G-Wagen vs. TLC 70/80

[Gurkha]

My understanding is that the 1FZ-FE in the 70 and 80 Series trucks was designed for three rebuilds (a rebuild consisting of simply re-shimming the valves), with 300,000 km between rebuilds. That's 1.2 million kilometers as a the design spec (which of course is usually underestimated by the manufacturer). I have seen examples with 500,000+ miles (not kilometers), but beyond that, the trucks are simply not old enough to have been driven that far yet. The B and H series diesels are also no slouches.

As for the suspension, the G makes up for lack of articulation with lockers. So what about a fully locked 70 or 80? Eats the G alive on the trail. Been there, done that (at least for the 80, can't get the 70 in the U.S.). And low ratio sucks on the G. 2.14:1 is about the worst I've seen in an off-roader.

Sorry, not trying to be a troll here, just trying to correct some misconceptions.

Tell you what, there are plenty of Toyota engines on ply here including D series, also B and H series, best among them are the H series built by HINO and none of them approach the life of OM616 and 617. 1FZ-FE are quite common as well. All are very good but MB diesel, they arent'.

As for eating G alive with lockers, I seriously doubt that, the G chassis can take torture that would wring the TLC chassis to a twist. I have seen cases of idler arm shearing off from TLC chassis, nothing like that ever happens with G. My friend in South Africa has owned both G and TLC, he has praise for both but he found out that the TLC chassis to take far less attrition than the G. So yes, TLC is great and apart from G, its the best. It will never be a G of course.

 

[4Rescue]

Tell you what, there are plenty of Toyota engines on ply here including D series, also B and H series, best among them are the H series built by HINO and none of them approach the life of OM616 and 617. 1FZ-FE are quite common as well. All are very good but MB diesel, they arent'.

As for eating G alive with lockers, I seriously doubt that, the G chassis can take torture that would wring the TLC chassis to a twist. I have seen cases of idler arm shearing off from TLC chassis, nothing like that ever happens with G. My friend in South Africa has owned both G and TLC, he has praise for both but he found out that the TLC chassis to take far less attrition than the G. So yes, TLC is great and apart from G, its the best. It will never be a G of course.

... So many poor "facts" in alot of your posts mate, but hey, you love your G's and I will agree they're awesome trucks... Are they so much better then a 70 Series Cruiser? No, not hardly, but they're awesome trucks nonethe less...

And if you want to talk about Diesel supremecy, Cummins beats both Toyota AND Mercedes into the ground in terms of duty cycles... However me thinks you're not too up to snuff on H-series Toyota Diesels they're really quite robust and are know world-wide to be a VERY reliable motor. Does Merc make a better diesel? Possibly, but at what point is one so much better then the other??? they're both amazing and will hold up to endless abuse so what if one can go for 400K and the other can go for 450K they're both phenominal if you ask me.

Now your love of the Ghurka... That just mistifies me. However it also intreagues me and makes me wish I had one around to take a look at because form the Videos shown on the web they look to be about as flimsy as a Yugo while being tested on "extreme tracks" that look like some of our driveways and "improved roads" here in Oregon I'd like to see a Ghurka hold up to a year on a Cattle station in Australia cause I really don't belive it'd last. As I said though, your love of them really makes me want to crawl around in/on one to see what they're made of. Have you ever really looked at/tinkered with a Toyota "mini-truck" or Hillux to you all??? THat frame under my own 1st Gen 4Runner defines Toyota's overbuilding of something reletive to it's size and intended usage. Toyota has always made amazingly sturdy 4wd trucks (even if the sheetmetal is a bit flimsy ) but then so has Mercedes sp frankly I'd actualy say, as I did before that the G/70series are, to me, a Tie in terms of ruggedness. I would love to own either one with either diesel plain and simple...

Cheers

Dave

 

[Gurkha]

... So many poor "facts" in alot of your posts mate, but hey, you love your G's and I will agree they're awesome trucks... Are they so much better then a 70 Series Cruiser? No, not hardly, but they're awesome trucks nonethe less...

