On 17/12/21 3:32 pm, Noddy wrote:
> On 17/12/2021 12:30 pm, Daryl wrote:
>> On 17/12/21 11:20 am, Noddy wrote:
>
>>> It's a bit like Henry Ford with his Model T, and buyers being able to
>>> have any colour they liked as long as it was black.
>>>
>>>
>> It seems to be what a lot of car buyers want, just reliable transport
>> and Toyota excel at providing that, rarely do they make anything
>> exciting.
>
> No, but then they don't make anything that's any more reliable than that
> of anyone else either. Despite popular myth that originated with their
> exceptionally good marketing department, Toyota makes their problematic
> cars just the same as anyone else.
>
> Ask anyone with an IFS Hilux how many front axle seals they've had to
> change because of the poorly designed offset axle housing that has zero
> support for the short shaft CV joint, or in fact anyone in the class
> action against Toyota over their handling of the diesel particulate
> filter issue for example.
>
>> Old saying amongst 4WDers, "if you want to go bush take a Land Rover,
>> if you want to come back take a Toyota":-)
>
> It must be an old saying, as I think the last truly capable and fairly
> reliable off road vehicle Toyota made was the  FJ40. They were truly
> rock solid and virtually unstoppable. Everything since then has been
> pretty soft :)
>
The only thing soft here Darren is your brain, ABI included. It was all
that vehicle head-butting that did it.

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

On Friday, 17 December 2021 at 12:30:50 UTC+11, Daryl wrote:
> On 17/12/21 11:20 am, Noddy wrote:
> > On 17/12/2021 9:57 am, Daryl wrote:
> >> On 17/12/21 1:17 am, Noddy wrote:
> >
> >>>> Could also be why they don't wring every last KW out of their
> >>>> engines, reduced stress should increase longevity.
> >>>
> >>> I think it's more a case of Toyota just being their uber conservative
> >>> selves. Very seldom, if ever, do they lead the pack.
> >>
> >> I think that that is deliberate, their philosophy seems to be that
> >> there is rarely anything bad about their vehicles but on the other
> >> hand there is never anything especially good, always middle of the road.
> >
> > And you can't blame them for that either. If they're selling as many
> > cars as they can make then why make anything special?
> >
> > It's a bit like Henry Ford with his Model T, and buyers being able to
> > have any colour they liked as long as it was black.
> >
> >
> It seems to be what a lot of car buyers want, just reliable transport
> and Toyota excel at providing that, rarely do they make anything exciting..
> Old saying amongst 4WDers, "if you want to go bush take a Land Rover, if
> you want to come back take a Toyota":-)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Nup, as a series and Disco Landy owner of many years i`ve *never* been stranded!. Minor breakdowns, but *never* had to get towed home. ;). Tho I must admit I had an H diesel powered FJ40 for a couple of years which never let me down either. (Mostly running on strained cooking oil.) Fuckin' rough prick of a thing tho, and a wee bit slpw on the highway. :)
>
> --
> Daryl

On Friday, 17 December 2021 at 12:53:28 UTC+11, Clocky wrote:
> On 17/12/2021 8:39 am, Yosemite Sam wrote:
> > On 17/12/2021 7:15 am, alvey wrote:
> >> On Thu, 16 Dec 2021 16:22:57 +0800, Clocky wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 16/12/2021 2:50 pm, Grumpy Tech wrote:
> >>>> On 16/12/2021 2:41 pm, jonz@ nothere.com wrote:
> >>>>> On Thursday, 16 December 2021 at 12:08:05 UTC+11, Grumpy Tech wrote:
> >>>>>> On 16/12/2021 6:55 am, alvey wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Wed, 15 Dec 2021 18:39:59 +1000, Grumpy Tech wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 15/12/2021 3:54 pm, alvey wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, 15 Dec 2021 10:38:53 +0800, Clocky wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On 15/12/2021 10:32 am, alvey wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 15 Dec 2021 09:08:14 +1000, Grumpy Tech wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 15/12/2021 8:16 am, alvey wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 15 Dec 2021 07:33:42 +1000, alvey wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 14 Dec 2021 22:18:09 +1100, Noddy wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That doesn't say much for the Hyundai, as the Tesla's are a
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pretty
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> average car.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> You're contradicting yourself Fraudster. You have a long and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> whining road
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> history of sneering at motor journos as 'know nothings', yet
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> here you are
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> passing judgement on a car that you've never sat in and, not
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> having any
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> friends better off than you, don't know anyone who owns one.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> So guess what
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fraudster? Yep, you're making a dick of yourself. Again.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Well played.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh and on "Well played", congrats to Elon Musk on being named
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Time's Person
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ot Year.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Yeah through history they have named some great people as
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Person of the
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Year like Hitler and Stalin, Richard Nixon, Khrushchev,
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Putin, and
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Trump. Yep he's in great company there.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Alvey takes foot out of arse and places it in mouth...
> >>>>>>>>>>> *Still* on the ironic "well played"... Well played to Gumps for
> >>>>>>>>>>> not knowing
> >>>>>>>>>>> what Time's PotY represents.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Here ya go Gumpo! "...a person, group, an idea, or an object
> >>>>>>>>>>> that for
> >>>>>>>>>>> better or for worse... has done the most to influence the events
> >>>>>>>>>>> of the
> >>>>>>>>>>> year".
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Seriously Gumps, give up the snipes and improve everyone's life.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> alvey
> >>>>>>>>>>> bye gumps.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Yep, every time... comes in a swingin' and a missin' and then
> >>>>>>>>>> buggers
> >>>>>>>>>> off again until the next time he makes a fool of himself.
> >>>>>>>>> Good old Gumps, he's like a king tide. Highly predictable, and
> >>>>>>>>> similar in
> >>>>>>>>> that both leave a smelly mess behind after they retreat...
> >>>>>>>> Oh alvey wearing his big boy pants waits for his team to stand
> >>>>>>>> up then
> >>>>>>>> whimpers a response. The only people making a fool of themselves
> >>>>>>>> here
> >>>>>>>> are those who are so lacking in insight that they are not able
> >>>>>>>> to see
> >>>>>>>> the woods from the trees.
> >>>>>>> I sure can see the Forrest Gumps...
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Think those who spend hours each day
> >>>>>>>> responding to posts knowing that the person they are responding to
> >>>>>>>> does
> >>>>>>>> not give a rats.
