Jump to content
SAU Community

Good Tow Cars?


Recommended Posts

For 2012 plate onwards you still looking roughly high 30's for one. I'd still buy an ST Navara dual cab as they were selling around the $37k on road brand new most of last year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Diesel Navaras and PJ/PK Rangers are killing injectors too. At $1000 per injector it ends up being an expensive repair! We've traded in quite a few with dead injectors. If you're looking to buy a second hand one, make sure you start it cold as they quite often don't play up when hot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not good. Seems a lot of cars have issues now, even the Toyotas. One thing I am noticing is the differences in servicing costs.

Landcruiser is 210 I think capped where cars like the jeep are 400odd. What are the other costs on the euro diesel 4wd?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

on the q7 at a vw specialist its as follows

minor service 300 every 15k

major service 800 every 30k

i changes the oil inbetween at 7500km about $100 or $150 if old mate does it

double/ maybe tripple that is you get audi to do it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had a Q5 3.0 TDI which fortunately I bought under the corporate plan (free servicing) but they still gave me the invoices for my records, it was $900 for a standard service (ouch!). A lot of the modern diesels (no, that doesn't count Toyotas...) are using fully synthetic oils now. That where a big part of the cost on a Grand Cherokee Diesel service is, in the oil.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

just a though about insurance and authorities should there be an acco. if you didn't have the correct towing capacity on the towing vehicle, and I don't mean what the towbar is rated at, you might have a problem. im not 100% how insurance companies would view this

Edited by mii11x
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I paid just under $500 for a 60k service on my Jeep Grand wk2 (current shape, but doesn't have LED head lights). Oils and filters cost the most.

I can't complain about it's reliability. This is my second WK2(I do heaps of k's) and both have been very reliable and awesome fuel efficient tow car.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I sell Jeeps and we have had a few minor issues with the current version Grand Cherokee (fiddly little electrical dramas) but overall they are seriously a brilliant car. I can honestly say that the build quality of the new gerneration Grand Cherokee is brilliant. At this stage it's the only Jeep I would buy but in the next 2 years all Jeeps will revert to the new way of building cars and will be world class. There's a bit of junk in there at the moment which is a hangover from the "old Jeep"...

Value for money, quality, driveability and towability you honestly cannot go wrong with the Grand Cherokee. Tows like a truck (3500kgs) yet drives like a car.

Completely unbiased rant over.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I sell Jeeps and we have had a few minor issues with the current version Grand Cherokee (fiddly little electrical dramas) but overall they are seriously a brilliant car. I can honestly say that the build quality of the new gerneration Grand Cherokee is brilliant. At this stage it's the only Jeep I would buy but in the next 2 years all Jeeps will revert to the new way of building cars and will be world class. There's a bit of junk in there at the moment which is a hangover from the "old Jeep"...

Value for money, quality, driveability and towability you honestly cannot go wrong with the Grand Cherokee. Tows like a truck (3500kgs) yet drives like a car.

Completely unbiased rant over.....