And if you want to talk about Diesel supremecy, Cummins beats both Toyota AND Mercedes into the ground in terms of duty cycles... However me thinks you're not too up to snuff on H-series Toyota Diesels they're really quite robust and are know world-wide to be a VERY reliable motor. Does Merc make a better diesel? Possibly, but at what point is one so much better then the other??? they're both amazing and will hold up to endless abuse so what if one can go for 400K and the other can go for 450K they're both phenominal if you ask me.

Now your love of the Ghurka... That just mistifies me. However it also intreagues me and makes me wish I had one around to take a look at because form the Videos shown on the web they look to be about as flimsy as a Yugo while being tested on "extreme tracks" that look like some of our driveways and "improved roads" here in Oregon I'd like to see a Ghurka hold up to a year on a Cattle station in Australia cause I really don't belive it'd last. As I said though, your love of them really makes me want to crawl around in/on one to see what they're made of. Have you ever really looked at/tinkered with a Toyota "mini-truck" or Hillux to you all??? THat frame under my own 1st Gen 4Runner defines Toyota's overbuilding of something reletive to it's size and intended usage. Toyota has always made amazingly sturdy 4wd trucks (even if the sheetmetal is a bit flimsy ) but then so has Mercedes sp frankly I'd actualy say, as I did before that the G/70series are, to me, a Tie in terms of ruggedness. I would love to own either one with either diesel plain and simple...

Cheers

Dave

My facts are poor because they don't reflect the love of your life TLC in good light. Well I am an ex TLC owner. I never said the H series Hino engines are inferior in any sense, however they are not MB and not all MB engines come close to the legend of the two I mentioned. That goes to show your knowledge on MB. FYI, there was a massive recall on one of the H series engines, good old Toyota played it down initially, then when lawsuits piled, they went and quietly did the job. The engines would have premature crank bearing failure due to design. It affected late 80s TLCs. As for Cummins better than Mercedes and Toyota diesels, all I would say is Muuuhahahahaha, I think I have now have an idea about your general knowledge level on diesels. Cummins is not even remotely close to the engineering and design of either MB or HINO, please get the hell out of Oregon and see the world. In adverse conditions of zero maintenance and overload, only HINO and MB engines survive in trucks driven in third world regions. There is Cummins in India as well sold by Tata, the reputation of that engine by any standards is a joke when its compared to HINO engined trucks.

Gurkha flimsy, wow are you mystified, what videos are you talking about may I ask, thats a huge ball of yarn that I have ever heard one. Please read May 87 issue of German Off Road mag where it was tested against the likes of TLC, G and LR, do you know what title was given to it? Haarter Im Buschtaxi, loosely translated meaning hardest off roader ever. 10 years of road that would bring your TLC to a scrap yard and it still runs. You talk about TLC hardiness compared to G, TLC won't even last against a Russian Gaz. Since you declare the world's only tubular chassis off roader as weak and not able to survive cattle station, let me tell you, with MB powertrain, MB3 ton diff in rear, 1.8ton in front, the Gurkha outlasts TLC handsomely on Indian roads where the dainty Japanese vehicle manages to eat its flange, loose its suspension bushings, develop diff groan etc., I am not even talking the terrains, just roads after monsoons where you get bomb sized craters. When we talk about off road, the porky TLC, FJs are a joke, even the WW-II Jeeps manage to thrash them there, the Gurkha with diff locks front and rear and super flexy tubular chassis manages to run circles around the costly Japanese toy with its massive V8, kind of a shame as the Gurkha has an ancient turbo charged OM616. Isn't that a contradiction when you call the G to be capable but the same G460 based Gurkha to be weak. Just FYI, the hood on the Gurkha weighs a solid 60lb, now thats about couple of times higher than the plastic (cough) hood on a TLC.

