|
|
Post by will258 on Feb 15, 2009 21:56:13 GMT 11
hi everyone,
im lookin at buyin a 1992 2.8 mu or a 1995 3.1 mu and was just wondering if there were any common problems with either of these motors that i should know about. also which motor is considered better. my dad used to have a 2.8 4jb1 in a tf rodeo and it was a brilliant motor but i dont really know anything about the 3.1 so any advice would be greatly appreciated.
cheers will
|
|
|
|
Post by geeves on Feb 17, 2009 8:21:14 GMT 11
Where are you?
Both are excellent motors if looked after but the 3.1 can have overheating issues in hot climates.
The 3.1 is rare in a manual.
We have evidence of vehicles with both motors with over 450000km.
Do get a mechanics report on the one you choose
2.8 is a higher revving motor thats not supper happy below 1500revs although fuel pump tweaks help a lot. The 3.1 will pull from idle but not rev as well and is slightly more thirsty
|
|
|
|
Post by will258 on Feb 17, 2009 11:54:34 GMT 11
ok thankyou very much. im in tassie on the north coast, like i said my dad used to have a 2.8 in a tf rodeo and that did about 250000 without ever having a spaner having to be put on it. and now we have the ra mechanical 3lt in the 05 rodeo and it is still a good motor but we prefered the 2.8 and im guessing the 3.1 is more then likely a tweaked version of the 3lt in our rodeo.
i shouldnt be towing much except maybe my boat every now and then. i just want a good reliable vehicle that can get me around the state and what i can use to do a bit of offroading.
cheers will
|
|
|
|
Post by geeves on Feb 17, 2009 12:09:27 GMT 11
The 3.0 in the Rodeo is a new common rail motor totally unlike either of the earlier motors and even different to the 3.0 4jx1 thats in 98 bighorns. The 2 you are looking at are both fully mechanical injection. Even the Rodeo 4jb1 is different to the Mu engine but only in that it has a gear drive for the cam where the Mu has a belt
|
|
|
|
Post by adrian on Feb 17, 2009 20:17:09 GMT 11
Just as a quick point, all 3.1 TD Isuzu Troopers, and Vauxhall Monterays which are origonal UK spec, and not imports, were manual transmission.............
which i why i bought a Japanese spec import one!!
only the 3.2 petrol got the option of having the auto gearbox here in UK.
|
|
|
|
Post by geeves on Feb 17, 2009 20:38:36 GMT 11
Interesting The 3.1 bighorns are common enough with manual but there is still far more autos. In the Mus though with the 3.1 I can count the ones Ive ever seen with a manual on my fingers. Theres nothing wrong with the auto used on this wagon though
|
|
|
|
Post by will258 on Feb 18, 2009 0:45:24 GMT 11
the older 3lt motors were mechanical not commonrail they didnt change until somewhere between 2003-2006 by memory. the last of the tf rodeos came out with 3lts and hood scoops instead of the original 2.8 and by memory had the same 3lt's. then when they changed the body style they changed the motor.
|
|
|
|
Post by mudgrip4 on Feb 18, 2009 16:45:48 GMT 11
Both the 2.8 and the 3.1 are good motors and commonly do huge ks.
I would choose the 2.8 however as the 3.1 is prone to occasional head cracking, and does require turbo replacement around 125ks. 2.8 turbo usually lasts life of truck.
The 2.8T motor has no real weaknesses - one of the best diesels out of japan. Some benefit from a breather kit - cost about $100 or so. Very easy to tune to quite high performance. Listed as most economical diesel on american market for many years. 2.8 will give 30-33mpg and the 3.1 25- 28mpg on average.
I believe a head recon specialist said the 3.1 solved its occasional head cracking once emission control gear was removed - unsure why.
2.8 the best if you can still find a good one, but 3.1 a good option too.
|
|
|
|
Post by geeves on Feb 18, 2009 19:41:56 GMT 11
Intresting re head recon info. The same is partly true of the famous Toyota 2lt although it is helped even more by a 2.5 inch exhaust.
Unfortunately the info on the turbo isnt entirely correct The Mu up to 92ish got the same bullet proof turbo as our bighorns but when the bighorn went to 3.1 the Mu carried on with the 2.8 for a while and some of them got the 3.1s turbo and associated issues.
|
|