> >>>>>>> Really Gumps? The Fraudster continually sniping from behind his
> >>>>>>> mighty
> >>>>>>> (snigger) killfail says otherwise. And then there's the instances
> >>>>>>> where the
> >>>>>>> idiot has replied directly to someone about whom he has brayed,
> >>>>>>> "he's in my
> >>>>>>> KF". Or he's on his "lappy", (an expression used exclusively by
> >>>>>>> knobs),
> >>>>>>> which convieniently hasn't been 'updated'. etc etc etc
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> What a bunch of fools.
> >>>>>>> Hey Gumps, I'm suffering slightly from an excess of Grigio and could
> >>>>>>> use a
> >>>>>>> larf. Would you mind reposting the reason why you support the
> >>>>>>> hypocritical,
> >>>>>>> abusive, lying fraud from Bumhole (Vic)?
> >>>>>> I see you called down the baying hounds. Such a pity all you got
> >>>>>> was a
> >>>>>> heap of pussies. The pack mentality that exists in the flc is what I
> >>>>>> object to more than anything else. You're all a bunch of moronic
> >>>>>> losers
> >>>>>> with little better to do than hunt in a pack however you are
> >>>>>> hamstrung
> >>>>>> in that fact that the only weapons you have are feather dusters.
> >>>>> ~~~~~
> >>>>> Yeah, and they may as well not bother!.
> >>>>> One only has to read the O/P to know *exactly* how each of
> >>>>> them will reply. 'There`s nothing new under the sun' <FBG>
> >>>>> d
> >>>>> O/P
> >>>> They certainly hunt in a pack. Bunch of grubs.
> >>> You have no morals, no backbone and are dishonest. You proved that
> >>> yourself.
> >> So he's got most of the qualities necessary to defend the Fraudster then.
> >>
> >> Anyhoo, it looks like Gumps has done his regular-as-a-Swiss-train act and
> >> runaway right on time.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> alvey
> >> Wondering why Gumps enjoys this Whack-a-Gump game so much?
> >>
> >
> > the difference between whack-a-mole game and whack-a-Gump is that,
> > unlike whack-a-mole, gumpy pops up in the same place :)
> >
> >
> LOL :-)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
Me, a few days ago:
Yeah, and they may as well not bother!.
One only has to read the O/P to know *exactly* how each of
them will reply. 'There`s nothing new under the sun' <FBG>

LOL indeed.

On Friday, 17 December 2021 at 13:22:20 UTC+11, Xeno wrote:
> On 17/12/21 12:57 pm, Clocky wrote:
> > On 16/12/2021 7:18 pm, Noddy wrote:
> >> On 16/12/2021 3:28 pm, jonz@ nothere.com wrote:
> >>> On Wednesday, 15 December 2021 at 15:14:30 UTC+11, Noddy wrote:
> >>>> On 15/12/2021 2:23 pm, jonz@ nothere.com wrote:
> >>>>> On Wednesday, 15 December 2021 at 13:14:04 UTC+11, Noddy wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>> They've come a long way but they're still niche, and it's the "niche"
> >>>>>> that costs. Still, manufacturers aren't above sticking it to
> >>>>>> people when
> >>>>>> it suits them. Look at Toyota. Ask them how much they're selling
> >>>>>> current
> >>>>>> stocks of SR5 hiluxes for at the moment compared to what they were 18
> >>>>>> months ago :)
> >>>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >>>>> Supply and demand.
> >>>> That's one way of looking at it. Price gouging is another. All
> >>>> manufacturers do it, but Toyota do it better than most :)
> >>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >>
> >>> Price gouging?,
> >>
> >> That's what it's called. When prices are set to take advantage of
> >> particular circumstances for no reason other than to profit from the
> >> experience.
> >>
> >>> Only stupids that don`t do their homework fall for that.
> >>
> >> In some cases, but not all. There is nowhere at the moment to buy a
> >> cheap Toyota, as it's Toyota *themselves* who are doing the gouging.
> >>
> >>> I would walk away. That applies to (nearly) *everything* for me. if
> >>> more ppl voted with their feet in those situations it would not
> >>> occur!. (Fuck all chance of that tho. :( )
> >>
> >> This is true, but then the world is full of retards like Clasener who
> >> would pay the "gouging tax" for a Toyota because he's one of the
> >> imbecilic sheep who thinks it's a good idea.
> >>
> >> Which is *exactly* the kind of fucked up brain dead mentality you
> >> would expect from someone who has zero trade relevance and hasn't done
> >> for over 25 years :)
~~~~~
True that!. (The same applies a few (most) of the of the other Baa Baa`s that infest this place.)
> >>
> >>
> >
> > You don't care you reckon... oh but you do, fraud, you most certainly do
> > :-)
> I just love it when Darren *proves to all and sundry* that I'm really
> getting under his skin. Hey, he can slap me down at any time, all it
> will take is proof, *irrefutable* proof, of all his automotive related
> claims.
> >
> > Bust a vein son... this is *all* your own doing.
> >
> Indeed it is! His own undoing is the one thing in his life he can take
> full credit for.
> --
> Xeno
>
>
> Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
> (with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

On Friday, 17 December 2021 at 15:32:31 UTC+11, Noddy wrote:
> On 17/12/2021 12:30 pm, Daryl wrote:
> > On 17/12/21 11:20 am, Noddy wrote:
>
> >> It's a bit like Henry Ford with his Model T, and buyers being able to
> >> have any colour they liked as long as it was black.
> >>
> >>
> > It seems to be what a lot of car buyers want, just reliable transport
> > and Toyota excel at providing that, rarely do they make anything exciting.
> No, but then they don't make anything that's any more reliable than that
> of anyone else either. Despite popular myth that originated with their
> exceptionally good marketing department, Toyota makes their problematic
> cars just the same as anyone else.
>
> Ask anyone with an IFS Hilux how many front axle seals they've had to
> change because of the poorly designed offset axle housing that has zero
> support for the short shaft CV joint, or in fact anyone in the class
> action against Toyota over their handling of the diesel particulate
> filter issue for example.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ask the IFS owners how they performed O/R.....Easy, they *Didn`t!!. Wet grass would stop them.

> > Old saying amongst 4WDers, "if you want to go bush take a Land Rover, if
> > you want to come back take a Toyota":-)
> It must be an old saying, as I think the last truly capable and fairly
> reliable off road vehicle Toyota made was the FJ40. They were truly
> rock solid and virtually unstoppable. Everything since then has been
> pretty soft :)
> --
> --
> --
> Regards,
> Noddy.