Now I don't wish to start a G Wagen/Gurkha versus TLC war, I love them all, if there was no G or Gurkha, I would be on a TLC no matter how weak the chassis, Of course to keep a TLC, I would have to buy a welding machine to fix the chassis crack and idler arm shear but even then, its a real nice well made vehicle, G Wagen or Gurkha it would never be in its wildest dreams ever. Lastly, this is a G Wagen thread, anything MB is welcomed, TLC thread is there for ranting on your favorite pseudo dainty little Japanese toy off roader.

This is a 20 year old 2WD version of Gurkha plying on Indian roads on daily basis, I guess its quite weak as one can see.

 

[mauricio_28]

Alright, take it easy guys, take it easy...

Gurkha, I am still searching for my 463 GD300 here in Indonesia. Most recently I came across a 463 G300 with about 110k kilometers selling for US$22k. What do you think? What´s the price range for a GD300 in good condition?

 

[dclee]

So many delusions, where to start?

Again, not trying to dis Gs, I love G's and that's what I currently own. You are a former TLC owner, while I am a current owner of both, and have been so for a long time. I am pretty intimately familiar with both trucks, and won't delude myself into thinking either one does not have its faults. Neither is perfect. Heck, I'll even go so far as to defend Rovers, Patrols (though I have no direct experience with them) and even the occasional Jeep! I am not tied dogmatically to some delusion of the perfect truck, with angels singing in the background.

I also don't think it is fair (especially to newbies) to spread incorrect information (like this "weak chassis" stuff, or the "plastic" hood comment, couldn't even begin to imagine where that falsehood comes from...).

Off the top of my head, here are some of the noted problems that are documented on the various G forums:

• premature wheel bearing failures
• premature prop shaft failures
• head cracking and failure on the OM603 engines
• 5-speed Getrag gearbox durability
• not sure why, but MUCH more prone to rust, both body AND frame, to the point that frame components must be replaced (spring perches are pretty common)

My perfectly maintained G with the original OM617 has actually left me stranded before, twice. Neither time was due to electronics, they were both as a result of engine-related failures. Conversely, none of my Land Cruisers ever has let me down, and they have been MUCH more abused. My experiences and those of many people that I know both in the U.S. and places like Africa and Australia have shown the durability of the Land Cruiser. Those are also places where the G has never caught on, while Land Cruisers have taken over from Land Rovers as the workhorses of the back country, and not because it was forced on them by former Imperial masters (e.g. Rover), but because they could choose the best vehicle in the world for their intended purpose, and they chose (and continue to choose) the Land Cruiser.

And again, as far as reliability (which is not the same thing as durability), the Cruiser is still at the top of the heap. I don't think any non-deluded person could argue otherwise. Now, if you're talking durability (which again is something different), I would argue that they are basically the same.

If you've ever wheeled either truck in serious rocks (e.g. Rubicon Trail, Fordyce Creek, Paragon, Katemcy, Johnson Valley, etc.), the deficiencies in the G's suspension become RAPIDLY apparent. Like I said, been there, done that, the G does not come up roses (compared to a multi-linked or leaf-sprung Land Cruiser).

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on how the G and the Cruiser stack up against one another. I happen to think they are much more evenly matched, especially when talking apples to apples: 70 or 80 Series with factory lockers versus 460 or 461 with factory lockers. I happen to like both trucks and feel that neither one has a decisive advantage. So it really comes down to personal preference as far as I'm concerned.

