New Mitsubishi Express - any good

[VYBerlinaV8]

I know this has been discussed here before, but does anyone have an
opinion on the SWB Mitsubishi Express van? Someone here at works wants
to buy one, and wants something simple, cheap and reliable. It will
mostly be used for light loads.

He wants to buy it new. I suggested that it would be pretty basic
compared to some other vehicles, but he doesn't seem to mind.

Thoughts?


--
VYBerlinaV8

[Albm&ctd]

In article <VYBerlina...@no-mx.phorums.com.au>, VYBerlinaV8.5knudo@no-
mx.phorums.com.au says...

Dunno about the newest ones. Guess they all have air and power steering by
now... so maybe not just a basic horrible handling noisy tin can on wheels like
my '98 one.

I'd suggest a test drive on the freeway in high winds.

A limited slip diff would be nice.

Al
--
I don't take sides.
It's more fun to insult everyone.

[Krypsis]

My preference in such things would be a Toyota. Pity they don't still
make the TownAce. That was a convenient sized little runabout. One of my
neighbours has a 4th gen model.

--

Krypsis

[Noddy]

The Express hasn't changes a lot on the last 25 years and there's a very
good reason for that: Because it's a *very* reliable machine. As you say
they're pretty bare bones, but it's a Van after all, and as far as
reliable, good value work vans go they're awfully hard to beat.

--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

[VYBerlinaV8]

Thanks boys. :)


--
VYBerlinaV8

[Toby Ponsenby]

On Fri, 19 Oct 2012 14:35:09 +1000, Albm&ctd blathered:

And nicer still, that diff wasn't thoughtfully provided by Mitsoshitty
with a ratio assuming the van is overloaded at all times.
--
Toby

[Noddy]

On 19/10/12 11:46 PM, Toby Ponsenby wrote:

> And nicer still, that diff wasn't thoughtfully provided by Mitsoshitty
> with a ratio assuming the van is overloaded at all times.

Never noticed anything odd about them in that respect. They always drove
well. Not overly powerful or quick, but well enough for a van just the same.



--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

[Toby Ponsenby]

On Sat, 20 Oct 2012 00:15:13 +1100, Noddy blathered:

Sorry, I didn't specify the diesel version.
Bloody awful final drive for highway work.
Lots of that round here with the freeways/tollways connecting industrial
enclaves.
Won't go any further with that argument for my utter "fear" of being
called paranoid:-)
--
Toby

[Pit]

On Oct 19, 10:24 am, VYBerlinaV8 <VYBerlinaV8.5kn...@no-

Not Driven SWB Express model younger than 2 years .
Found it basic but nothing frightening (except the seat not as
comfy as the Benz, VW & Hyundais )

My advice before parting with hard earned cash is have a look at one
of these even if just out of interest
http://www.hyundai.com.au/vehicles/iload
Punt one on a regular basis and LOVE it excellent ergonomics
excellent vis
and they must be ok as a lot of them about now

[Albm&ctd]

In article <k5rjop$fe2$1...@dont-email.me>, m...@wardengineering.com says...

Yeah, nothing a six speed manual and a turbo, full chassis and all wheel drive
wouldn't fix.. and 100 KG added to the arse end over a rear LSD axle.
The brakes,.. well it's as good as the Lada Niva was, but the Lada felt better
to drive on the freeway.
As for seeing out of the thing, well forget it unless you fit a LH door window
(for getting out of -nose in- parking spots) and a reversing cam.
The mirrors are fuck*ng hopeless and fitting a blind spot mirror on the left one
is essential to avoid doing a LH turn over a speeding granny in a bike lane.

Oh and it's a '99 not '98, yet my Lada was a '91 model.
Both have the same compwete wack of technowogy.

[VYBerlinaV8]

OK, so I bought a bunch of old Wheels magazines off ebay, and in a 1986
issue is a story about people movers, and lo and behold there is the
Mitsubishi Starwagon, with exactly the same mechanical spec as today's
Mitsubishi Express. 2.4l fuel injected engine with manual gearbox and
all, even the power and torque figures were almost identical.

