Ask The Guide

I wouldn’t be concerned about the cylinder configuration of a particular engine. What’s more important is how much power and torque that engine makes, and how towing-friendly that power delivery is. By which we mean how smooth and flexible is the delivery. What you don’t want is a peaky engine that needs to be revved before it delivers the good as that puts a strain on everything and make the vehicle tricky and unpleasant to drive.

The good news is that all the vehicles you’ve nominated have good, solid powerplants that are well suited to towing a caravan. Modern turbo-diesels – especially with an automatic transmission – are ideal for this task.

What you should go for, however, is the vehicle with the highest towing rating. In this case, that’s any of the Grand Cherokee, MU-X or older Discovery, all of which have variants that can handle a towed load of 3.5 tonnes. The Everest is almost as good with 3.1 tonne, but only almost. The problem is that the van you’ve nominated can easily weigh between 2.2 and 2.8 tonnes which, with a 3.1-tonne limit, leaves you very little headroom for water tanks and camping gear. You’d be amazed at how much a fully loaded caravan weighs, so don’t rely on the brochure, load the van and take it to a weighbridge to make sure the vehicle you have can legally tow it.

The two vehicles you’ve mentioned are, in fact, fundamentally the same vehicle. The only difference in the rear bumpers of each was that the base-model Prado’s bumper was finished in grey plastic, while the upmarket Grande’s was body-coloured for a more integrated look. So, yes, the two bumpers should be physically interchangeable.

The only difference in any of the Prado’s side mouldings was that the entry-level model, the RV, with its skinnier wheels and tyres, didn’t have the wheel-arch flares, so the moulding that joins the rear bumper to the rear part of the wheel arch would be different on the RV compared with the other Prado trim levels.

Your car is probably still worth around $4000 to $5000 depending on condition and kilometres. The catch is that you won’t be offered that much if you use the car as a trade-in, and the value I’ve quoted would be to sell the car privately, not back to a car dealer. A lack of demand for good used cars is keeping values a little higher (a lot higher in some cases) than they might have been, so even though your car is still worth decent money, you’ll pay a bit extra for whatever you replace it with.

As far as lifespan goes, that has a lot more to do with maintenance than any other factor. If your car has been serviced by the book, there’s every chance it could last for 200,000 to 250,000km and perhaps even more. But I’ve also seen neglected cars die incredibly young.

Swapping a five-speed gearbox into an older car or ute is a pretty well-trodden path, partly because it makes all sorts of sense. While older four-speed gearboxes generally have a fourth gear ratio of 1:1, a five-speed is will have an overdriven fifth gear which makes for more relaxed highway-speed driving and, potentially, a fuel saving as the engine won’t be working as hard or turning as fast.

The Toyota 2Y engine is, I believe, a more or less bolt-up fitment to the 2Y engine in your vehicle. Commonly found in early, rear-drive Celicas, the W50 is definitely strong enough for your application since the 2Y engine in your car probably struggles to make its full 58kW these days. The only catch you might run into is that if you’re running bigger wheels and tyres or your regularly tow a trailer or the vehicle is way down on power, the engine might struggle to pull that taller gearing. At best you might find yourself shifting back and forth pretty regularly in hilly country or when encountering a headwind. But if you do go through with the swap, you’ll find that the W50 has a fifth gear ratio of 0.853:1 which should reduce your engine speed for the same road speed by about 15 per cent.

Beyond the Toyota E50 gearbox, there’s really no limit to what you can fit if you have the time and money to have the engineering sorted out. That said, anything beefier than the W50 is almost certainly overkill.

The Santa Cruz not only has an integrated tub, it’s also a monocoque design rather than a separate body on a ladder-style chassis as many commercial vehicles are. But it would, in Australia, still be classified as a light commercial vehicle. According to the Federal Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development, light commercial vehicles are: '…motor vehicles constructed to carry goods or specialised equipment that are less than or equal to 3.5 tonnes gross vehicle mass. They include utility vehicles, panel vans, cab chassis vehicles and goods vans.' And that pretty neatly describes the Santa Cruz utility.

There has been a lot of talk about the Hyundai tray-back making it to Australia, but a couple of things are standing in the way. The volume models, for a start, are front-wheel-drive and the construction rules out the huge towing limit of something like a Toyota HiLux or Ford Ranger (3.5 tonnes). But there’s plenty to suggest that the Santa Cruz would be a nicer thing to drive than a conventional dual-cab ute and, for those who don’t need to tow super-heavy loads, the Hyundai might make a bit of sense. But don’t hold your breath on it coming here. For now, Hyundai is saying no to an Australian launch, purely because the Santa Cruz is not being built in right-hand-drive form.