On 15/12/2021 5:30 pm, Noddy wrote:
> On 15/12/2021 5:45 pm, Daryl wrote:
>> On 15/12/21 3:14 pm, Noddy wrote:
>
>>> That's one way of looking at it. Price gouging is another. All
>>> manufacturers do it, but Toyota do it better than most :)
>>>
>>>
>> A few years ago I asked one of the owners of Melton Toyota why they
>> don't discount Hilux's, she replied "we can sell as many as we can get
>> our hands on at RRP so why would we discount".
>>  From a business owners point of view that comment is difficult to
>> argue with, with the current lack of supply they seem to getting away
>> with charging whatever they like.
>
> Which is a crap business policy if you ask me. Shows you how little they
> think of their customers :)
>
>
>

This is what Ford thinks of theirs... and they have a long track record
of total contempt for their customers.

https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/court-orders-ford-to-pay-10-million-penalty-for-unconscionable-conduct

On 16/12/2021 10:17 pm, Noddy wrote:
> On 16/12/2021 11:08 pm, Daryl wrote:
>> On 16/12/21 2:01 pm, Noddy wrote:
>
>>> I thought it was interesting to see the differences between them
>>> given the fact that the Toyota attracts a price premium of just over
>>> 10 thousand bucks for the similar specced model.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> For some reason Triton has always been by far the cheapest Japanese
>> ute, not that long ago if they weren't cheap they wouldn't have sold
>> many mostly because they had a poor reliability reputation but it
>> looks like they have improved.
>
> I've never known them to be unreliable. They were always pitched at the
> "cheap and cheerful" end of the market, but they were pretty solid.
> Mitsubishi commercials always have been.
>

Nowhere near as solid as a Hilux, not even in the same ballpark. You can
expect major repairs on a Triton at somewhere near the 120-160k mark.
Turbos are a very common failure.

>> My experience with Hilux brakes is that they last a lot of kms before
>> they need replacing, on the 2003 I owned the front pads lasted well
>> over 100,000km as did the pads on the 2009 I also owned, it would be
>> easy to reduce braking distance by fitting different pads but it seems
>> to be a Toyota design criteria that longevity is more important than
>> performance, even the OE Bridgestone tyres last 80,000+ kms, bugger
>> all grip in the wet but they just don't wear out.
>
> I don't know if Toyota goes out of their way to make the Hilux not stop
> as well as it could and I'm sure their brakes work as well as anything
> else. In the video I linked to earlier it showed the stopping distance
> to be somewhat longer than that of the Triton, but the Triton is also a
> lighter car than the Hilux and that has to be taken into account.
>
> There is another video floating around where all the current utes are
> tested for both wet and dry stopping distances and in the wet the Triton
> was 4 suburbs longer to stop than anything else on the test which the
> testers put down to the absolutely appallingly bad wet weather
> performance of it's OEM Dunlop tyres.
>
>> Could also be why they don't wring every last KW out of their engines,
>> reduced stress should increase longevity.
>
> I think it's more a case of Toyota just being their uber conservative
> selves. Very seldom, if ever, do they lead the pack.
>

Except where it matters... in long term reliability and value for money.

>> Youngest son just bought an FJ Cruiser, 4.0lt V6 petrol with 200kw,
>> same 4.0lt engine in a Hilux puts out about 150kw.
>> The above is possibly why the Hilux is so popular with business
>> buyers, they take the abuse and last because they aren't stressed, my
>> son has 2 basic Hiluxes, great for the workers to use and abuse but he
>> doesn't drive one himself.
>
> Despite popular belief, I don't actually have anything against Toyotas.
> I just don't believe that they make anything that is as far ahead of the
> rest of the field that some people *think* they do. The Hilux is a fine
> vehicle, but there is absolutely *nothing* about it that makes it stand
> out from the rest of the field, and it is no more or less reliable than
> anything else.
>
> Toyota's have their issues like anyone else.
>

In the real world that simply is not the case. Real tradies know this.
Pretend ones drive a Navara, the absolute worst choice in utes for
reliability!

On 17/12/2021 8:20 am, Noddy wrote:
> On 17/12/2021 9:57 am, Daryl wrote:
>> On 17/12/21 1:17 am, Noddy wrote:
>
>>>> Could also be why they don't wring every last KW out of their
>>>> engines, reduced stress should increase longevity.
>>>
>>> I think it's more a case of Toyota just being their uber conservative
>>> selves. Very seldom, if ever, do they lead the pack.
>>
>> I think that that is deliberate, their philosophy seems to be that
>> there is rarely anything bad about their vehicles but on the other
>> hand there is never anything especially good, always middle of the road.
>
> And you can't blame them for that either. If they're selling as many
> cars as they can make then why make anything special?
>
> It's a bit like Henry Ford with his Model T, and buyers being able to
> have any colour they liked as long as it was black.
>
>

Which is a myth.

The Model T was available in many colours up until close to the end of
production when black became the only option as an absolute cost cutting
exercise.

On 17/12/2021 9:30 am, Daryl wrote:
> On 17/12/21 11:20 am, Noddy wrote:
>> On 17/12/2021 9:57 am, Daryl wrote:
>>> On 17/12/21 1:17 am, Noddy wrote:
>>
>>>>> Could also be why they don't wring every last KW out of their
>>>>> engines, reduced stress should increase longevity.
>>>>
>>>> I think it's more a case of Toyota just being their uber
>>>> conservative selves. Very seldom, if ever, do they lead the pack.
>>>
>>> I think that that is deliberate, their philosophy seems to be that
>>> there is rarely anything bad about their vehicles but on the other
>>> hand there is never anything especially good, always middle of the road.
>>
>> And you can't blame them for that either. If they're selling as many
>> cars as they can make then why make anything special?
>>
>> It's a bit like Henry Ford with his Model T, and buyers being able to
>> have any colour they liked as long as it was black.
>>
>>
> It seems to be what a lot of car buyers want, just reliable transport
> and Toyota excel at providing that, rarely do they make anything exciting.
> Old saying amongst 4WDers, "if you want to go bush take a Land Rover, if
> you want to come back take a Toyota":-)
>

That is a literal truth. I know a bloke who bought a new Land Rover to
do the Gibb River crossing. It broke down 1/3 of the way in. He was so
pissed off that he immediately traded it in on a 200 series and never
looked back.

Toyota make safe and boring vehicles but they are #1 for longevity and
dependability.