BTW, I love that picture of the "Gurkha". Now I understand, it is not a Graz-produced G, it is a G clone. So for you to say the axles are standard (and even at that, they are still weaker than those on a 70 or 80 Series Land Cruiser) does not necessarily mean they are standard on an Austrian G. Also, what's up with the independent front suspension in that picture (at least that's what it looks like)? There's less ground clearance under there than on a Porsche. And 20 years old? Driving on smooth asphalt? Poo-poo, here's a 40 year old Land Cruiser driving where Gurkhas fear to tread:

 

[dclee]

...and here I am in my "weak" Land Cruiser negotiating the Gatekeeper obstacle on the Rubicon Trail (before the Forest Service dynamited it flat):

 

[Gurkha]

For every G problem that you list, I can list a quantum number more, how bout weak chassis, the chassis cracks in new FJs. Weak idler arm housing shearing off, transfer case flange premature wear. Overall weak body panels dinging with a slight rock hit. Gasoline engines with premature sludging and exhaust valve burn, sluding is a typical Toyota speciality, engine head gasket failure in the inline 6, another typical Toyo trait. Overall weak weak weak weak, few runs off road, all the drivetrain components show early signs of wear.

The fact that you fictitiously compare the so called reliability of your Toy against a MB Gelande Wagen which is legendary for its reliability combined with durability speak of peyote induced daydream at the best. Lets put it this way, TLC is competent, cheap as compared to G Wagen but in terms of durability or reliability when pushed to extremes, it will never remotely come close to a G Wagen or Gurkha or even to an extent a 80s old Nissan Patrol.

Now you are talking about Gurkha, that particular one plys in 45C weather of Rajasthan and just because its taken on a asphalt road don't necessarily mean that thats all it does. It goes through roads rural areas where they have no roads. Now about your pics, its just a joke, you call that a stock TLC, modded tires and suspension, tell you what, with just bigger wheels, the Gurkha or G would do that with ease on daily basis and wont' break their plastic parts on top of that.

Where did I say they are stock G diffs, please read my posts with care. I mentioned rear diffs from MB 307D truck and front from Hanomag utility vehicle. Where does G come in this equation is beyond my comprehension. About GC, Gurkha stock has 238mm, which is more than your stock TLC toy, so if thats low to you, get yourself an Unimog.

The idler arm in TLCs with IFS come with plastic bushings which wear down in no time, the mod is to put beefier idler arm with brass bushings which are greaseable, FYI, Gurkha has far beefier ider arm which is an integral part of the tubular chassis and they come stock with brass bushings and can be greased. So much for high tech TOY from Japan. Plastic bushings, plastic suspension and sludgemesiter engine, I think I have heard enough.

Aww gee......look at the new Tonka toy cracking under stress, a typical FJ specialty.

LOLOLOL! I guess TIGs are a standard feature when FJs are off roaded. Guess you would need a sturdy truck to carry th TIGs, I volunteer with my G300 or Gurkha, your choice.

 

[Gurkha]

Now compare the Gurkha's chassis to the toy you see above.

Now take a look at the size of the axles, chassis in G

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8x-IaAhywis

How one can compare to the toy sized chassis and axle in TLC is beyond sense.

About G Wagens rust issue, I can show you equal number of poorly maintained TLCs and FJs rusting away. The G Wagen has a stronger body corrugated sheet body panel and that makes the lines squarer compared to the play dough design TLC. Thats the reason water tends to stay in a G body compared to a TLC so when not maintained right, a G body would rust quicker than a rounded body vehicle.

 

[dclee]

I started this reply out in a very nasty manner, then realized it wasn't worth it. Sometimes, there's just no reasoning with folks. Plus, I don't know you, so I'm not going to make personal attacks. And BTW, I don't smoke peyote, but I am drinking a glass of wine right now. So let me just try to clear up a few of these misconceptions in as objective a manner as I can.

I still don't know where you're getting this plastic parts idea, if you've ever been under a real Land Cruiser, you'd know that there is nothing plastic under there (except splash guards and crap like that on the newer ones, which are not mechanical components and therefore moot for this argument). Plastic bushings? Not on any Land Cruiser I've ever serviced.

