Amarok a better bakkie than the X-Class - Page 3





Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 41 to 54 of 54
  1. #41
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Pretoria
    Age
    43
    Posts
    440
    Thanked: 53

    Default Re: Amarok a better bakkie than the X-Class

    I'm on my 3rd Amarok. First 2 were 2lts, 4x2 then 4x4 Auto. I would not give up my V6 for anything else! Regardless of ride quality.
    But then again, I'm not that judgemental about cars and ride quality etc. Just glad I can get into the V6 and spend 2 to 3 hours + a day in it.
    Only gripe is getting 100km less per tank of fuel.
    2018 VW Amarok V6 4Motion Auto

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Melkbosstrand
    Age
    44
    Posts
    783
    Thanked: 173

    Default Re: Amarok a better bakkie than the X-Class

    Quote Originally Posted by Wazza View Post
    Only gripe is getting 100km less per tank of fuel.
    Can I ask how you consumption compares when towing? (for interests sake)
    2015 VW Amarok 4motion Auto
    2011 Conqueror Companion

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Kempton Park
    Age
    53
    Posts
    13,882
    Thanked: 1041

    Default Re: Amarok a better bakkie than the X-Class

    Quote Originally Posted by Wazza View Post
    I'm on my 3rd Amarok. First 2 were 2lts, 4x2 then 4x4 Auto. I would not give up my V6 for anything else! Regardless of ride quality.
    But then again, I'm not that judgemental about cars and ride quality etc. Just glad I can get into the V6 and spend 2 to 3 hours + a day in it.
    Only gripe is getting 100km less per tank of fuel.
    windgat ry kos geld.

    Anyway very interesting comments . Discussing 2l v6 3l. I love my 2l. Now the vet spietkop wants to buy it.

    As we are off topic, I had a huge change in comfort going bigger on my kombi's tyres.

    So back to the OP. Better? I think so. But then the aussies says a 3.2 ranger is better than the amarok v6. I don't like the benz at all. Have not driven the v6 yet.
    Training: 4x4, bush mechanics, recovery, defensive, 4x4 trucks
    Supply and manufacture: Recovery gear, Custom 4x4 installations and manufacturing, 4x4 equipment
    Angel Construction
    Turnkey Construction solutions [Indoor shooting ranges, safe rooms, shops and shopfitting, Rainwater harvesting, Solar]
    IP CCTV, electric Fencing, Automation, Gates, Stainless steel Fabrication
    You name it, we can probably build or manufacture it.
    COMBAT19: Large scale fogging and decontamination of coronaviruses
    [email protected]
    [email protected]
    +27824453301

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Tzaneen
    Age
    59
    Posts
    178
    Thanked: 48

    Default Re: Amarok a better bakkie than the X-Class

    Quote Originally Posted by 949BFN View Post
    Dez
    Do you also have the larger wheels (19 or 20"). Do you also find the ride to be harsh and did the replacement shocks make a difference? If so, would you mind sharing the details of the new shocks?
    I managed to get the dealer to exchange the standard 20" rims with 19" rims because the standard 19" tyres have a higher profile, but I still find the ride to be harsh (compared to the 2.0 which had 17" rims). I like the look of the 19" rims very much, but I'm seriously considering getting a set of 17 inchers. I will postpone my decision until I've done at least 7,500km with the 20" rims.
    The dealer warned me that I could pick up problems with the warranty if I change to smaller than 19" rims, because the Extreme is only available in 2 rim sizes (19 and 20) and that the gearbox is coded accordingly (and not for 17-inch rims.) I don't believe that to be true, but I'll have to investigate that before moving to 17" rims. (In the end, the circumference stays more or less the same, so I don't understand why it would make a difference.)

    No I have 17". The Amarok is my farm bakkie and needs as much rubber as possible so I got it delivered with the horrible looking 17s that the Amarok now comes with. Interestingly tyres are at this stage lasting as long as they did on the 2l. In fact it seems to be doing better than the 2l. Transferred them from my old vehicle after 10000 km and have now done 45000km in the V6. Goodyear Wrangler a=AT adventure. I do a lot of high speed gravel which can chew tyres fast. I would say the ride is a little harsher than the 2l but not much.Dont think the shocks improved harshness just stability. If I were to replace I would replace with another V6. The Amarok is the cheapest vehicle I have owned to run repairs wise. No hassles compared to the other vehicles I have had on the farm. Fuel consumption is heavier but my foot is heavier because its fun to drive. The shocks I fitted made a huge difference. The y are Monroe Dakars I am told. It seems I cannot keep original shocks as I had issues with the shocks on the old Amarok as well. When I swopped them front left was totally shot (But not leaking so VW would not replace.) causing the vehicle to hop around horribly on gravel roads.
    Last edited by Dez; 2019/02/04 at 04:11 PM.
    2017 Amarok V6 HiLine+
    2014 Amarok 4Motion Auto (Sold)
    1983 Suzuki SJ410V
    2019 Nissan X-Trail 2.5 Tekna CVT
    1985 Suzuki SJ413
    Mazda Cx7 Turbo(Sold)
    Fiat 500 1400MTA (Tweety)