On 17/12/2021 1:00 pm, Xeno wrote:
> On 17/12/21 3:32 pm, Noddy wrote:
>> On 17/12/2021 12:30 pm, Daryl wrote:
>>> On 17/12/21 11:20 am, Noddy wrote:
>>
>>>> It's a bit like Henry Ford with his Model T, and buyers being able
>>>> to have any colour they liked as long as it was black.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> It seems to be what a lot of car buyers want, just reliable transport
>>> and Toyota excel at providing that, rarely do they make anything
>>> exciting.
>>
>> No, but then they don't make anything that's any more reliable than
>> that of anyone else either. Despite popular myth that originated with
>> their exceptionally good marketing department, Toyota makes their
>> problematic cars just the same as anyone else.
>>
>> Ask anyone with an IFS Hilux how many front axle seals they've had to
>> change because of the poorly designed offset axle housing that has
>> zero support for the short shaft CV joint, or in fact anyone in the
>> class action against Toyota over their handling of the diesel
>> particulate filter issue for example.
>>
>>> Old saying amongst 4WDers, "if you want to go bush take a Land Rover,
>>> if you want to come back take a Toyota":-)
>>
>> It must be an old saying, as I think the last truly capable and fairly
>> reliable off road vehicle Toyota made was the  FJ40. They were truly
>> rock solid and virtually unstoppable. Everything since then has been
>> pretty soft :)
>>
> The only thing soft here Darren is your brain, ABI included. It was all
> that vehicle head-butting that did it.
>
>
Even dopey Daryl must be scratching his head at the frauds ridiculous
comments and thinking how much of a clueless dickhead he is.

On 17/12/21 7:58 pm, Clocky wrote:
> On 16/12/2021 10:17 pm, Noddy wrote:
>> On 16/12/2021 11:08 pm, Daryl wrote:
>>> On 16/12/21 2:01 pm, Noddy wrote:
>>
>>>> I thought it was interesting to see the differences between them
>>>> given the fact that the Toyota attracts a price premium of just over
>>>> 10 thousand bucks for the similar specced model.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> For some reason Triton has always been by far the cheapest Japanese
>>> ute, not that long ago if they weren't cheap they wouldn't have sold
>>> many mostly because they had a poor reliability reputation but it
>>> looks like they have improved.
>>
>> I've never known them to be unreliable. They were always pitched at
>> the "cheap and cheerful" end of the market, but they were pretty
>> solid. Mitsubishi commercials always have been.
>>
>
> Nowhere near as solid as a Hilux, not even in the same ballpark. You can
> expect major repairs on a Triton at somewhere near the 120-160k mark.
> Turbos are a very common failure.
>
>>> My experience with Hilux brakes is that they last a lot of kms before
>>> they need replacing, on the 2003 I owned the front pads lasted well
>>> over 100,000km as did the pads on the 2009 I also owned, it would be
>>> easy to reduce braking distance by fitting different pads but it
>>> seems to be a Toyota design criteria that longevity is more important
>>> than performance, even the OE Bridgestone tyres last 80,000+ kms,
>>> bugger all grip in the wet but they just don't wear out.
>>
>> I don't know if Toyota goes out of their way to make the Hilux not
>> stop as well as it could and I'm sure their brakes work as well as
>> anything else. In the video I linked to earlier it showed the stopping
>> distance to be somewhat longer than that of the Triton, but the Triton
>> is also a lighter car than the Hilux and that has to be taken into
>> account.
>>
>> There is another video floating around where all the current utes are
>> tested for both wet and dry stopping distances and in the wet the
>> Triton was 4 suburbs longer to stop than anything else on the test
>> which the testers put down to the absolutely appallingly bad wet
>> weather performance of it's OEM Dunlop tyres.
>>
>>> Could also be why they don't wring every last KW out of their
>>> engines, reduced stress should increase longevity.
>>
>> I think it's more a case of Toyota just being their uber conservative
>> selves. Very seldom, if ever, do they lead the pack.
>>
>
> Except where it matters... in long term reliability and value for money.
>
>>> Youngest son just bought an FJ Cruiser, 4.0lt V6 petrol with 200kw,
>>> same 4.0lt engine in a Hilux puts out about 150kw.
>>> The above is possibly why the Hilux is so popular with business
>>> buyers, they take the abuse and last because they aren't stressed, my
>>> son has 2 basic Hiluxes, great for the workers to use and abuse but
>>> he doesn't drive one himself.
>>
>> Despite popular belief, I don't actually have anything against
>> Toyotas. I just don't believe that they make anything that is as far
>> ahead of the rest of the field that some people *think* they do. The
>> Hilux is a fine vehicle, but there is absolutely *nothing* about it
>> that makes it stand out from the rest of the field, and it is no more
>> or less reliable than anything else.
>>
>> Toyota's have their issues like anyone else.
>>
>
> In the real world that simply is not the case. Real tradies know this.
> Pretend ones drive a Navara, the absolute worst choice in utes for
> reliability!
>
You're expecting Darren to have any idea of the *real world*? Ask him
about his fake world, the one that exists only in his imagination - he's
the full bottle on that, the real world - not so much. Not at all really.

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

On 17/12/21 6:18 pm, jonz@ nothere.com wrote:
> On Friday, 17 December 2021 at 15:32:31 UTC+11, Noddy wrote:
>> On 17/12/2021 12:30 pm, Daryl wrote:
>>> On 17/12/21 11:20 am, Noddy wrote:
>>
>>>> It's a bit like Henry Ford with his Model T, and buyers being able to
>>>> have any colour they liked as long as it was black.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> It seems to be what a lot of car buyers want, just reliable transport
>>> and Toyota excel at providing that, rarely do they make anything exciting.
>> No, but then they don't make anything that's any more reliable than that
>> of anyone else either. Despite popular myth that originated with their
>> exceptionally good marketing department, Toyota makes their problematic
>> cars just the same as anyone else.
>>
>> Ask anyone with an IFS Hilux how many front axle seals they've had to
>> change because of the poorly designed offset axle housing that has zero
>> support for the short shaft CV joint, or in fact anyone in the class
>> action against Toyota over their handling of the diesel particulate
>> filter issue for example.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Ask the IFS owners how they performed O/R.....Easy, they *Didn`t!!. Wet grass would stop them.

I owned a 2003 4WD Hilux with IFS and that wasn't my experience,
certainly not all that good in extreme off road but I never had an issue.
I used mine off road mostly for getting firewood and it handled that
task very well, a tonne in the tray and another tonne in a trailer no
problem.