It was good to read, and to consider things from the perspective of
nearly 30 years ago.


--
VYBerlinaV8

[Krypsis]

And to see how much in the way of advancements Mitsubishi has made in
all that time - none! ;-)

--

Krypsis

[who where]

On Fri, 26 Oct 2012 10:50:48 +1100, Krypsis <kry...@optusnet.com.au>
wrote:

If it ain't broke, don't fix it?

[Krypsis]

No advancements in the past 30 years? You must be joking!

BTW, advancements are improvements, not fixes.

--

Krypsis

[bugalugs]

Back about 8 years ago the boss bought a Mitsi van for the mailrun.
during the 2 years I was driving it it was always having overheating
problems. The run was mostly flat and very little highway driving. The
run,including the van was sold and about 18 months later the new owner
was sucking on a beer and looking at the thing for inspiration. He
noticed the fan was on back to front. (god knows how they got it on) The
van had been back to the dealer every couple of months with no results.

He went in and ripped a new asshole right through the whole dealership
and there has never been another Bitsomissy on the fleet ever since.

--
Everyone is entitled to be stupid, but some abuse the privilege.

[Noddy]

On 26/10/12 10:50 AM, Krypsis wrote:

> And to see how much in the way of advancements Mitsubishi has made in
> all that time - none! ;-)

They've done that on purpose. The Express has always been a very good
van and while it sells okay there is no need to fuck with it.





--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

[Noddy]

On 26/10/12 12:55 PM, Krypsis wrote:

> No advancements in the past 30 years? You must be joking!

It's a *van*. What the fuck do you want them to do to it? :)

> BTW, advancements are improvements, not fixes.

What part of "van" don't you understand?


--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

[Albm&ctd]

In article <cqpis.410$1k5...@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com>,
m...@wardengineering.com.au says...

Hate to enlighten you but there have been heap of changes in the engines and
body etc., since they were introduced... so you are fuck*ng wrong again.

[Krypsis]

On 26/10/2012 4:44 PM, Noddy wrote:
> On 26/10/12 12:55 PM, Krypsis wrote:
>
>> No advancements in the past 30 years? You must be joking!
>
> It's a *van*. What the fuck do you want them to do to it? :)

Improvements... the same as there has been in cars during the same time
period.

>
>> BTW, advancements are improvements, not fixes.
>
> What part of "van" don't you understand?
>

Van, has 4 wheels, box body, used for carting stuff.
Car, has 4 wheels, not so boxy body, used for carting stuff, including
people.

Cars got improved, other makes of VANs got improved, Mitsubishi vans
stayed the same and Mitsubishi is no longer the company it once was.
There's a message in there for car (and van) manufacturers who think
more of the same is a good thing.
>

--

Krypsis

[Krypsis]

Rubbish! They've got a bunch of dicks in the development department who
haven't got an ounce of the inspiration that the development crew of 30
years ago had!


--

Krypsis

[Krypsis]

LOL

--

Krypsis

[Noddy]

On 26/10/12 6:40 PM, Albm&ctd wrote:

> Hate to enlighten you but there have been heap of changes in the engines and
> body etc., since they were introduced... so you are fuck*ng wrong again.

Actually Al, they've changed fuck all in the last 25 years or so, and
have changed less than just about any other vehicle that's been in
production for that amount of time.



--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

[Noddy]

On 26/10/12 6:56 PM, Krypsis wrote:

> Cars got improved, other makes of VANs got improved, Mitsubishi vans
> stayed the same and Mitsubishi is no longer the company it once was.
> There's a message in there for car (and van) manufacturers who think
> more of the same is a good thing.

Marketing clearly isn't your speciality.


--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

[Noddy]

On 26/10/12 6:58 PM, Krypsis wrote:

> Rubbish! They've got a bunch of dicks in the development department who
> haven't got an ounce of the inspiration that the development crew of 30
> years ago had!