This next one is actually kinda funny! The latest FJ (I assume you mean FJ Cruiser, especially judging by those pics of yours) is not the same thing as the heavy duty Land Cruisers that I am talking about (40, 45, 55, 60, 70, 80 Series, etc.). Let me repeat that again: it is NOT a Land Cruiser. It is in fact built on the light duty Prado/GX/4Runner platform. I wonder if this is the source of all of your other mis-statements? For example, the FJ Cruiser does in fact have large plastic inserts in its hood, so maybe that is where your "plastic hood" comment comes from. But I can tell you that a real Land Cruiser has all steel up there, buddy. Please try to get your facts straight before posting this drivel.

You have a whopping statistic of exactly one for the idler arm housing. And was that even on a Land Cruiser, or was that on an FJ Cruiser (now everything you've written previously is suspect to me). Anyway, that is statistically insignificant. I personally have never seen or heard of this on a REAL Land Cruiser.

Big-end bearing problem was in one run of bearing caps for the 1HD-FTE engine in 1990. It was fixed. Other than that, this engine has been faultless, let alone the previous H, 2H, and legendary 12HT before it.

And yes, all those 40 and 50 year old Land Cruisers running around, getting regularly pounded on the rocks in the U.S. or corrugations in the Outback, they sure can't stand up to time and abuse. I'm just not sure where you're getting your data that Cruisers won't stand up to the abuse over time, and are not even "remotely" close to G's in that regard. Tell that to all the UN peacekeepers, Red Cross workers, Australian cattle drivers, and African safari companies that abuse these things. So I've gotta call b#(($#!t on that one, unless you can give me some verifiable sources (no, not car test mags, or one-off experiences of friends - show me the entire body of work).

238 mm. minimum ground clearance. That is certainly more than a stock 460, and even more than a stock 463 (211 mm.), so the Gurkha must use taller suspension coils or bigger tires. However, even at 238 mm. you have still not beat a factory stock FZJ80 Land Cruiser, not by a longshot. Minimum height at the lowest point (bottom of diff pumpkin) is 10.8", or 274 mm. (rounded down). That's more than 20% higher than the Gurkha. And don't talk to me about UNIMOGs. I've owned two of them. Capable, but the Cruisers were actually much more pleasant to wheel.

On my pics, I never said they were stock. Sure they have suspension lifts and bigger tires. But the components in question: axles, diffs, frame, even steering in the case of the 80, those are stock. The argument was about durability, and my point was that the components on a Cruiser are easily up to taking severe beatings, all the time. Also, put a G on bigger wheels and a lift and it will still NOT do that, or at least not nearly as easily. Unless you like teetering on two wheels a lot and leaving butt cheek imprints on your seats because you're clenching them so hard. I've witnessed it. Scary.

As for the axles, I must have mis-read your post (#22), where you state:
"The axles on G are standard, the Gurkha uses MB 307D axles in rear which are rated at 2.75t and Hanomag in front rated at 1.8t, it comes stock like that." I took that to mean that you were saying the axles on the G and Gurkha were the same and both were standard issue. If that is not the case, my apologies.

 

[Gurkha]

We all get passionaite and loose our senses, I am not better. The Gurkha uses tubular chassis as you can see from the pics. The GC advertised on factory TLCs are claimed to be 220mm which is 18mm shorter than Gurkha, side by side comparison reveals the same. A TLC is nowhere near a Gurkha's ground clearance.

Now here we have another contradiction to your statement, seems like according to this report your Tonka Toy's GC has serious issues. http://www.fourwheeler.com/featuredvehicles/129_0508_1993_toyota_land_cruiser_fzj80/index.html

Lastly you have stooped low to even dis the mightiest most competent off roader ever built thats the UNIMOG, tell you what, nothing from that toy maker Toyota can even remotely dream of coming close to Unimog, not even the cheap typical Japanese copy of H1 Megacruiser.

 

[dclee]

We all get passionaite and loose our senses, I am not better. The Gurkha uses tubular chassis as you can see from the pics. The GC advertised on factory TLCs are claimed to be 220mm which is 18mm shorter than Gurkha, side by side comparison reveals the same. A TLC is nowhere near a Gurkha's ground clearance.