What IFS lacked off road it made up for on road where it was very
significantly better than a live axle Hilux.

--
Daryl

On 17/12/2021 6:18 pm, jonz@ nothere.com wrote:
> On Friday, 17 December 2021 at 15:32:31 UTC+11, Noddy wrote:

>>
>> Ask anyone with an IFS Hilux how many front axle seals they've had to
>> change because of the poorly designed offset axle housing that has zero
>> support for the short shaft CV joint, or in fact anyone in the class
>> action against Toyota over their handling of the diesel particulate
>> filter issue for example.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Ask the IFS owners how they performed O/R.....Easy, they *Didn`t!!. Wet grass would stop them.

I make no bones about how well they performed. Just that the IFS was a
shitty design that had issues.

--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

On 17/12/2021 5:04 pm, Clocky wrote:
> On 17/12/2021 8:20 am, Noddy wrote:
>> On 17/12/2021 9:57 am, Daryl wrote:
>>> On 17/12/21 1:17 am, Noddy wrote:
>>
>>>>> Could also be why they don't wring every last KW out of their
>>>>> engines, reduced stress should increase longevity.
>>>>
>>>> I think it's more a case of Toyota just being their uber
>>>> conservative selves. Very seldom, if ever, do they lead the pack.
>>>
>>> I think that that is deliberate, their philosophy seems to be that
>>> there is rarely anything bad about their vehicles but on the other
>>> hand there is never anything especially good, always middle of the road.
>>
>> And you can't blame them for that either. If they're selling as many
>> cars as they can make then why make anything special?
>>
>> It's a bit like Henry Ford with his Model T, and buyers being able to
>> have any colour they liked as long as it was black.
>>
>>
>
>
> Which is a myth.
>
> The Model T was available in many colours up until close to the end of
> production when black became the only option as an absolute cost cutting
> exercise.
>
>

Apologies, I got that wrong. The Model T was available in several
colours in it's first five and last two years of production. Between
1914 and 1925 it was only available in black.

So it was available in several colours for 7 years and only black for 11
years contrary to popular belief that they only ever came in black.

On Fri, 17 Dec 2021 12:32:14 +0800, Clocky wrote:

> On 17/12/2021 10:27 am, alvey wrote:
>> On Fri, 17 Dec 2021 09:57:52 +0800, Clocky wrote:
>>> On 16/12/2021 7:18 pm, Noddy wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Which is *exactly* the kind of fucked up brain dead mentality you would
>>>> expect from someone who has zero trade relevance and hasn't done for
>>>> over 25 years :)
>>>>
>>>
>>> You don't care you reckon... oh but you do, fraud, you most certainly do :-)
>>>
>>> Bust a vein son... this is *all* your own doing.
>>
>> Continuing with the "Fraudster is stoopid because..." line.
>>
>> Fraudster is stupid because he bangs on endlessly (and pointlessly) about
>> "trade relevance". There's two stoopid aspects here Der Der;
>>
>> 1) You have zero "trade relevance". You are an unqualified, 20 year
>> unemployed bogan stuck in both the 1970s *and* the boonies. These are facts
>> that no amount of money you burn in your tin shed will alter.
>>
>> 2) This is alt.cars. It is *not* alt.trade.relevance.
>
> aus.cars actually but anyway.
>
> Whatever the snot
>> that is. There's a thought Fraudster! Perhaps you, or one of your equally
>> erudite associates, could attempt to define what this magical "trade
>> relevance" actually is? I'm sure it'll be worth reading.
>>
>
> It's about time the FLCJC realised the fraud is all cock and no balls
> and need to stop bending over for him and actually dare ask a few questions.
>
> But they won't... because they collectively a bunch of limp dicks.

I notice that none of them have published their thesis on, "What is 'Trade
Relevance' and its connection to aus.cars?". This is surprising. Someone
must have eaten the crayons again.

alvey

alvey

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On 17/12/2021 3:32 pm, Clocky wrote:
> On 17/12/2021 10:27 am, alvey wrote:
>> On Fri, 17 Dec 2021 09:57:52 +0800, Clocky wrote:
>>> On 16/12/2021 7:18 pm, Noddy wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Which is *exactly* the kind of fucked up brain dead mentality you
>>>> would
>>>> expect from someone who has zero trade relevance and hasn't done for
>>>> over 25 years :)
>>>>
>>>
>>> You don't care you reckon... oh but you do, fraud, you most
>>> certainly do :-)
>>>
>>> Bust a vein son... this is *all* your own doing.
>>
>> Continuing with the "Fraudster is stoopid because..." line.
>>
>> Fraudster is stupid because he bangs on endlessly (and pointlessly)
>> about
>> "trade relevance". There's two stoopid aspects here Der Der;
>>
>> 1) You have zero "trade relevance". You are an unqualified, 20 year
>> unemployed bogan stuck in both the 1970s *and* the boonies. These are
>> facts
>> that no amount of money you burn in your tin shed will alter.
>>
>> 2) This is alt.cars. It is *not* alt.trade.relevance.
>
> aus.cars actually but anyway.
>
>  Whatever the snot
>> that is. There's a thought Fraudster! Perhaps you, or one of your
>> equally
>> erudite associates, could attempt to define what this magical "trade
>> relevance" actually is? I'm sure it'll be worth reading.
>>
>
> It's about time the FLCJC realised the fraud is all cock and no balls
> and need to stop bending over for him and actually dare ask a few
> questions.
>
> But they won't... because they collectively a bunch of limp dicks.
>
>
>

yes!

--
"his opinions have been crushed into insignificant dust by
the enormous weight of his lies"- Alvey on the Fraudster

On 18/12/21 10:00 am, alvey wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Dec 2021 12:32:14 +0800, Clocky wrote:
>
>> On 17/12/2021 10:27 am, alvey wrote:
>>> On Fri, 17 Dec 2021 09:57:52 +0800, Clocky wrote:
>>>> On 16/12/2021 7:18 pm, Noddy wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Which is *exactly* the kind of fucked up brain dead mentality you would
>>>>> expect from someone who has zero trade relevance and hasn't done for
>>>>> over 25 years :)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You don't care you reckon... oh but you do, fraud, you most certainly do :-)
>>>>
>>>> Bust a vein son... this is *all* your own doing.
>>>
>>> Continuing with the "Fraudster is stoopid because..." line.