Really? What did the crew of 30 years ago do? :)

Here's something you may not have realised. The Express has survived
largely unchanged for the last 25 years because it fills a niche, and
that niche is for a bare bones van at a cheap price. In that role the
Express does pretty well, and well enough for Mitsubishi to keep it on
the market for so long *without* needing to continuously update the
thing and move it away from the core product that is relatively popular.

The short answer is that it exists like it does because there have been
enough people who *wanted* it to.



--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

[Krypsis]

Nor was it a speciality of Mitsubishi as the evidence would indicate. In
fact, market research was a distinct "fail" for Mitsubishi in this country.

--

Krypsis

[D Walford]

I very much doubt that it has remained unchanged in that period but most
likely the changes aren't easily seen, the basic specs may have stayed
the same but things like suspension, brakes and chassis tweaking can be
done without being obvious but still improving the vehicle.
Even something as simple as redesigning the seats can make a big difference.
VW Beetles looked much the same for their entire 60 or so years of
production but there were very significant changes underneath.



Daryl

[terryc]

On 26/10/12 18:56, Krypsis wrote:
> On 26/10/2012 4:44 PM, Noddy wrote:
>> On 26/10/12 12:55 PM, Krypsis wrote:
>>
>>> No advancements in the past 30 years? You must be joking!
>>
>> It's a *van*. What the fuck do you want them to do to it? :)
>
> Improvements... the same as there has been in cars during the same time
> period.

Forget that. They are work vehicles and not pushing all the car
"development" is what keeps them reliable and economic.

[terryc]

Because the competition was better and offered what the market would
accept at a better price?.OTOH, they did have a niche.
>

[Noddy]

On 26/10/12 10:39 PM, Krypsis wrote:

> Nor was it a speciality of Mitsubishi as the evidence would indicate. In
> fact, market research was a distinct "fail" for Mitsubishi in this country.

It certainly was in the case of their cars, but their commercials have
always been in a different league.



--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

[Noddy]

On 26/10/12 10:49 PM, D Walford wrote:

> I very much doubt that it has remained unchanged in that period but most
> likely the changes aren't easily seen, the basic specs may have stayed
> the same but things like suspension, brakes and chassis tweaking can be
> done without being obvious but still improving the vehicle.

As far as I'm aware the changes are very minor. For example, they now
use a 2.4 efi engine rather than a 2.0 carb as in the original SF
series, they have power steering as standard where it used to be
optional, they have slightly different front bumpers and lights and they
come in a wider range of colours.

Outside of that, everything else is about the same as when it first
appeared in late 1986 :)

> Even something as simple as redesigning the seats can make a big
> difference.
> VW Beetles looked much the same for their entire 60 or so years of
> production but there were very significant changes underneath.
>
>
>
> Daryl

--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

[Albm&ctd]

In article <AItis.416$1k5...@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com>,
m...@wardengineering.com.au says...

30 years was mentioned. Um 30 from 2012.. errmmm errmm, fark 1982??
The 4G63 2.0 litre 16 valve sohc we have was introduced when?
When re-ringing there were different ring sets to choose from, some not the
right ones, had to do some research and measure ring width and depth to get the
right ones. Ours '99 model has the so called electronic carburettor.
Bet they don't even make a carby model any more.

So you are sooo fuck*ng wrong again :)

Talk about the Black Knight! Would you like some bandages for those bloody
squirting wounds?

[who where]

On Fri, 26 Oct 2012 22:39:42 +1100, Krypsis <kry...@optusnet.com.au>
wrote:

MMAL were *very* different to Mitsi Japan (where the vans came from).

