The Thailand Special Thread - New Developments/News

[vbomber]

https://www.carexpert.com.au/car-com...ee-l-vs-rexton

[prydey]

Watched the ute one that he did a while back, and the 4cyl Everest part of this test and have concluded that he hasn't gained any credibility since the last test so I'm not going to waste my time watching any more.

Testing 2 different spec levels of car (Everest) and then attributing the differeces in behaviour to the cylinder count?? Yep, logic right there.

I guess it gains him a few 'clicks' on his channel.

[fiestaz]

Originally Posted by prydey

Watched the ute one that he did a while back, and the 4cyl Everest part of this test and have concluded that he hasn't gained any credibility since the last test so I'm not going to waste my time watching any more.

Testing 2 different spec levels of car (Everest) and then attributing the differeces in behaviour to the cylinder count?? Yep, logic right there.

I guess it gains him a few 'clicks' on his channel.

I’m not following where you got that idea?

He put it as the best of the 4 cylinder SUVs in the towing test.

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by prydey

Watched the ute one that he did a while back, and the 4cyl Everest part of this test and have concluded that he hasn't gained any credibility since the last test so I'm not going to waste my time watching any more.

Testing 2 different spec levels of car (Everest) and then attributing the differeces in behaviour to the cylinder count?? Yep, logic right there.

I guess it gains him a few 'clicks' on his channel.

So the better spec level performed better at towing because it has cooled leather seats?
I’m missing what you are actually complaining about.
From what I have seen this test was comparing how each vehicle handled different driving tasks.

[prydey]

I would suggest that the differences in handling have very little to do with the cylinder count. He did mention differences in wheels but seems to spend much of the time inferring its to do with the cylinder count.

I refuse to believe that a car with more power and torque and better gearing can fail a test that a car with less power, less torque and less gears passed, simply because it had one extra cylinder. It defies logic. Obviously I'm referring to the 3.2 Ranger tested in the ute test.

I don't agree with his methods because very few people in the real world actually drive like that.

I personally don't find him credible.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by prydey

I would suggest that the differences in handling have very little to do with the cylinder count. He did mention differences in wheels but seems to spend much of the time inferring its to do with the cylinder count.

I refuse to believe that a car with more power and torque and better gearing can fail a test that a car with less power, less torque and less gears passed, simply because it had one extra cylinder. It defies logic. Obviously I'm referring to the 3.2 Ranger tested in the ute test.

I don't agree with his methods because very few people in the real world actually drive like that.

I personally don't find him credible.

Theres been other reviews where they tested the 2.0 and the 3.2 back to back in towing tests and they've rated the older 3.2 as being the better setup.

The concern on the other reviews has been the 2.0 and it's 10x gears, its constantly banging up and down gears where as the 3.2L variations with the 6sp auto picks a gear and stays in it.

The 2.0 is more refined but needs more revs to do the same job – therefore it’s constantly shuffling up and down the gears. This is due to the extra gears, as well as a taller final gearing than the five-pot (3.31 v 3.73).

The 2.0 also struggled to gain momentum on the steep incline. It wasn’t great going down, either, with far less engine braking than the 3.2.

The 3.2 put in a strong towing performance, courtesy of good quality gear shifts (and less of them) and having max power on tap at 3000rpm. It shined on the steep hill climb, slogging along at 2500-3000rpm with no unnecessary gear changes. Engine braking was better, too.

The 2.0 might be better in general driving conditions, but when it’s time to roll the sleeves up and ferry a load, best opt for the 3.2.

https://www.whichcar.com.au/reviews/...anger-tow-test

[fiestaz]

Originally Posted by prydey

I would suggest that the differences in handling have very little to do with the cylinder count. He did mention differences in wheels but seems to spend much of the time inferring its to do with the cylinder count.

I refuse to believe that a car with more power and torque and better gearing can fail a test that a car with less power, less torque and less gears passed, simply because it had one extra cylinder. It defies logic. Obviously I'm referring to the 3.2 Ranger tested in the ute test.

I don't agree with his methods because very few people in the real world actually drive like that.

I personally don't find him credible.

What 3.2L? He compared it to the v6 diesel, which is better than the 4 cylinder.

Ute test had the 4 cylinder and v6 also, no 3.2.

Why does he have to drive like everyone in the real world for a test? They put all these 4wds in the same setting using the same tests to figure out who’s who in the zoo. I don’t know why anyone would find that a bad thing.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

Theres been other reviews where they tested the 2.0 and the 3.2 back to back in towing tests and they've rated the older 3.2 as being the better setup.

The concern on the other reviews has been the 2.0 and it's 10x gears, its constantly banging up and down gears where as the 3.2L variations with the 6sp auto picks a gear and stays in it.



https://www.whichcar.com.au/reviews/...anger-tow-test

I've read most of those reviews and you can also find reviews with the exact opposite outcome. It comes down to the driver mindset and many of them think that changing gears means it's struggling.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by fiestaz

What 3.2L? He compared it to the v6 diesel, which is better than the 4 cylinder.

Ute test had the 4 cylinder and v6 also, no 3.2.

There was no 4cyl available but you're right, it was new ranger.

Apologies all, I've gone off a bit half cocked but I can see where I've made the mistake.

I still don't rate the guy doing the testing, or the testing methods but for some reason I thought it was with the old ute.

My bad.

I was wrong.

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by PooDog

Can't have had too many bits missing when it took the race out last year

The custom built buggy with no actual Triton bits on it?

[PooDog]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

The custom built buggy with no actual Triton bits on it?