Where are you seeing this advertised? I am looking at the factory literature from Toyota Motor Company for a 1994 80 Series Land Cruiser. Also, beyond that, we've actually measured our trucks in the real world and the number I gave earlier is accurate. What side-by-side comparison are you talking about? If that's true, either you are not parked next to an FZJ80 (maybe an FJ Cruiser? ), or the Gurkha is higher than advertised. Also, I'm talking about minimum running ground clearance. The body on the G (and I assume the Gurkha) is higher, which may give the illusion that it is a taller truck underneath as well. But you have to measure the lowest points on both trucks, which should always be the bottom of the pumpkins.

Now here we have another contradiction to your statement, seems like according to this report your Tonka Toy's GC has serious issues. http://www.fourwheeler.com/featuredvehicles/129_0508_1993_toyota_land_cruiser_fzj80/index.html

What contradiction? That article seems like it pretty much supports what I've been saying. I had that same 6" lift from Christo. The driveline vibrations mentioned (which in point of fact are minor and more annoyance than anything else) are due to the extreme lift and the changed angles of the prop shaft flanges to the T-case. This is normal in any truck that is lifted to a certain degree, and in fact happens to the G with even smaller lifts (it's less tolerant to suspension lift, especially with the outdated radius arm design). I certainly hope you don't think this vibration happens in factory stock Cruisers...

Lastly you have stooped low to even dis the mightiest most competent off roader ever built thats the UNIMOG, tell you what, nothing from that toy maker Toyota can even remotely dream of coming close to Unimog, not even the cheap typical Japanese copy of H1 Megacruiser.

Haha, yes, that was said sort of tongue-in-cheek, and notice I didn't say the Cruisers were better wheelers, just that they were more pleasant to wheel. But let me be serious for a moment. As capable as they are, MOGs are a bear to wheel, unless you drive one everyday and are thoroughly well-versed in the controls. Especially in tight technical trails, where you have to be able to react fast. I don't know if you've ever driven one, but I've owned two of these mighty beasts (though one never ran). Capable as hell, but no fun to drive. The controls are not intuitive, and there are too many of them. Plus, it's essentially a forward control cab, so you're basically sitting on the engine, with virtually no shielding, which means not only is it uncomfortably hot (especially in the summer), but so loud that you can't carry on a conversation and need to wear ear protection when driving on the highway. BTW, did I say highway? You can barely get out of your own way, and you'd be lucky to get 55 mph on level road at sea level! So yes, they were not very pleasant to wheel compared to my Cruisers, where I could roll up the windows and turn on the A/C and CD player while reclining in my power-adjustable leather seats.

Still, I don't know why you insist on all this vitriolic disrespect of Toyota. Did someone piss in your cornflakes, did Toyota take jobs away from your town, or does your self-esteem need some bolstering? Oh well, cheers, have a good day. :beer:

 

[Christian]

Hi

First of all before I go in to this subject I think my own experiences with the vehicles discussed must be mentioned. I have owned Landcruisers (HJ60 and KZJ70) and driven others (BJ42, LJ70, HDJ80, VX90) plus various hiluxes etc. And being a former sergeant in the Danish army I have driven a lot of G-wagens (short version, special army scout version, long bodies etc.)and Unimogs. I have even driven a G500 offroad. So you know I don't just make unsupported claims.

First of all, this thread started as a discussion on G-wagens and have ended up being a "mines better than yours" flame, with one participant being especially nasty in his formulations. Let me be the one to remind everybody to "play nice".

Secondly, when including the FJ-Cruiser we might as well include the M-class or even the GL from Mercedes. Remember when making theses comparisons that Toyota have made scores of 4x4 in almost every configuration, it is therefore easy to find one that in some respect or other is outperformed by the original G-wagen, this goes the other way around too!

Thirdly, on the errors or less perfect designs or solutions made by Toyota, again remember that the Land Cruiser is the most produced 4x4 ever, with production numbers twice as high as any other manufacturer. Therefore finding flaws will be easier than on the G-wagen.

