U.S. Tacoma versus Kenyan Hilux

[enzo]

I'm Toyotas biggest fan but wow that Ranger is nice. I really like the fact that it was designed/engineered in Australia.

 

[Jonathan Hanson]

I'm noticing 5-lugs... did they go with the bigger 14mm studs/5x150 of the landcruiser?

The 4x4 Hilux still uses six-lug wheels.

I did see a HiAce driving down Broadway last night since we are talking about what vehicles we can't get here...

Truth be told, the Hi-Ace is probably the toughest vehicle on the planet, and puts Land Cruisers/LandRovers/G-Wagens to shame. I've seen them taking mind-boggling abuse as Matatus crammed with 14 people and hammering sideways at speed on corrugated roads. Incredible.

 

[keezer37]

I'm impressed by my Tacoma's composite bed. Not a problem with it and easy to drill through. Personally, I'd be disappointed to see them go to metal. No dents, rust, or scratches. After 125k, it's in better shape than the driver's seat or the driver for that matter.

 

[Clutch]

Truth be told, the Hi-Ace is probably the toughest vehicle on the planet, and puts Land Cruisers/LandRovers/G-Wagens to shame. I've seen them taking mind-boggling abuse as Matatus crammed with 14 people and hammering sideways at speed on corrugated roads. Incredible.

Would like one of those as well.

This one was forward control passenger model, going the opposite direction...couldn't get a picture of it. Assumed it is up from Mexico, it looked brand new.

There is also a Daihatsu sitting in a neighbors yard. Hasn't moved for a couple months.

 

[Klierslc]

The new ford is tempting--the Afghans use them a lot with good results. They don't hold up well to IEDs but beyond that they pose a pretty serious threat to the Hilux. Factory roll bar, steel bumper, fender protection, sliders, and rear bumper Jerry can holders....

 

[bjowett]

T-TT-0152-11 is for the 11/12 trucks and says the crack is superficial. I don't have the older TSB #, I will try to find it.

 

[toylandcruiser]

I just don't have the problem others do with C-channel vs boxed frame sections.

My old 1981 Toyota pickup, with a nice fully-boxed frame, had significant perforating corrosion around the rear spring hangers when I moved it on (after 28 years!). I gotta think the design was part of that.

I'm perfectly happy to have a C-channel on my 2001 Tacoma DC, and after Toyota's extended service program rust treatment a few years ago, I'm quite confident the frame will outlast me. I work the truck, but don't punish it by any means. C-channel suits my needs perfectly -- a well-designed truck for my needs, except for the engine (smile).

Don

I agree. I can't understand why people trash talk c channel frames. All big rigs and military vehicles designed for heavy fury use have c channel.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jonathan Hanson]

I agree. I can't understand why people trash talk c channel frames. All big rigs and military vehicles designed for heavy fury use have c channel.

True - but there are C-channel frames, and there are C-channel frames. The twist apparent in a lot of older American pickups on any bit of cross-axle terrain is scary. Yeah, I know Chevy and Ford said, "We designed them that way," but I've lost count of how many of those trucks I've seen with beds permanently cockeyed to the cab, or dents in the cab where the top corner of the bed contacted it. Show me a 70s-era long-bed Ford with the side chrome strips still lined up, and I'll show you ten without. The Unimog was one of the few vehicles I know with a chassis that actually appeared to be designed properly to flex in a controlled manner.

On the other hand, a fully boxed chassis is no guarantee of rigidity or durability, especially given inadequate measures to prevent rust from trapped water.

Still, given the choice, I'd take a boxed chassis.

 

[toylandcruiser]

True - but there are C-channel frames, and there are C-channel frames. The twist apparent in a lot of older American pickups on any bit of cross-axle terrain is scary. Yeah, I know Chevy and Ford said, "We designed them that way," but I've lost count of how many of those trucks I've seen with beds permanently cockeyed to the cab, or dents in the cab where the top corner of the bed contacted it. Show me a 70s-era long-bed Ford with the side chrome strips still lined up, and I'll show you ten without. The Unimog was one of the few vehicles I know with a chassis that actually appeared to be designed properly to flex in a controlled manner.

On the other hand, a fully boxed chassis is no guarantee of rigidity or durability, especially given inadequate measures to prevent rust from trapped water.

Still, given the choice, I'd take a boxed chassis.

That would be from piss poor design and engineering. Not from lack of c channels ability to be strong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jonathan Hanson]

That would be from piss poor design and engineering. Not from lack of c channels ability to be strong.

That was my point in saying, "There are C-channel frames, and C-channel frames." You could easily make a fat C-channel frame that would be more rigid than a narrow-section boxed frame. But using the same amount/weight of material, a closed section will be stronger. I believe a round tube is the strongest supporting member you can make with a given amount of material.

 

[Scott Brady]

I enjoyed the article Jonathan. Thanks for posting it up.

 

[Mitubitchy 3.5]

The new ford is tempting--the Afghans use them a lot with good results. They don't hold up well to IEDs but beyond that they pose a pretty serious threat to the Hilux. Factory roll bar, steel bumper, fender protection, sliders, and rear bumper Jerry can holders....View attachment 131553View attachment 131554

Hi Kliersic,

both Trucks on the Pics showing the old Modell, under the Hood its a Mazda BT 50, not a Ford.

The new Modell is egineerd by Ford Australia, and its so much better then the old one I cant subscribe...

Stephan