Maybe all the mitsi bits fell off .....I'm sure if there was a Ford badge on the front you'd be trumpeting it from the roof

[Fordman1]

Originally Posted by PooDog

Maybe all the mitsi bits fell off .....I'm sure if there was a Ford badge on the front you'd be trumpeting it from the roof

You’re trolling, do some research on your beloved Mitsubishi and see what class it was in.

[PooDog]

Originally Posted by Fordman1

You’re trolling, do some research on your beloved Mitsubishi and see what class it was in.

No I'm responding to people that bag a manufacturer for no reason other than ignorance .....why research a race that doesn't really interest me?

[DFB FGXR6]

Originally Posted by prydey

There was no 4cyl available but you're right, it was new ranger.

Apologies all, I've gone off a bit half cocked but I can see where I've made the mistake.

I still don't rate the guy doing the testing, or the testing methods but for some reason I thought it was with the old ute.

My bad.

I was wrong.

I don't rate him either.

[Fordman1]

Originally Posted by PooDog

No I'm responding to people that bag a manufacturer for no reason other than ignorance .....why research a race that doesn't really interest me?

Checkmate

[PooDog]

There was no threat of violence just the suggestion of paying him a visit ?

[russellw]

Originally Posted by PooDog

There was no threat of violence just the suggestion of paying him a visit ?

It sounded like a threat of violence to me so the smart thing to do would be to leave it at that.

[PooDog]

Fair enough Russell, il take the ban then thanks

[au2000]

On a side note, seeing Kia is aiming at hilux and ranger, who thinks they will be a real threat?
Tbh, I think they will be, maybe not straight off the bat, but after 12 months or so I think they can be depending on how they price it

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by au2000

On a side note, seeing Kia is aiming at hilux and ranger, who thinks they will be a real threat?
Tbh, I think they will be, maybe not straight off the bat, but after 12 months or so I think they can be depending on how they price it

I reckon they'll go too hard on pricing and end up meeting 25% of their sales target, I'm calling $55K-$70K mark when it hits the market, it'll be very close to Ranger and Hilux premium pricing.

[PG2]

Originally Posted by au2000

On a side note, seeing Kia is aiming at hilux and ranger, who thinks they will be a real threat?
Tbh, I think they will be, maybe not straight off the bat, but after 12 months or so I think they can be depending on how they price it

I have been reading up on these a bit over the last few days.

It seems possible that they have the right engines to compete. They have the 2.2 diesel out of the Sorrento, a 6cyl diesel with an output over 200kW and a petrol V6 to directly take on the Raptor.

7 years warranty as well.

It will be interesting with delivery times. Would there be a chance that some Ranger buyers will cancel their orders if they can get into a 'Tasman' sooner?

As you mentioned, I think that a lot will depend on how they are priced.

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by prydey

I don't agree with his methods because very few people in the real world actually drive like that.

.

Just wait until you find out how the offical fuel economy for new cars is tested. They don’t drive the car like normal people do.

These tests are just to show how a car compares to its competitors in a range of tests. It’s probably a better review than a journalist going in with a bias opinion discussing how a car handles compared to its competitor that the journalist last drove 8 months ago.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by Ben73

Just wait until you find out how the offical fuel economy for new cars is tested. They don’t drive the car like normal people do.

These tests are just to show how a car compares to its competitors in a range of tests. It’s probably a better review than a journalist going in with a bias opinion discussing how a car handles compared to its competitor that the journalist last drove 8 months ago.

I'm well aware of adr81 02, or whatever it's up to.

There is very little science involved with mr maric...

[Swordie]

Originally Posted by vbomber

https://www.carexpert.com.au/car-com...ee-l-vs-rexton

The best quote was when he was driving the Patrol - "You can't beat having a NA V8 under your right foot".

[Fordman1]

Originally Posted by au2000

On a side note, seeing Kia is aiming at hilux and ranger, who thinks they will be a real threat?
Tbh, I think they will be, maybe not straight off the bat, but after 12 months or so I think they can be depending on how they price it

They’ll take a % of the market, will they take Ranger or Hilux sales, or are they more likely to take Isuzu and Chinese market % ?

I guess we’ll see

[XR Martin]

Kia has terrible parts support, so I can't see them taking off.
Braking a driveshaft out in the bush and waiting 3 months for it isn't going to be popular.
Quite often we have damaged Kias at work off the road for 6 months. We have encountered parts that don't even exist as being available.
Toyota on the other hand rarely are over a month.

[DFB FGXR6]

Originally Posted by XR Martin

Kia has terrible parts support, so I can't see them taking off.
Braking a driveshaft out in the bush and waiting 3 months for it isn't going to be popular.
Quite often we have damaged Kias at work off the road for 6 months. We have encountered parts that don't even exist as being available.
Toyota on the other hand rarely are over a month.

Sounds like Kia are about to learn a lesson then.

[kevino]

Originally Posted by XR Martin

Kia has terrible parts support, so I can't see them taking off.
Braking a driveshaft out in the bush and waiting 3 months for it isn't going to be popular.
Quite often we have damaged Kias at work off the road for 6 months. We have encountered parts that don't even exist as being available.
Toyota on the other hand rarely are over a month.

What are MG and Haval like for timing on parts?

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Fordman1

They’ll take a % of the market, will they take Ranger or Hilux sales, or are they more likely to take Isuzu and Chinese market % ?

I guess we’ll see

My observation has been a two horse race between Ranger and Hilux,
the rest of the Ute sales ladder seems to be a separate competition….

[kevino]

A young fellow I know bought a new GWM ute.
Now he is buying a new Mustang.