had this problem however, presumably due to changing vehicles frequently. Fuel consumption (petrol) is around 14 litres / 100km driven conservatively or 17 litres / 100km with heavy loads etc.
What would I buy? Toyota is tops for build quality and reliability. No dispute there. But I would be wanting to check that the suspension is in fact now adequate I were planning on towing a single axle trailer or carrying more than a modest load. We have the Rodeo simply due to past problems with the Toyota suspension. (Since we lease the vehicles we have no option to fit other than manufacturer's standard suspension.)
If I wanted something that drives more like a car than a commercial vehicle (but is still a legitimate commercial vehicle) then the Falcon is tops by far provided that you make sure both sides of the door opener (on the same door) aren't used at once (Ford informs me that failure in this event is 100% certain so don't try it!). The on-road handling of the Falcon is certainly better than that of the others with the possible exception of the Commodore (roughly equal).
All of these vehicles have relatively high fuel consumption. If would strongly suggest looking at a turbo diesel if you want reasonably good performance and keep the fuel costs down. Even though diesel is no longer cheaper at the pump than petrol, you will typically need a third less of it so it's cheaper overall. If you aren't concerned about speed travelling up hills etc. then a non-turbo diesel might be OK. Whether or not LPG is worth considering is questionable. Excise changes will increase the price somewhat over the coming years relative to petrol whilst, contrary to popular belief, LPG pricing IS linked to the oil price. It is certainly a second preference after diesel IMO but would be worth looking at if you live somewhere where LPG is relatively cheap. If going LPG then factory fitted will generally lead to better performance than a conversion of a petrol system since the latter commonly use relatively low tech systems.
The overall cost is a hard question to answer since the leasing rate we pay is unique to us as a customer. It's based on past history with accidents, resale value etc for individual vehicles. We can lease two identical vehicles and pay different rates for each one. That said, the differences between models don't seem to be large. Whether or not this would be reflected in private ownership costs I really don't know.
Note that all of these are cab/chassis vehicles fitted with our own design (not manufacturer supplied) tray. It's a fairly standard flat tray design with the addition of a mining truck style guard over the roof, load retaining pins on the roof and rear "hurdle". Actually there's quite a few of these on the roads in Tas now since the tray manufacturer seems to be offering our design to others. We should have patented it...
Note also that these vehicles are leased for two years and then replaced. They get a bit of a workout since we have a legitimate need to drive over obstacles which would make the average driver worry about damage to the vehicle (but we have no choice...). Also we have an added electrical load (used intermittently) of approximately 10 amps. We also do quite a bit of normal highway driving. All of these vehicles have been serviced by the relevant dealer at intervals specified by the manufacturer.
The verdict?
Mitsubishi Triton. No problems with the 4WD model at all. V6 petrol engine but the fuel economy is not good, over 15 litres per 100km. We did have problems with 2WD petrol (4 cyl engine) models some years ago - ground clearance too low for our needs (ridiculously so with a heavy load), annoying whistles around the window when travelling at highway speed and a burnt out alternator. Another section of our organisation has used turbo(?) diesel models and to my understanding the on-road performance is quite good.
Toyota Hilux. We've had several 4 cyl petrol Hilux vehicles (2WD) around 1999 - 2001. Zero problems with reliability or build quality (outstanding) but the rear suspension was far too "soft" for carrying heavy loads (ie half tonne loads plus the tray itself or towing a single axle trailer) which created safety hazards with very light steering. We became sufficiently concerned to arrange the test of a fully loaded vehicle on the skid pan at the police academy with alarming results. Fuel consumption for the petrol 4 cyl (2.7 litre) model was about 13 litres per 100 km. We do not have any Hilux vehicles at present but I note that the design of the present model seems similar to the Holden Rodeo in terms of ground clearance, suspension and so on so I would assume that the soft suspension issue probably doesn't apply to current models. Another section of our organisation had problems with poor on-road performance from a non-turbo diesel model.
Holden Rodeo. Various irritating quality problems though no actual breakdowns. Windshields snapping off in strong winds when the vehicle was parked, repeated clutch problems (the same drivers have had no similar problems with other vehicles), every such vehicle apart from the present one has had the battery "errupt" spilling sulphuric acid everywhere, various rattles etc. On the plus side the actual performance of the vehicle in use has been very good, no issues with driveability etc and it carries heavy loads very well. The build quality issues were with late 1990's 4 cyl versions and have not appeared in our current 6 cyl vehicle. We got an auto this time to avoid any clutch issues. Fuel consumption (petrol) I don't know but to my understanding it's similar to the others.
