2015 2.8 litre Engine

[OzDriver Member Find all posts View Profile Close OzDriver]

I had a couple of test drives and careful inspections of the Everest (Ranger). I agree that the engine seems to have a bit more mid/top power and was also better on handling and boot layout (and a bit better looking). But the the build quality was much worst than the Prado and the engine felt quite noisy and 'busy' around town (OK on freeway). If it was just a company car for 3 years then perhaps an option, but as a longer term private car not so good.
After about 6 months with my 2.8 the performance & economy is fine (and should improve) for how I drive it but I might get better springs/shocks to make it feel more settled at low speed and reduce nose dive (GXL).

[ArcticSoldier Lurker Find all posts View Profile Close ArcticSoldier]

Damn, so the Ford Ranger beats you up hill. I like the fact that they are 3.2 and 5 cylinder. Don't like the bad reviews though.

what bad reviews? the only thing bad about the everest is the the insane price tag. i did read it does lose out to prado in offroad climb until the rear diff was locked.

[Brett1979 Avid PP Poster! Find all posts View Profile Close Brett1979]

what bad reviews? the only thing bad about the everest is the the insane price tag. i did read it does lose out to prado in offroad climb until the rear diff was locked.

He mentioned Ford Rangers and Rangers are lemons. Buy one and then comeback to us in a year's time and tell us how you had the whole drive train replaced under warranty. Buying one invites trouble.

[Lski Member Find all posts View Profile Close Lski]

He mentioned Ford Rangers and Rangers are lemons. Buy one and then comeback to us in a year's time and tell us how you had the whole drive train replaced under warranty. Buying one invites trouble.

There are stories I could tell about them being used on remote mine sites that support that comment - I wouldn't touch them!

[Turbo Piston Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close Turbo Piston]

Yes I was referring to the Ford Ranger. I haven't read much on the Everest.

You will aways get complaints on any car on any type of forum, but I do read a lot of bad stories regarding the Ford Ranger. First hand stories.

Just a quick glance at the Ford Ranger:
http://www.productreview.com.au/p/fo...5-present.html

http://www.productreview.com.au/p/fo...7-present.html

And then the Prado:
http://www.productreview.com.au/p/to...9-present.html

[pradodp Lurker Find all posts View Profile Close pradodp]

further update about fuel consumption: it's better and it reaches 8.6l/100km for 800km highway driving.
quite good, and wonder if 8l could be reached at next stage.

[Symo Advanced Member Find all posts View Profile Close Symo]

further update about fuel consumption: it's better and it reaches 8.6l/100km for 800km highway driving.
quite good, and wonder if 8l could be reached at next stage.

When I first got my 3.0 it was doing 7.5 on a 1700km run In winter. That was the third tank, one whole tank.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pradodp Lurker Find all posts View Profile Close pradodp]

When I first got my 3.0 it was doing 7.5 on a 1700km run In winter. That was the third tank, one whole tank.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

amazing! how about now?

[pjtaylor3 Lurker Find all posts View Profile Close pjtaylor3]

I went from a 3.0L 150 to a 2.8L 150. Towed our 1.2T camper for the first time last week about 1500km. I don't know what I think yet about the towing. It certainly doesn't tow better then the 3.0L despite the extra 40NM torque. The 6th gear is way too tall for towing anything so i left it in 5th the whole way. 6th gear only seems to be good when car is unloaded and on a flat road. Any sign of a hill it goes back to 5th. Aparently 5th gear in the 6 speed auto is the same ratio as 5th in the 5 speed. (so the new gearbox has 2 overdrives). My old 150 used 12.5L/100 towing the camper and the new prado used 14.5L/100. Hopefully this gets better since I only have 13000km on the clock.

[krypto Avid PP Poster! Find all posts View Profile Close krypto]

I went from a 3.0L 150 to a 2.8L 150. Towed our 1.2T camper for the first time last week about 1500km. I don't know what I think yet about the towing. It certainly doesn't tow better then the 3.0L despite the extra 40NM torque. The 6th gear is way too tall for towing anything so i left it in 5th the whole way. 6th gear only seems to be good when car is unloaded and on a flat road. Any sign of a hill it goes back to 5th. Aparently 5th gear in the 6 speed auto is the same ratio as 5th in the 5 speed. (so the new gearbox has 2 overdrives). My old 150 used 12.5L/100 towing the camper and the new prado used 14.5L/100. Hopefully this gets better since I only have 13000km on the clock.

I know that this has been discussed a lot, but just a reminder that towing in overdrive gears under load is a recipe for disaster. Ran into a bloke up north the other day who pretty well cooked his gearbox doing this. In O/D the gearbox tends to fall out of lock-up pretty easy and then you get the torque converter heating up the oil pretty quickly.

[CamJam Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close CamJam]

Just wondering- and noting the date and the Km's used - could perhaps you have had the updated firmware for the auto at the 10K service perhaps?

Mine's only around 2500km's old and getting around 9.7 - 9.9L/100 by the digital readout. I'm interested to see what happens when the Bar/ Lights and OME goes on in a month or so...

[jeffs0308 Lurker Find all posts View Profile Close jeffs0308]

i have a 2012, 150 series petrol, Altitude with 80 000km on it. (STOCK STANDARD ) the trip computer has never been reset. it says its averaging 12.7ltrs per 100 around town. very little highway use. Powers is great, its very smooth and quiet.

[Phs Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close Phs]

We have a 2016 Kakadu and feel the motor is good but as a lot here feel it's a little under powered another 10kws would go along way, also owning a Everest that does get up and move with less effort, thow I do like the gearbox in the Prado better. We just got back from a 1000km trip combined hwy, fwy, city and off-road driving we averaged 10.5lts per 100. Our Everest is averaging 11.5lts

The Prado only has 6k on the clock so I'm sure fuel economy will improve and after its 20k service we will look at flash tunes ect. really would like some better low end response, happy now but after we get it set up for touring. I'm sure it will need a little boost

[[email protected] Junior Member Find all posts View Profile Close [email protected]]

Just wondering- and noting the date and the Km's used - could perhaps you have had the updated firmware for the auto at the 10K service perhaps?

Mine's only around 2500km's old and getting around 9.7 - 9.9L/100 by the digital readout. I'm interested to see what happens when the Bar/ Lights and OME goes on in a month or so...

Without bar, light, I got around 9.1L and that was before 15K. Now with ARB bar, Lightforce HTX, Thule Aero roof bar, it sits at 9.7L. I hope I can manage to be below 10.5L after 2 inch lift, All terrain tyre and dual battery. BTW, the car is 50 Percent highway, 35 percent windy hilly road, the rest is urban driving.

[CamJam Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close CamJam]

Just a bit of thought - particularly for people not happy with the move from 3.0L to 2.8L - have you tried switching the ECO ON to ECO OFF? I've done that in the past thousand + km's and have noticed an absolute zero difference in fuel usage (going by the read-out, which whether it's correct or not would be the same for the ECO ON or OFF) but the pick-ups much better, the shift down is much quicker and freeway driving feels much better. I never had a 3.0L so I can't compare it, but thought it might be worth a try.

I am thinking this ECO thing is simply there to pass an emissions test (like auto stop/start cars) and works in the laboratory, but is better switched off in the real world. I'll certainly be keeping mine off.