[who where]

On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 00:51:41 +1100, Noddy <m...@wardengineering.com.au>
wrote:

>On 26/10/12 10:49 PM, D Walford wrote:
>
>> I very much doubt that it has remained unchanged in that period but most
>> likely the changes aren't easily seen, the basic specs may have stayed
>> the same but things like suspension, brakes and chassis tweaking can be
>> done without being obvious but still improving the vehicle.
>
>As far as I'm aware the changes are very minor. For example, they now
>use a 2.4 efi engine rather than a 2.0 carb as in the original SF
>series, they have power steering as standard where it used to be
>optional, they have slightly different front bumpers and lights and they
>come in a wider range of colours.
>
>Outside of that, everything else is about the same as when it first
>appeared in late 1986 :)

Our 88? (I actually thought it was earlier) SD 8-seater had very thin
seats in the "passenger" compartment, and hinged rear window sections
both sides which were absolutely great at providing through
ventilation without the noise etc of an open sliding window. 1.6L 4G32
4-speed. Had to add a 5-speed ex the wreckers to get any sort of
highway speed though. The real issue was the diff ratio was selected
to climb vertical walls in 1st, and for suburban parcel delivery in
Tokyo with a ton on board. It should have been re-geared for
passenger duty esp. in Oz.

Having said all that, we were so satisfied with it that we went on to
the 96 SJ that's in the garage at the moment. 2L carb 4G63, far
better seats, same diff ratio AFAICT, oblong headlights that actually
light up the road. Still a PITA to adjust the alternator belt
tension, and allow an hour to replace the #4 spark plug.

The van version interior is what you would describe as "spartan",
while the 8-seater was a bit more up-market but never could they be
desribed as flash.

>> Even something as simple as redesigning the seats can make a big
>> difference.

It did.

[Noddy]

On 27/10/12 4:41 PM, Albm&ctd wrote:

> 30 years was mentioned. Um 30 from 2012.. errmmm errmm, fark 1982??

That was Krypsis. Not me :)

> The 4G63 2.0 litre 16 valve sohc we have was introduced when?

Couldn't tell you.

When the SF series van first appeared in around 1987 or so it came with
a carburetted version of the 2.0 litre 4G63, but it was only an 8 valve
version in the Australian released vans even though a 16 valve version
existed at the time, as did the 2.4 litre with electronic fuel injection
which were both reserved for other parts of the world.

In the early 90's (I can't recall exactly when), the 16 valve variant
started to appear, and the 2.4 litre EFI engine that was mainly used in
Europe was issued as an option on the Australian models. Today the 2.4
EFI is the standard (and only) engine across the range in the Australian
models and it's the same engine that was around back in the 80's.

> When re-ringing there were different ring sets to choose from, some not the
> right ones, had to do some research and measure ring width and depth to get the
> right ones.

That's largely because the 4G63 engine appeared in a *lot* of different
vehicles, ranging from cars, to light commercials like vans and utes, to
industrial applications like forklifts. Each variant had it's own
specific piston and ring combo.

> Ours '99 model has the so called electronic carburettor.
> Bet they don't even make a carby model any more.

No, but they would if they could get away with it I'm sure :)

> So you are sooo fuck*ng wrong again :)

Go take a look at a brand spanker Al, and compare it to your 12 year old
job. If you can pick more than half a dozen differences you'll be doing
*very* well :)

> Talk about the Black Knight! Would you like some bandages for those bloody
> squirting wounds?

Stop. I'm dying.....



--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

[Albm&ctd]

In article <k6g506$uhu$1...@dont-email.me>, m...@wardengineering.com.au says...

> On 27/10/12 4:41 PM, Albm&ctd wrote:
>
> > 30 years was mentioned. Um 30 from 2012.. errmmm errmm, fark 1982??
>
> That was Krypsis. Not me :)
>
> > The 4G63 2.0 litre 16 valve sohc we have was introduced when?
>
> Couldn't tell you.
>
> When the SF series van first appeared in around 1987 or so it came with
> a carburetted version of the 2.0 litre 4G63, but it was only an 8 valve
> version in the Australian released vans even though a 16 valve version
> existed at the time, as did the 2.4 litre with electronic fuel injection
> which were both reserved for other parts of the world.
>
> In the early 90's (I can't recall exactly when), the 16 valve variant
> started to appear, and the 2.4 litre EFI engine that was mainly used in
> Europe was issued as an option on the Australian models. Today the 2.4
> EFI is the standard (and only) engine across the range in the Australian
> models and it's the same engine that was around back in the 80's.
>
> > When re-ringing there were different ring sets to choose from, some not the
> > right ones, had to do some research and measure ring width and depth to get the
> > right ones.
>
> That's largely because the 4G63 engine appeared in a *lot* of different
> vehicles, ranging from cars, to light commercials like vans and utes, to
> industrial applications like forklifts. Each variant had it's own
> specific piston and ring combo.
>