I have seen flaws on both manufacturers vehicles, I have seen G-wagens that have stripped the teeth of their diff's (2.4L N/A engine version, didn't think that engine would be strong enough for that though!) Birf's broken on cruisers, nothing is perfect. One common this is rust though!
I know it can be hard to ignore when somebody flames what you love, or show blatant ignorance of fact (otherwise I wouldn't chime in, would I?) But compairing vehicles is almost impossible to do, and possitively impossible when some are religiously devoted to one kind only.
I have seen one participant in this thread defending G's in several other threads with all the passion and fanatism of a religious celot, to others beware, there is no reasoning with celots.

Now I would like to remind everyone on the subject of the thread and the O/P.

best regards,

Christian

 

[Gurkha]

Where are you seeing this advertised? I am looking at the factory literature from Toyota Motor Company for a 1994 80 Series Land Cruiser. Also, beyond that, we've actually measured our trucks in the real world and the number I gave earlier is accurate. What side-by-side comparison are you talking about? If that's true, either you are not parked next to an FZJ80 (maybe an FJ Cruiser? ), or the Gurkha is higher than advertised. Also, I'm talking about minimum running ground clearance. The body on the G (and I assume the Gurkha) is higher, which may give the illusion that it is a taller truck underneath as well. But you have to measure the lowest points on both trucks, which should always be the bottom of the pumpkins.



What contradiction? That article seems like it pretty much supports what I've been saying. I had that same 6" lift from Christo. The driveline vibrations mentioned (which in point of fact are minor and more annoyance than anything else) are due to the extreme lift and the changed angles of the prop shaft flanges to the T-case. This is normal in any truck that is lifted to a certain degree, and in fact happens to the G with even smaller lifts (it's less tolerant to suspension lift, especially with the outdated radius arm design). I certainly hope you don't think this vibration happens in factory stock Cruisers...



Haha, yes, that was said sort of tongue-in-cheek, and notice I didn't say the Cruisers were better wheelers, just that they were more pleasant to wheel. But let me be serious for a moment. As capable as they are, MOGs are a bear to wheel, unless you drive one everyday and are thoroughly well-versed in the controls. Especially in tight technical trails, where you have to be able to react fast. I don't know if you've ever driven one, but I've owned two of these mighty beasts (though one never ran). Capable as hell, but no fun to drive. The controls are not intuitive, and there are too many of them. Plus, it's essentially a forward control cab, so you're basically sitting on the engine, with virtually no shielding, which means not only is it uncomfortably hot (especially in the summer), but so loud that you can't carry on a conversation and need to wear ear protection when driving on the highway. BTW, did I say highway? You can barely get out of your own way, and you'd be lucky to get 55 mph on level road at sea level! So yes, they were not very pleasant to wheel compared to my Cruisers, where I could roll up the windows and turn on the A/C and CD player while reclining in my power-adjustable leather seats.

Still, I don't know why you insist on all this vitriolic disrespect of Toyota. Did someone piss in your cornflakes, did Toyota take jobs away from your town, or does your self-esteem need some bolstering? Oh well, cheers, have a good day. :beer:

The lowest point on Gurkha is at 238mm with standard 16" 7.50x16 tires. Can you tell me whats the factory claim in mm of the TLC you mention, would be interesting to know. Driveline vibrations means harmonics will eventually get better of the components, no matter I see quite a few TLCs with worn out flanges.

Mog was not meant to be highway driven although the Brabus I drove in Germany was not too shabby on highway. You don't buy a Mog to do a duty of a Mall cruiser like the TLC. You do serious off road with it.

 

[mrbishi]

Guys take all your quarreling / mines better than yours cr@p to another thread! :violent-smiley-031:

This is G-forces build up thread. btw she's a beaut mate - can't wait to see what you come up with!

 

[Gurkha]

Exactly, this thread is about G, there is a seperate Tonka Toy thread out here, no need to ruin a legit G thread.