I used to have the WG/J V8 and was in the 'old Jeep' category. Reckon (believe it or not) the Fiat ownership improved build quality immensely. The new one is a million times better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • There are a few variables here, some are relevant but not critical (IMHO) to help answer your question. The two major things: 1) Ignoring anything to do with forced induction - all engines have their own natural torque curve, and it will ALWAYS roll over higher in the rpm.  There is a fixed relationship between power and torque.  When dealing with kw and nm, the relationship between them is roughly: kw = (rpm * nm) / 9549 nm = (kw / rpm) * 9549 The peak torque of an engine (without boost) will typically climb until somewhere nearish the middle of it's operating rev range, give or take a bit - then start dropping again.   The nearer the minimum and maximum rpm of the engine the steeper that drop off tends to be. 2) Boost simply increases the density of the air going into the engine, which inflates the torque at that point.  The ramp up in the torque curve you see on a turbo engine is due to the boost rising, but it's essentially just multiplying the torque you'd see if it was naturally aspirated.  The roll over you see at the end will typically be what would have always happened with the engine, whether it was naturally aspirated or turbocharged.   If the torque never started dropping then power would climb infinitely. The cool thing about this is you absolutely can tune the power delivery to suit the needs of the owner and/or the limitations of the car, and I regularly do this.    With modern turbos we've got to the point where a setup that someone may run well over 20psi of boost with could actually reach target boost well under 4000rpm if the tuner/owner WANTED to - and a lot of people seem to do this when there is actually no realistic benefit, generally it just adds a massive amount of strain to the engine and drivetrain and often actually makes the car harder to drive. As a general rule I tend to tune the boost curves for cars I tune to reach a "useful" torque level through the rev range and will often end up with a curve that ramps hard to a point, then creeps for the rest of the rev range - not to make the boost curve "soft" as such, but more to make sure its neither laggy nor pointlessly violent in it's delivery.   There have been cars I've tuned to be almost like a centrifugal supercharger (or naturally-aspirated-ish) where they actually only hit like 8psi of boost before opening the gate, then ramp up the next 10psi over the rev range... if the car is "loose enough" to drive. On the flip side I've tuned a car that had stock cams and the engine's natural torque curve fell over HARD in the higher rpm and resulted in a slightly awkward power curve to work with, in that case I actually started ramping up boost to boost torque in a way to offset the engines "NA" torque drop off... at peak rpm actually running a good 5psi+ more boost that what the "flat curve" would have defined.  This gave the owner an extra 500rpm or so of useable rev range, and had a fairly solid impact on times he was running at motorsport events due to being able to hold gears a bit longer and also falling into a more useful part of the rev range in the following gears. Here's an example of an RB in a GTSt I've done the "softened" boost curve to not pointlessly ramp straight to the max boost target early in the rpm, but still made sure it builds useful boost.  If you went in the car you'd not guess at all that the boost curve was doing anything "weird", it feels like it spools immediately and accelerates relentlessly (traction dependent) and holds to max rpm.   I don't know if you'd guess what the boost curve was doing by driving the car, or even looking at the dyno plot... but imho it suits the combination.  
    • therefore on the first examples, as we see, changing cams (graph 2) influences the quantity of torque at high revs its OK for me. so a tuner can act on the wastegate via the boost controller to increase the boost at high revs? on the last example, the boost does not decrease ok, but the torque does. this can come from cams etc etc ok. but on the other curves the boost is not constant, it increases, this is what I find strange to my mind. even more so if it comes from the relief valve. sorry I'm very new don't blame me. in my mind I couldn't imagine how the boost could be higher after the spool  
    • right, but fundamentally, for a given mechanical setup, you are either using all the torque (and therefore power) it will give, or you are choosing to run it less efficiently. Many tuners will have a practice of identifying peak available torque and then winding it back a couple of % for safety, but unless you are working around a very specific issue like a weak gearbox, there is nothing to be gained by making 20 or 30% less than the engine can
    • You can manipulate the torque delivery by ramping in boost gently, then throwing it all in after peak torque to keep the torque flat. It's nothing magical.
    • Tuning the wastegate to do it. That is all. Most people want the boost to not fall off like the most recent example. Those also look like dyno runs with an Auto/Torque converter setup, which does fun things to the graph. The boost tapers down like that because the turbo cannot supply the same amount of air at 7000rpm that it can at 3000 in terms of PSI. That, or the tuner has decided that it tapering off like that is what someone chose to do. IF you have a wastegate that can't bleed enough air to slow the turbine, and IF that turbo can flow enough air to feed the engine at high RPM, you get 'boost creep' which is a rise of boost pressure beyond what you are capable of controlling and/or want. None of these show symptoms of that, but if you had a run that was 20psi at 3000rpm, and 27psi at 7000rpm, it could be an example of that. Or simply that the person wanted boost later for their own reasons... The dyno graphs don't always show the full context.
×
×
  • Create New...