Mazda Australia has previously told CarsGuide that it would love to get hold of a batch of the hot-shot Mazda 3 Turbos. And while the local arm of Mazda has asked head office for a batch of the all-wheel-drive hot-hatches, no decision has been confirmed as yet.

Mazda’s problem is justifying the cost of making the car in right-hand-drive form, and the complex mechanical packaging makes that even more difficult than usual. Designed for the North American market, the lack of a right-hand-drive variant will likely be the biggest hurdle to the car making it into showrooms here.

Mazda Australia is obviously keen on the idea as it would give it a competitive product to tackle the success of the VW Golf GTi, the Renault Megane RS and the soon-to-arrive new Subaru WRX. The bottom line? Cross your fingers, but don’t hold your breath.

I really think you’ve answered your own question here. You’ve admitted that you started to fix the park brake, but gave up half way through and you’re not sure whether you may have adjusted something the wrong way. I’d say you’re bang on the money. If the park-brake is dragging, it will soon get hot and can start to make all sorts of weird groans and scraping noises.

I does surprise me a little, though, that your mechanic was so dismissive about this. He or she clearly didn’t look too far into things, and simply ruling out a bearing or differential noise because he didn’t recognise the noise seems a bit slack to me. I’d be reversing whatever you did to the car before it started making the noise and see if that fixes things. Good on you for having a go at home maintenance, but really, when it comes to something like a car’s braking system, it needs an experienced pair of hands tackling it to avoid potential disasters down the track.

Your car is certainly exhibiting the signs of a car with a blown head gasket. The smoke from the exhaust is one symptom, and so is the loss of performance. The oil leaks, could be part of the same problem, but could also be from somewhere else on the engine. Oil leaks have a cunning habit of being able to hide their true source.

On top of that, even the exhaust smoke and lack of performance could be down to something other than a head gasket problem, so the next step is to take the car to a workshop and have what’s known as a TK test carried. This test will chemically detect if combustion from the engine cylinders is finding its way into the coolant. If it is, you can be pretty sure that you have a blown head gasket.

At that point, you need to weigh up the cost of repairs to see whether you think it’s worth doing, given the overall condition of the car versus the cost of getting into something newer. If you really love the Mazda as much as you say, then maybe the cost of changing the head gasket will be acceptable compared with how you value the vehicle. And even if the repairs cost $2000 or even $3000 (which they could depending on how deep into the engine you need to go and what else you find wrong) there’s not much out there in today’s market for that money that represents anything even remotely decent.

Mazda’s 6 has always had a pretty good reputation in the trade for its reliability and durability, but globally, there have been a few concerns with the automatic transmission. The first of those is a situation where the transmission goes into limp-home mode. At that point, it can suffer slurred shifts and a lack of acceleration. It doesn’t seem a common complaint in Australia, but it’s reckoned to be caused by the transmission fluid becoming contaminated with small iron particles (possibly swarf from the production process) becoming attracted to the magnetic sensors inside the transmission. At that point, the sensors lose the plot and the information going to the computer becomes garbled.

The other thing seen (mostly in the US) has been a whining noise from the transmission. Inspections have shown this to be caused by a damaged bearing in the transmission, possibly the victim of misalignment of the gearbox casing. Again, it’s not a common fault showing up here.

Overall, the Mazda 6 seems one of the better bets out there in reliability terms.

Since both the Triton and Pajero Sport boast exactly the same power and torque outputs, I doubt whether there’s a huge difference (if any at all) in the mapping of either engine. Which suggests that switching from one to the other without changing your driving patterns would be a very good way of reproducing the Triton’s DPF problems in a Pajero Sport. My suspicion is that you’re having to force multiple DPF regenerations because your driving habits don’t let the engine get up to the correct temperature often enough to allow the vehicle to conduct its own, automatic regeneration. This is a pretty common problem with modern turbo-diesels and it’s not a criticism of your driving, simply a confirmation that these modern diesel engines don’t like short trips. Then again, 24,000km in 12 months doesn’t sound like the vehicle is used solely for the school run.

Six regenerations in 24,000km sounds like an awful lot, also, so I’d be more concerned that your dealer is underplaying the situation to avoid dealing with a problem in your specific vehicle. Has the vehicle been electronically scanned? Perhaps this might show up a dud sensor or other problem that’s making the computer think it needs another regeneration. We’ve heard of a faulty temperature sensor on this model Triton that can lead the DPF to offer up a false alarm that it’s ready for a regeneration. That could explain the high number of regenerations the vehicle has demanded. Again, a scan might tell the full story.