The original rings in ours traced back to the turbo 4g63, by way of the
inside chamfer of the top ring. Apparently the evo 4g63 bottom end wise ain't
that much different. Mind you this info is from a net search so could be utter
utter fuck*ng bullshit. I settled for rings that were size compatible and they
were made in Taiwan and very good. This particular motor doesn't appear to have
crank walk / end float either.

> > Ours '99 model has the so called electronic carburettor.
> > Bet they don't even make a carby model any more.
>
> No, but they would if they could get away with it I'm sure :)
>

In the desert a carby is your friend... but a fuck*d ecu could be a bit of a
crunt.

> > So you are sooo fuck*ng wrong again :)
>
> Go take a look at a brand spanker Al, and compare it to your 12 year old
> job. If you can pick more than half a dozen differences you'll be doing
> *very* well :)
>

My eyes, my eyes, you cruel bastard!!

> > Talk about the Black Knight! Would you like some bandages for those bloody
> > squirting wounds?
>
> Stop. I'm dying.....
>

Bullshit, you're growing a furry little arm back as we speak :)

[Albm&ctd]

In article <584n88d0k9vibuije...@4ax.com>, no...@home.net says...

> and allow an hour to replace the #4 spark plug
>

I put the cylinder head back on in less time than that.
Reading a Japanese manual.. if you find yourself swearing you are doing
something wrong. If you want a real swearing challenge in situ, try honing no4
cylinder.

[Jason James]

> If you want a real swearing challenge in situ, try honing no4 cylinder.

I asked a mechy once how to get a good angle cross-hatch hone. He said, about the same speed of in and outing of the stalk of a premature ejackulator,...about right is that Al?

Jason :-)

[Noddy]

On 28/10/12 5:38 PM, Albm&ctd wrote:

> The original rings in ours traced back to the turbo 4g63, by way of the
> inside chamfer of the top ring. Apparently the evo 4g63 bottom end wise ain't
> that much different. Mind you this info is from a net search so could be utter
> utter fuck*ng bullshit. I settled for rings that were size compatible and they
> were made in Taiwan and very good. This particular motor doesn't appear to have
> crank walk / end float either.

They used the 4G63 in a variety of applications, including early
Magna's, but the van motors were surprisingly different. Where the
locally made 4G63 in the Magna was as soft as butter and would wear out
incredibly quickly, the Japanese made version in the van was *very*
durable and would last forever.

I've seen *many* of them with well over 300k km's on their dials and
still running well, and the one I owned for some time had around 450k
km's on it and only blew a head gasket after I took it to the local tip
and snagged a piece of wire on a heater hose which dumped the coolant.

When I pulled the head off that engine to repair it the bores were in
excellent shape and the thing is still going around today with God only
knows how many miles on it.

--
Regards,
Noddy.

[Albm&ctd]

In article <k6j1jp$qjm$1...@dont-email.me>, m...@wardengineering.com.au says...

The one I bought had sucked in dust, lots of it from an ill-fitting element.
At 150,000 it was rooted engine wise but the rest is fair to good. Then gearbox
and diff are both noisy but they can stay that way. The 1/4 inch of oil and dust
on the rocker cover was an indication that all was not well... and obvious that
the previous owner drove on a dirt road often... and a serious oil leak at the
back of the head.

[who where]

On Sun, 28 Oct 2012 16:46:34 +1000, Albm&ctd
<alb_mand...@connexus.net.au> wrote:

>In article <584n88d0k9vibuije...@4ax.com>, no...@home.net says...
>> and allow an hour to replace the #4 spark plug
>>
>I put the cylinder head back on in less time than that.

