Ln167 vs kzn165 hilux

I have a KZN165 and previously a LN65 and LN106. The fuel consumption between the LN106 and KZN165 is much the same and there wasnt any remarkable breakthroughs between the 106 and 167 (3L-5L).
The 165 on the other hand has quite good power between 2000 and 3000rpm and sits at 110-125kph without too much trouble.

I have a LN167 hilux...that is the non turbo, 5LE electronicly controlled conventional injected diesel.
As far as non turbo motors it is about as good as it gets.

They are a great reliable little diesel...mine has over 350 000 on it runs like a top and still has compression within spec.

They are not a fast car......if you want a faster car buy a petrol motor...the 2.7 liter petrol makes far more power than the turbo diesel.

I have a 2.7 liter petrol in 2wd...but for long highway crusing I prefeer the diesel.....it just sits on speed better.

It will sit on 110 on the highway all day...yeh you will slow down on some of the big hills...but so what.

I have towed a tandem trailer loaded with a 700Kg electric truck..and it sat on the highway at 100-110 K no problems...I've dragged a couple of other heavier trailers and round the hilly back blocks here it pulls willingly..though its not fast.

If ya worried about fuel costs...don't buy a ute and don't buy a 4wd.

I know some people bleat about hiluxes being thursty....compared to what...its a light commercial that will carry a full tonne in the tray and pasengers in the cab in single cab.
If being compared to a light sedan or station waggon..of course it will be thursty...but not that bad...and it wont get much worse when you load it up.

In the hiluxes unless you want a live front end...the best value is post 01 and pre 05.....right across the range there where some improvements in the post 01.

for some background.
there was about a 6 Hp improvement going from the 2.8 litre 3L to the early 3 litre 5L...there was another 6ish Hp improvement going from the 5L to the 5LE.....the electronic injection and a change in cam timimg gave a little extra power and better drivability.
That 6Hp may not seem much......but in a relativly low power diesel it is s significant improvement.

The turbo diesels in that era are a bit hard to find and will be costing you quite a bit more.

If it is your first car.....I gota say there are a lot worse choices....they are a great little truck and the diesel thing will help you keep your licence.

Buy in white, keep the thing looking plain and clean..and the coppers will drive right past you and pull up the young turk in the rice rocket.


Again back to the power......its a diesel it will never be fast off the mark......a little attitude adjustment and learning to drive a diesel and it wont bother you......actually once you get over the whole acceleration thing you should find the diesel calming.

At the moment I drive the diesel every day...I get home just as fast as everybody else.......in heavy traffic its actually easier to drive than the petrol.

as far as hiluxes generally...they are cheap motoring.....there are plenty of em about and there are plenty of parts arround for them both new genuine, aftermarket and used.
A hilux would have to be one of the cheaperst utes or 4wds over all to own.

A great first vehicle for a hard working young bloke or tom boy chick.

cheers

I had an LN 167, good car. Fuel consumption was never bad around 10LP100, fitted a set of extractors and fuel consumption jumped to 8 LPH - a known improvement. Power and torque never improved noticeably. Standard the LN165 puts out around 200nm and 65kw, so not real exiting. On rough rocky trails they're excellent, but if your going to be using it in sand, beach, etc, not the best - you need power and revs for that. Better off with a TD or petrol engine. Faults: driving with hand on gear knob will result in a bent selector and the gearbox will jump out of gear (third gear I think). No biggy just push the lever in the opposite direction and selector will bend back again. The LN165 were also known for oil draining back into the sump at reat, resulting in a delay in the oil light extinguishing on startup, Toyota were aware of the problem but never did nothing about it. Again no biggy. There was also a problem with a pin on the plastic gear driving the speedo gear (only on removing drive shaft) and a week circlip holding the transfer box lever in place. Some Toyotas come with built in design flaws, makes them interesting - particularly on the GRR.

I have owned a 167 single cab non turbo diesel for the last seven years. It had 42000ks on it when I bought it and it is now getting very close to 142,000. It has taken us everywhere from the top of Blue Rag to the top of Mt Beadell without any trouble at all on standard suspension and stock size 205 tyres.. The only modification is an auto locking diff in the front. It has never been fully loaded on any of those trips.

It is no sports car and you won't win a drag race with it gets us there and easily keeps up with the traffic. If you want all out speed and power then forget it. I deliberately did not go looking for a turbo when I bought it. I like keeping things as simple as can be.

I have found the big killer with fuel consumption is speed which is not surprising because most 4wds have the aerodynamics of a brick. Big wide tyres make things even worse with increased rolling and wind resistance. This is why even 400 mph salt lake racing cars have very skinny tyres.

I recorded 12.5 L/100 ks on the Birdsville Track while trying to keep up with a convoy. My wife and I traveling on our own have consistently recorded low 9s per 100k on many trips in the same conditions but at much lower speeds. The best ever was a mid 7 per 100 last year between Alice Springs and Kintore. The road was smooth but I don't think I exceeded 60 the whole way. A relaxing three day run down the Sandy Blight to Giles gave us a fraction under 9.

The worst ever was 16.5 L/100 over an eight day period in the Victorian High Country. The speed was about zero, the hills were near vertical, the rivers were lapping the top of the bonnet a couple of times and I was in low range for most of the day.

I have owned both of these vehicles. I traded the 5LE on a new 2007 Turbo Hilux.
For me there was a big difference in how they drive on the highway. The 5LE will be doing over 3000RPM at the speed limit while the turbo is more leisurely. There is the go factor of the turbo which is an advantage in overtaking or hill lugging.

The 5LE has a smaller tray area if you are looking for one with the standard tub. It has more ground clearance from factory and the suspension can be lifted a little cheaper than the later model depending upon suspension brand. There is more room in the later model especially in the back seat if a dual cab. From memory, the computer is up high behind the glove box in the 5LE.

Off road, the lack of engine grunt in the 5LE is less of a problem as the 5LE is better geared. The turbo will use more fuel but not that much. Driven carefully it can be quite economical.

KZN165 has more electrical stuff. Also the chassis is much more solid and does not flex in the middle like the 5LE. My 5LE used to bend in the middle in heavy off road work such that the canopy used to rub on the rear of the roof. That's a 1 inch gap! Did not have that problem with the KZN165.

Don't put oversize tyres on a 5LE. It has a fair impact on drivability on the highway

Both have their good points and bad. As others have said the 5LE is basic and reliable.

However having driven both, I found that the later KZN165 is more useful for general use and highway driving. As you say though the 5LE is cheaper to purchase and probably to maintain now. At the time though, the KZN165 service costs were cheaper.

Hope this helps.