Holden Commodore. No problems in use, carrying loads etc but various build quality issues. Window winder fell off on the first day, repeated rear brake problems (meaning that the hand brake doesn't work at all) and now the power steering pump sounds seriously crook. Fuel consumption (petrol) around 16 - 17 litres per 100 km.
Ford Falcon. Absolutely the best performer in use, carrying heavy loads etc and very car-like to drive. They do have various build quality issues however. The most ridiculous of which is that if the door is opened from the inside and someone outside lifts the door opening handle before the inside one is released then it breaks the lock and there is no way to keep the door shut (apart from rope...). Also one (of 3) had a diff failure after about 10,000 km. Seat belts are a problem too - all have had problems with the belt failing to retract. In the interests of safety we have insisted on complete replacement of the seat belts rather than repair. Ford have acknowledged (after taking 3 months to get spare parts!) that the diff failure and door handle issues are a common problem. The replacement diff has had no problems so presumably the quality issue there has been rectified(?). I am told by a courier company owner that there are issues with brakes being expensive to maintain on various Ford commercial vehicles - apparently the discs (not just the pads) wear out excessively. We have not had this problem however, presumably due to changing vehicles frequently. Fuel consumption (petrol) is around 14 litres / 100km driven conservatively or 17 litres / 100km with heavy loads etc.
What would I buy? Toyota is tops for build quality and reliability. No dispute there. But I would be wanting to check that the suspension is in fact now adequate I were planning on towing a single axle trailer or carrying more than a modest load. We have the Rodeo simply due to past problems with the Toyota suspension. (Since we lease the vehicles we have no option to fit other than manufacturer's standard suspension.)
If I wanted something that drives more like a car than a commercial vehicle (but is still a legitimate commercial vehicle) then the Falcon is tops by far provided that you make sure both sides of the door opener (on the same door) aren't used at once (Ford informs me that failure in this event is 100% certain so don't try it!). The on-road handling of the Falcon is certainly better than that of the others with the possible exception of the Commodore (roughly equal).
All of these vehicles have relatively high fuel consumption. If would strongly suggest looking at a turbo diesel if you want reasonably good performance and keep the fuel costs down. Even though diesel is no longer cheaper at the pump than petrol, you will typically need a third less of it so it's cheaper overall. If you aren't concerned about speed travelling up hills etc. then a non-turbo diesel might be OK. Whether or not LPG is worth considering is questionable. Excise changes will increase the price somewhat over the coming years relative to petrol whilst, contrary to popular belief, LPG pricing IS linked to the oil price. It is certainly a second preference after diesel IMO but would be worth looking at if you live somewhere where LPG is relatively cheap. If going LPG then factory fitted will generally lead to better performance than a conversion of a petrol system since the latter commonly use relatively low tech systems.
The overall cost is a hard question to answer since the leasing rate we pay is unique to us as a customer. It's based on past history with accidents, resale value etc for individual vehicles. We can lease two identical vehicles and pay different rates for each one. That said, the differences between models don't seem to be large. Whether or not this would be reflected in private ownership costs I really don't know.
Just like to add non-tubo diesels are probably more reliable but very slow, especially up hills. Fuel consumption however tends to be a bit better I believe. As to suspension problems with the rear, it is a fairly easy task to add extra leaf springs or beef the rear up, if that is an issue.
HI ALL,
yes i drive a hilux four wheel drive version at work.Toyota have made a great work ute. I have never driven a better vehicle on a mine site but the suspension would be too hard for the day to day around town.
Horses for courses the 2 wheel drive may be just as good.
I have not had any major problems with any toyota.
I have a diesel non turbo and the fuel consuption seems reasonable considering 50% off road driving.
Turning circle a bit wide for the supermarket car park.
anyway thats my bias opinion for this week.
CHEERS RAY
yes i drive a hilux four wheel drive version at work.Toyota have made a great work ute. I have never driven a better vehicle on a mine site but the suspension would be too hard for the day to day around town.
Horses for courses the 2 wheel drive may be just as good.
I have not had any major problems with any toyota.
I have a diesel non turbo and the fuel consuption seems reasonable considering 50% off road driving.
Turning circle a bit wide for the supermarket car park.
anyway thats my bias opinion for this week.
CHEERS RAY
Similar threads