Yebbut - you don't have to remove the driver's seat, half the floor
and 3/4's of the air intake system to remove the head.

Shite, Al, I think you've cracked it. To replace the #4 spark plug,
simply remove the head to get access. Yer frickin' brilliant, lad.

>Reading a Japanese manual.. if you find yourself swearing you are doing
>something wrong. If you want a real swearing challenge in situ, try honing no4
>cylinder.

No thanks.

[Albm&ctd]

In article <0fbs88d0o0lqc07hk...@4ax.com>, no...@home.net says...

> On Sun, 28 Oct 2012 16:46:34 +1000, Albm&ctd
> <alb_mand...@connexus.net.au> wrote:
>
> >In article <584n88d0k9vibuije...@4ax.com>, no...@home.net says...
> >> and allow an hour to replace the #4 spark plug
> >>
> >I put the cylinder head back on in less time than that.
>
> Yebbut - you don't have to remove the driver's seat, half the floor
> and 3/4's of the air intake system to remove the head.

Did you mean, you do?

>
> Shite, Al, I think you've cracked it. To replace the #4 spark plug,
> simply remove the head to get access. Yer frickin' brilliant, lad.
>

I know :)

> >Reading a Japanese manual.. if you find yourself swearing you are doing
> >something wrong. If you want a real swearing challenge in situ, try honing no4
> >cylinder.
>
> No thanks.

[Albm&ctd]

In article <k6j1jp$qjm$1...@dont-email.me>, m...@wardengineering.com.au says...

> They used the 4G63 in a variety of applications, including early
> Magna's, but the van motors were surprisingly different. Where the
> locally made 4G63 in the Magna was as soft as butter and would wear out
> incredibly quickly, the Japanese made version in the van was *very*
> durable and would last forever.
>

Just a follow up on this. I don't recall a 4G63 in a Magna so I bow to your
superwior knowedge, what model?
AFAIK, the Magna had a 2.6 4G54 8 valve and a 2.4 4G64 16 valve sohc.

Express, 1.8 litre and a 2.0 litre in 8 valve 4G63 and a 2 litre 16 valve (like
ours) and a 4G64 2.4 litre in both 8 and 16 valve.

Our one has a big MMAL sticker and both ID plates have Mitsubish Motors
Australia Limited so I take it that it was made in Australia, and of course they
maka nuffing here now so the current Express is made in Japan.

ALL the above could be wrong :)

[Noddy]

On 01/11/12 2:09 PM, Albm&ctd wrote:

> Just a follow up on this. I don't recall a 4G63 in a Magna so I bow to your
> superwior knowedge, what model?
> AFAIK, the Magna had a 2.6 4G54 8 valve and a 2.4 4G64 16 valve sohc.

Sorry, I actually meant a locally made 4G54, and they were fucking terrible.

The 4G63 could be found in things like Cordias, Lancers and some
Pajeros, and was made under licence by Hyundai for the Elantra if I
recall. Also fitted to the early L200 Ute.

> Express, 1.8 litre and a 2.0 litre in 8 valve 4G63 and a 2 litre 16 valve (like
> ours) and a 4G64 2.4 litre in both 8 and 16 valve.
>
> Our one has a big MMAL sticker and both ID plates have Mitsubish Motors
> Australia Limited so I take it that it was made in Australia, and of course they
> maka nuffing here now so the current Express is made in Japan.
>
> ALL the above could be wrong :)

As far as I'm aware none of the Mitsu vans were ever made here, but
rather were imported and plated here. Much like early model Falcons were
made at Broadmeadows and exported across the world where they were
plated as being "Made by Ford South Africa".

The early models on our market were all made in Japan, but later and
current ones all come from either Indonesia or Thailand. Like just about
every other Japanese commercial.