>>>
>>> Fraudster is stupid because he bangs on endlessly (and pointlessly) about
>>> "trade relevance". There's two stoopid aspects here Der Der;
>>>
>>> 1) You have zero "trade relevance". You are an unqualified, 20 year
>>> unemployed bogan stuck in both the 1970s *and* the boonies. These are facts
>>> that no amount of money you burn in your tin shed will alter.
>>>
>>> 2) This is alt.cars. It is *not* alt.trade.relevance.
>>
>> aus.cars actually but anyway.
>>
>> Whatever the snot
>>> that is. There's a thought Fraudster! Perhaps you, or one of your equally
>>> erudite associates, could attempt to define what this magical "trade
>>> relevance" actually is? I'm sure it'll be worth reading.
>>>
>>
>> It's about time the FLCJC realised the fraud is all cock and no balls
>> and need to stop bending over for him and actually dare ask a few questions.
>>
>> But they won't... because they collectively a bunch of limp dicks.
>
> I notice that none of them have published their thesis on, "What is 'Trade
> Relevance' and its connection to aus.cars?". This is surprising. Someone
> must have eaten the crayons again.

*Trade Relevance* is *irrelevant* to aus.cars because, under the
aus.cars description, all it says is petrol heads. No mention of "trade
relevance" whatsoever. All you need is to be a bit of a petrol head to
*qualify* for inclusion here. ;-) It doesn't even mention that one
needs to be a tradie or in the automotive trade. An interest in cars,
doesn't even mandate ownership of a car.

Hmmm, that brings up a very good point when it is observed that some
posters here, those who bang on most about *relevance*, trade or
otherwise, are not entirely relevant here anyway. Why? Well look at what
they drive - "diseasels" (with apologies to Thomas the Tank Engine)!
Their interest is at odds with what they drive - trucks. Ok, it's a bit
of a stretch to call a Navara a truck, especially when you can bend the
chassis at the drop of a hat with a *legal load*. But, still, it has a
goods carrying tray and is treated as a commercial vehicle by the
tollways. Ok, a *light commercial vehicle* if you want to be technical.
And in Darren's case, a *poseur's truck*.

Now, let me see. I drive a *petrol engined car*. I'm relevant here. So
does Alvey, so does felix. All relevant here. Clocky has a petrol
engined *car* so relevant here. What about *Darren*? His *truck (LCV) is
a diesel so not relevant there, his F100 is a truck even though it is
petrol powered, his forklift doesn't count - still not a car. His
Failane - does it even have an engine and driveline? The Santa Fe, nah,
that's his wife's daily driver and registered in her name. Ok, not
relevant on the basis of what he drives. What about trade relevance,
something Darren bangs on about *all the time*? Darren's a faker, no
trade papers so no relevance to - well - anything really, certainly not
relevant to the motor trade.

That makes Darren the *least relevant* poster in aus.cars. He really
should *unsubscribe* and take his self aggrandising bullshit and lies
elsewhere. I think aus.wankers needs him more.
>
Ok, not a thesis and certainly much shorter than any thesis I have ever
worked on but very clear findings nevertheless! HTH

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

On 16/12/2021 11:08 pm, Daryl wrote:
> On 16/12/21 2:01 pm, Noddy wrote:

> My experience with Hilux brakes is that they last a lot of kms before
> they need replacing, on the 2003 I owned the front pads lasted well over
> 100,000km as did the pads on the 2009 I also owned, it would be easy to
> reduce braking distance by fitting different pads but it seems to be a
> Toyota design criteria that longevity is more important than
> performance
Just as a follow up to this, I was fucking around with the Navara this
afternoon getting it ready to sell. I've made up my mind to get rid of
it and move into something more modern as my daily driver, and I'm going
over it giving it a detail and general tidy up.

As part of that I'm fitting new front rotors and pads to it. It doesn't
need them, but around 4 years ago I bought new front rotors and pads in
anticipation of needing to change them one day, but the problem is that
they haven't yet worn to the point where they need to be changed.
However the new brake parts are no good to me after the car is gone and
fitting them now will give the new owner brand new front brakes that
they won't have to worry about for some years.

Anyway, the reason I'm mentioning this is to show that Toyota isn't the
only company that builds longevity into their products :)

These are the brake pads I removed today, and they're the original
factory pads fitted when the ute was built:

> https://www.imagebam.com/view/ME5NZZM

> https://www.imagebam.com/view/ME5NZZN

As can be seen in the second photo, there's still around 4mm of friction
material left before you hit the wear indicators. The rotors themselves
were a millimeter above minimum spec and still perfectly serviceable
without any heat marks or warpage, and the brakes were working as well
as they always have. This is a fairly heavy vehicle that has big 320mm
rotors and it's always stopped exceptionally well.

It's also 10 years old with 121 thousand km's on the dial, and to get
this level of service life out of front brakes on any vehicle today is
outstanding.

Even by Toyota's standards :)

--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

On 18/12/21 10:46 pm, Noddy wrote:
> On 16/12/2021 11:08 pm, Daryl wrote:
>> On 16/12/21 2:01 pm, Noddy wrote:
>
>> My experience with Hilux brakes is that they last a lot of kms before
>> they need replacing, on the 2003 I owned the front pads lasted well
>> over 100,000km as did the pads on the 2009 I also owned, it would be
>> easy to reduce braking distance by fitting different pads but it seems
>> to be a Toyota design criteria that longevity is more important than
>> performance
> Just as a follow up to this, I was fucking around with the Navara this
> afternoon getting it ready to sell. I've made up my mind to get rid of
> it and move into something more modern as my daily driver, and I'm going

Yeah, they are ancient technology, that is for sure.

> over it giving it a detail and general tidy up.
>
> As part of that I'm fitting new front rotors and pads to it. It doesn't
> need them, but around 4 years ago I bought new front rotors and pads in
> anticipation of needing to change them one day, but the problem is that
> they haven't yet worn to the point where they need to be changed.
> However the new brake parts are no good to me after the car is gone and
> fitting them now will give the new owner brand new front brakes that
> they won't have to worry about for some years.
>
> Anyway, the reason I'm mentioning this is to show that Toyota isn't the
> only company that builds longevity into their products :)
>
> These are the brake pads I removed today, and they're the original
> factory pads fitted when the ute was built:
>
> > https://www.imagebam.com/view/ME5NZZM
>
> > https://www.imagebam.com/view/ME5NZZN
>
> As can be seen in the second photo, there's still around 4mm of friction
> material left before you hit the wear indicators. The rotors themselves
> were a millimeter above minimum spec and still perfectly serviceable
> without any heat marks or warpage, and the brakes were working as well
> as they always have. This is a fairly heavy vehicle that has big 320mm
> rotors and it's always stopped exceptionally well.