--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

[who where]

On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 13:09:35 +1000, Albm&ctd
<alb_mand...@connexus.net.au> wrote:

(snip)

>Our one has a big MMAL sticker and both ID plates have Mitsubish Motors
>Australia Limited so I take it that it was made in Australia, and of course they
>maka nuffing here now so the current Express is made in Japan.
>
>ALL the above could be wrong :)

Check the VIN. With the exception of European models(*), that should
show the country of build.

* The Europeans seem to think that because say GM Europe are hq-ed in
Germany, it is kosher to assign a German build code to their crap made
in say Belgium or (shudder) pommieland.

[who where]

On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 12:51:26 +1000, Albm&ctd

<alb_mand...@connexus.net.au> wrote:

>In article <0fbs88d0o0lqc07hk...@4ax.com>, no...@home.net says...
>> On Sun, 28 Oct 2012 16:46:34 +1000, Albm&ctd
>> <alb_mand...@connexus.net.au> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <584n88d0k9vibuije...@4ax.com>, no...@home.net says...
>> >> and allow an hour to replace the #4 spark plug
>> >>
>> >I put the cylinder head back on in less time than that.
>>
>> Yebbut - you don't have to remove the driver's seat, half the floor
>> and 3/4's of the air intake system to remove the head.
>
>Did you mean, you do?

I haven't had the (mis-)fortune to do a head removal on an L300, but
the potential to do so without ripping the bvehicle back to a
box-of-parts is more likely than the #4 spark plug job.

[Noddy]

On 01/11/12 8:11 PM, who where wrote:

> I haven't had the (mis-)fortune to do a head removal on an L300, but
> the potential to do so without ripping the bvehicle back to a
> box-of-parts is more likely than the #4 spark plug job.

They weren't that bad. If you wanted to see "bad" in all it's glory try
doing a timing belt on one with dealer fitted air.

Now *that* was bad :)


--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

[Albm&ctd]

In article <k6ssho$ucg$1...@dont-email.me>, m...@wardengineering.com.au says...

> Sorry, I actually meant a locally made 4G54, and they were fucking terrible.
>

You had me going there for a while and *hey* you were *wrong*... again :)

[Albm&ctd]

In article <k6tft7$gha$2...@dont-email.me>, m...@wardengineering.com.au says...

At least the one I rescued from the wreckers didn't have air.
The names that the express was called are varied in many countries but I always
considered the empty tin can van as the express and the so called L300 as the
people mover, called the star wagon recently.

[Toby Ponsenby]

On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 17:09:13 +0800, who where blathered:

Some good news on that front!!
Ford are stopping production of their vans in the
UK. Really. 1400 Jobbies will go.
Looks like the pommie wrecking yards are about to cop a shitload of
jobbie vacancy enquiries...

PS, they'd be the dickheads amongst other dickheads that *don't* refuse
to put together Transits with shit pressure hoses for power steering
directly above the turbocharger.
Genius's all.

--
Toby

[Toby Ponsenby]

On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 20:37:41 +1100, Noddy blathered:

We have a new champion!
The Starter motor on a V8Diesel Landcruiser.
Toyota elected to bury the fucker up top - in the valley. At the back,
or course. Of course a million sensors and other silly shit is directly
in the path to the starter motor..
Sure, it's less prone to water/dirt damage there. Good thinking Toyota.
Trouble is, people driving machinery they don't own (err, that's
probably the majority of the damm things in many areas) tend to find
ways to mix water, dirt and all manner of other shite with that starter
motor.
Bonus:
Some change outa 3 grand for the SM alone, and
You can have fun standing up - sorta, doing the job on the SM, and
You can be happy knowing that all that shite at the front of the motor
doesn't have to be removed all that often because the cams on these new
motors use <gasp> chains!
(Well, they had to - Hyundai got up their noses by doing that with their
monster petrol 8's as sold to the Seppos.)
--
Toby

[Albm&ctd]

In article <4s1498ho2rl1duuq9...@4ax.com>, sac...@omen.net.au

says...
> On Sun, 28 Oct 2012 16:46:34 +1000, Albm&ctd
> <alb_mand...@connexus.net.au> wrote:
>