>
> It's also 10 years old with 121 thousand km's on the dial, and to get
> this level of service life out of front brakes on any vehicle today is
> outstanding.
>
> Even by Toyota's standards :)

My Toyota is not quite 6 years old and has 118k on it now and front
discs and pads are still are original. But then, I expect that from Toyota.

Your Navara brakes are still Ok only because it's not been a *work* ute.
It's a general purpose retiree's runabout and nothing more. Those
brakes, which would normally get a thorough workout *in industry* are
just loafers in your hands.

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 22:46:52 +1100, Noddy wrote:

snip boring.

Ahhhh Fraudster, you've done it again.

Once more you've leapt into action to try and make some pissant, incredibly
insignificant point, yet you won't provide any proof of any of your
stupendously grandiose claims.

How about a few pix of the fabled NA of A?
Or your Grange collection?
Sunshine Coast property?
Qualifications?
Drag racing action shots?
Happy snaps from Japan and USA?

Seeing your siblings on Xmas Day are you Fraudster? Or have they all turned
their back on you since you diddled them out of their inheritance?

Oty Fraudster!

alvey
"I enjoy *very* fine food and don't mind paying a pretty penny for it...".
One of my Fraudster Faves. A serious contender for the funniest thing he's
ever claimed.

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On 18/12/21 10:46 pm, Noddy wrote:
> On 16/12/2021 11:08 pm, Daryl wrote:
>> On 16/12/21 2:01 pm, Noddy wrote:
>
>> My experience with Hilux brakes is that they last a lot of kms before
>> they need replacing, on the 2003 I owned the front pads lasted well
>> over 100,000km as did the pads on the 2009 I also owned, it would be
>> easy to reduce braking distance by fitting different pads but it seems
>> to be a Toyota design criteria that longevity is more important than
>> performance
> Just as a follow up to this, I was fucking around with the Navara this
> afternoon getting it ready to sell. I've made up my mind to get rid of
> it and move into something more modern as my daily driver, and I'm going
> over it giving it a detail and general tidy up.
>
> As part of that I'm fitting new front rotors and pads to it. It doesn't
> need them, but around 4 years ago I bought new front rotors and pads in
> anticipation of needing to change them one day, but the problem is that
> they haven't yet worn to the point where they need to be changed.
> However the new brake parts are no good to me after the car is gone and
> fitting them now will give the new owner brand new front brakes that
> they won't have to worry about for some years.
>
> Anyway, the reason I'm mentioning this is to show that Toyota isn't the
> only company that builds longevity into their products :)
>
> These are the brake pads I removed today, and they're the original
> factory pads fitted when the ute was built:
>
> > https://www.imagebam.com/view/ME5NZZM
>
> > https://www.imagebam.com/view/ME5NZZN
>
> As can be seen in the second photo, there's still around 4mm of friction
> material left before you hit the wear indicators. The rotors themselves
> were a millimeter above minimum spec and still perfectly serviceable
> without any heat marks or warpage, and the brakes were working as well
> as they always have. This is a fairly heavy vehicle that has big 320mm
> rotors and it's always stopped exceptionally well.
>
> It's also 10 years old with 121 thousand km's on the dial, and to get
> this level of service life out of front brakes on any vehicle today is
> outstanding.
>
> Even by Toyota's standards :)
>
>

Their longevity could be due partly to where we live, not much stop
start and plenty of longish hwy trips, non of our cars have ever worn
out their brakes quickly.

--
Daryl

On 19/12/2021 12:08 pm, Daryl wrote:
> On 18/12/21 10:46 pm, Noddy wrote:

>> As can be seen in the second photo, there's still around 4mm of
>> friction material left before you hit the wear indicators. The rotors
>> themselves were a millimeter above minimum spec and still perfectly
>> serviceable without any heat marks or warpage, and the brakes were
>> working as well as they always have. This is a fairly heavy vehicle
>> that has big 320mm rotors and it's always stopped exceptionally well.
>>
>> It's also 10 years old with 121 thousand km's on the dial, and to get
>> this level of service life out of front brakes on any vehicle today is
>> outstanding.
>>
>> Even by Toyota's standards :)
>>
>>
>
> Their longevity could be due partly to where we live, not much stop
> start and plenty of longish hwy trips, non of our cars have ever worn
> out their brakes quickly.

Possibly. No doubt in my mind that these Navara pads & rotors would have
comfortably gone another 10 thousand km's, and possibly even another 20
given the remarkably low wear rates they're showing. Country living
probably helps, but the point is anything a Toyota is capable of doing
is not exclusive to them and beyond the realm of anything else.

And I'm not singing Nissan's praises here, either. I can remember when I
used to service my old man's work vans. His last 3 or 4 vehicles were
Mitsubishi Express vans and he had an exceptionally good run out of them
as did most people. He was in the bathroom & Kitchen renovation business
and he would *always* be lugging his van around full of crap along with
towing a fully loaded "tradie" trailer will all his tools every day the
van got used. I can't tell you what the total weight was but it was
always choc-a-bloc and probably close to 3 tonne, and this was in
suburbia where there was plenty of stop start driving.

He did lots of miles, yet he would routinely get 80-90 thousand km's out
of a set of front pads. Rear shoes would never wear out, and he would
see 300 thousand or more out of a clutch. This was on vans that would
hit 400k km's over the course of a 3 year lease before he would off-load
it and move onto the next one.

Tradies vans tend to get abused like that. One of his best mates was a
plumber who worked with him a lot who had a Hi-Ace which I also
serviced, and that never did any better. It would get around the same
mileage out of pads and clutches, they both seemed to be about as
reliable as each other. The only real significant difference between
them was that the Mitsubishi was around 10 grand cheaper to buy.

--
--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

On 19/12/21 12:08 pm, Daryl wrote:
> On 18/12/21 10:46 pm, Noddy wrote:
>> On 16/12/2021 11:08 pm, Daryl wrote:
>>> On 16/12/21 2:01 pm, Noddy wrote:
>>
>>> My experience with Hilux brakes is that they last a lot of kms before
>>> they need replacing, on the 2003 I owned the front pads lasted well
>>> over 100,000km as did the pads on the 2009 I also owned, it would be
>>> easy to reduce braking distance by fitting different pads but it
>>> seems to be a Toyota design criteria that longevity is more important
>>> than performance
>> Just as a follow up to this, I was fucking around with the Navara this
>> afternoon getting it ready to sell. I've made up my mind to get rid of
>> it and move into something more modern as my daily driver, and I'm
>> going over it giving it a detail and general tidy up.
>>
>> As part of that I'm fitting new front rotors and pads to it. It
>> doesn't need them, but around 4 years ago I bought new front rotors
>> and pads in anticipation of needing to change them one day, but the
>> problem is that they haven't yet worn to the point where they need to
>> be changed. However the new brake parts are no good to me after the
>> car is gone and fitting them now will give the new owner brand new
>> front brakes that they won't have to worry about for some years.
>>
>> Anyway, the reason I'm mentioning this is to show that Toyota isn't
>> the only company that builds longevity into their products :)
>>
>> These are the brake pads I removed today, and they're the original
>> factory pads fitted when the ute was built:
>>
>>  > https://www.imagebam.com/view/ME5NZZM
>>
>>  > https://www.imagebam.com/view/ME5NZZN
>>
>> As can be seen in the second photo, there's still around 4mm of
>> friction material left before you hit the wear indicators. The rotors
>> themselves were a millimeter above minimum spec and still perfectly
>> serviceable without any heat marks or warpage, and the brakes were
>> working as well as they always have. This is a fairly heavy vehicle
>> that has big 320mm rotors and it's always stopped exceptionally well.
>>
>> It's also 10 years old with 121 thousand km's on the dial, and to get
>> this level of service life out of front brakes on any vehicle today is
>> outstanding.
>>
>> Even by Toyota's standards :)
>>
>>
>
> Their longevity could be due partly to where we live, not much stop
> start and plenty of longish hwy trips, non of our cars have ever worn
> out their brakes quickly.
>
>
And in Darren's case especially, no hard yakka for his retiree's ute.

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

On 19/12/21 12:39 pm, Noddy wrote:
> On 19/12/2021 12:08 pm, Daryl wrote:
>> On 18/12/21 10:46 pm, Noddy wrote:
>
>>> As can be seen in the second photo, there's still around 4mm of
>>> friction material left before you hit the wear indicators. The rotors
>>> themselves were a millimeter above minimum spec and still perfectly
>>> serviceable without any heat marks or warpage, and the brakes were
>>> working as well as they always have. This is a fairly heavy vehicle
>>> that has big 320mm rotors and it's always stopped exceptionally well.
>>>
>>> It's also 10 years old with 121 thousand km's on the dial, and to get
>>> this level of service life out of front brakes on any vehicle today
>>> is outstanding.
>>>
>>> Even by Toyota's standards :)
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Their longevity could be due partly to where we live, not much stop
>> start and plenty of longish hwy trips, non of our cars have ever worn
>> out their brakes quickly.
>
> Possibly. No doubt in my mind that these Navara pads & rotors would have
> comfortably gone another 10 thousand km's, and possibly even another 20
> given the remarkably low wear rates they're showing. Country living
> probably helps, but the point is anything a Toyota is capable of doing
> is not exclusive to them and beyond the realm of anything else.

So pray tell why Toyota has a reputation for *reliability and Nissans
have, well, a *bad* reputation. Your Toyota envy is showing. I notice
that you have had such a bad run out of your Navara you aren't buying
another. I'm on my 3rd Toyota and my 4th is likely to also be a Toyota.
Reliability and TCO, two factors that make a car a good buy and Toyota
has both well covered. Nissan, not so much - obviously.
>
> And I'm not singing Nissan's praises here, either. I can remember when I

You're not alone, nobody else does either.

> used to service my old man's work vans. His last 3 or 4 vehicles were
> Mitsubishi Express vans and he had an exceptionally good run out of them
> as did most people. He was in the bathroom & Kitchen renovation business
> and he would *always* be lugging his van around full of crap along with
> towing a fully loaded "tradie" trailer will all his tools every day the
> van got used. I can't tell you what the total weight was but it was
> always choc-a-bloc and probably close to 3 tonne, and this was in
> suburbia where there was plenty of stop start driving.
>
> He did lots of miles, yet he would routinely get 80-90 thousand km's out
> of a set of front pads. Rear shoes would never wear out, and he would
> see 300 thousand or more out of a clutch. This was on vans that would
> hit 400k km's over the course of a 3 year lease before he would off-load
> it and move onto the next one.

400k on a three year lease Darren? That sounds way too rich a *lie* even
by *your standards*. Did your father do any work or did he just drive
between job sites just for the heck of it. Certainly, if he was doing
130k+ per year, he would have to have been behind the wheel all day
long. How did he squeeze any work in?
>
> Tradies vans tend to get abused like that. One of his best mates was a
> plumber who worked with him a lot who had a Hi-Ace which I also
> serviced, and that never did any better. It would get around the same
> mileage out of pads and clutches, they both seemed to be about as
> reliable as each other. The only real significant difference between
> them was that the Mitsubishi was around 10 grand cheaper to buy.

You serviced his van - in your little backyard business in Altona? Your
parent's place, wasn't it?

--
Xeno

Nothing astonishes Noddy so much as common sense and plain dealing.
(with apologies to Ralph Waldo Emerson)

On 19/12/2021 7:13 am, alvey wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 22:46:52 +1100, Noddy wrote:
>
> snip boring.
>
> Ahhhh Fraudster, you've done it again.
>
> Once more you've leapt into action to try and make some pissant, incredibly
> insignificant point, yet you won't provide any proof of any of your
> stupendously grandiose claims.
>
> How about a few pix of the fabled NA of A?
> Or your Grange collection?
> Sunshine Coast property?
> Qualifications?
> Drag racing action shots?
> Happy snaps from Japan and USA?

or scan his trade certificates and post them. after all, they should be
public info since he 'works' as a motor mechanic

>
> Seeing your siblings on Xmas Day are you Fraudster? Or have they all turned
> their back on you since you diddled them out of their inheritance?
>
> Oty Fraudster!
>
>
>
> alvey
> "I enjoy *very* fine food and don't mind paying a pretty penny for it...".

he buys the supersize meal at Maccas! :)

> One of my Fraudster Faves. A serious contender for the funniest thing he's
> ever claimed.
>

--
"his opinions have been crushed into insignificant dust by
the enormous weight of his lies"- Alvey on the Fraudster