> >In article <584n88d0k9vibuije...@4ax.com>, no...@home.net says...
> >> and allow an hour to replace the #4 spark plug
> >>
> >I put the cylinder head back on in less time than that.
> >Reading a Japanese manual.. if you find yourself swearing you are doing
> >something wrong. If you want a real swearing challenge in situ, try honing no4
> >cylinder.
>

> It is just as easy as all the rest. You do it from below with a
> flexible hone.
>
That's a thought, push the crank aside. I had a lovely little nest of wasps
as pets under it to keep me company (took happy snaps with the Minolta). Felt
lousy when I had to hose them out at RWC time.
Interesting thing was the head was supposed to be torque to yield, yet none of
the bolts measured stretched but of course I fitted new ones and did the
business with a torque wrench checking when the cut off point was and a few
clicked off at 80 foot pounds. The early 4G63 IIRC was 60 ft/lbs and then
increased to 70 ft/lbs in a service bulletin. The rod bolts I did up to the old
35 ft/lbs as on the early ones and it was so similar to the so called torque to
yield results. In fact the rod bolts were not stretched at all so re-used them.
I doubt any of it was done up to mfgs yield specs. The tell-tale is to see if
the rod nuts can be run up the thread by finger and yes not a problem, so
reused.

(Q) Why am I telling you all this. (A) I dunno.

[Albm&ctd]

In article <4sp0a7yleplt$.1qf7cw8ncp7jj$.d...@40tude.net>, m...@privacy.net says...

Gee. I just fixed the Bosch '85 Merc alternator with a common $5 brush set I had
(yeah I know I got ripped off for those) and I put in a brand new 6201 rear
bearing that I had.
Bugger going out to get a new front bearing so washed and regreased it.

If the Bosch starter fucks up, I'm sure the cheap Holden, Valiant or Ford
brushes I've got will fit.

[Noddy]

On 01/11/12 10:25 PM, Albm&ctd wrote:

> You had me going there for a while and *hey* you were *wrong*... again :)

See? Told ya :)



--
--
Regards,
Noddy.

[who where]

On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 21:48:41 +1000, Toby Ponsenby <m...@privacy.net>
wrote:

(snip)

>You can be happy knowing that all that shite at the front of the motor
>doesn't have to be removed all that often because the cams on these new
>motors use <gasp> chains!

There's a school of opinion that belts and serious off-road don't go
well together due to the amount of shitencrud that eventually finds
its way in there. At least chains (on all the motors I've seen) are
kept "indoors".

[Toby Ponsenby]

On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 16:12:50 +0800, who where blathered:

Wondering if the BDA motors on the rally cars had differing housings or
in fact any housings/shielding cf the circuit race versions. Never did
get a look at a rally version of anything with that engine.
--
Toby

[Albm&ctd]

In article <7g8798hd2cuhrd1d2...@4ax.com>, sac...@omen.net.au
says...
> ?! If you do that, you do realise that they won't stretch!?
>
To be clearer:

I did the torque to yield by it's specified beginning torque, then the required
angles of turn. The torque wrench was just going along for the ride as I had it
set for 80 ft/lbs and quite a few went off at that setting.

I still like the old 1000 km run in and retorque the head bolts.. but these
engines are such a shit to do again.

To do the torque to yield I had to use a mirror to see the white markings I put
on the bolt heads.. the rear bolts.

[Albm&ctd]

In article <6mg998l9v8m1m582o...@4ax.com>, sac...@omen.net.au
says...

> You weren't using an angle gauge?
>
You don't need one if you mark the bolt heads after the first specified torque
point. I wonder how many fuck-ups have happened because someone got interrupted
or went to smoko and forgot what bolt they were on... with the two in sequence
specified angles being required on each bolt.

This could happen on the rod bolts too, so IMHO better to use the torque wrench
on those.

I still hate this cunt of a vehicle but hey it was cheap and I needed something
useful and cheap for carting stuff.