  5. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Dez For This Useful Post:


  6. #45
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Location
    Roodekrans
    Posts
    10
    Thanked: 4

    Default Re: Amarok a better bakkie than the X-Class

    Quote Originally Posted by WillemT View Post
    A classic case of some idiot at the dealer that doesn't have a clue...
    The coding is exactly the same for all amaroks in terms of speedo calibration. You can change it up or down but it has got nothing to do with rim size... Saying rim size because rim size has nothing to do with wheel size if you don't specify a tire size with it. The 265/65/17 is 1.7 % bigger in terms of circumference. I'm running both 19s and 265/70/17s... Like the 17s more for some reasons and the 19s for others.... very different driving characteristics but nothing beats the comfort of the 17s and again nothing beats the road holding of the 19s... But honestly saying I have shitty tires on the 17s and Grabbers on the 19s... Same tyres both sizes and the difference will get closer in terms of roadholding, still comfort on the 17s will not be beat.

    You will find that the real speed of the amarok with different wheel sizes will vary a bit due to the same wheel size coding... You can change it if you really want... With my 17s my speedo speed and GPS speed readings are about the same.
    Hi Willem

    I'm planning to go the 17" route... I would like to know if you have any rubbing or clearance issues with the 265/70/17's? Is your suspension setup still standard or did you mod something?

    Cheers
    2018 VW Amarok 2.0 BiTDI 4Motion A/T H/L+
    2008 Nissan Navara 4.0 A/T (SOLD)

  7. #46
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Durbanville
    Age
    35
    Posts
    1,374
    Thanked: 560

    Default Re: Amarok a better bakkie than the X-Class

    Quote Originally Posted by Judge Dredd View Post
    Hi Willem

    I'm planning to go the 17" route... I would like to know if you have any rubbing or clearance issues with the 265/70/17's? Is your suspension setup still standard or did you mod something?

    Cheers
    I ran them first on the standard setup. No problems, they just touched the chassis aft position, but only just just on full lock, not so that it bothered or heard anything but I could see the touch marks.
    It was with pretty lme half worn dunlop at22. Suspect a proper AT might rub a bit. But I also suspect the v6 might have had a slight adjustment to the front susp.
    Without a lift they suggest your max to be 265/65/17.
    Or else fit a seikel susp upgrade alternative is billstein mikem combination.
    The seikel setup however will keep all warrantee things in check like drive shafts etc.

    Has since installed the koni raid seikel setup. Not because of that, just because i got it for a steal, and thus why not...

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to WillemT For This Useful Post:


  9. #47
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Bloemfontein
    Age
    57
    Posts
    200
    Thanked: 18

    Default Re: Amarok a better bakkie than the X-Class

    Resale: The dealer was prepared to give me substantially more than trade (despite the large discount on the V6). In the end, I sold the 2.0 privately by word of mouth. If the first guy did not take it, I had two more guys who were serious buyers. Bottom line – this is by far the least money I’ve lost on a vehicle (I bought the 2.0 new.)

    TPMS: The 2019 Amarok has a prober TMPS system, with actual sensors in the wheels. (Strangely, the low-pressure threshold of the TPMS can’t be changed. One can only choose between Normal and Full Load, but the thresholds (which is set to 2.0 bar for Normal Loads) can’t be changed. Don’t know what one is supposed to do when going off-road. The Germans weren’t taking that into account. I have however found a way to re-program the TPMS control unit, but I have not done mine yet. I’ll wait until I need a lower setting because the changes will definitely void the warranty in respect of the TPMS Control Unit.

    Tire size: I spend a substantial amount of time reading forums (including the Ross-Tech/VCDS forum and I have never heard the story about wheel size dependent coding of the gearbox control unit.
    I had 265/65R17 (Michelin LTX) tires on the 2.0l and they did not touch, but that’s not to say they will work on the 3.0l if the suspension setup of the 3.0l differs from the 2.0l. I was under the impression that the setup is the same, apart from heavier coil springs. (But I suppose that could also make a difference in respect of the available clearance.)
    By the way – what happened to the Aus Amarok forum? They frequently had trouble with security certificates, but it seems that the forum has now finally disappeared.
    2.0 vs 3.0: Interesting to see the remarks regarding the reliability of the 2.0l. Until recently, people joked about the small over-stressed engine that would not last. Amarok fans, however, know from experience that the 2.0 has suffered very few failures and emerged as a fairly indestructible power plant. Hopefully, the V6 will emerge as similarly reliable.

    If I had to choose again, I would go for the 3.0l, despite my comments. The power of the 3.0l outweighs the negatives. Don’t forget that I’m comparing the 3.0 to another Amarok. That is not to say that the 3.0 is still a more refined vehicle than most if not all its competitors. I was just surprised that the 3.0 is not as smooth as the 2.0 as I expected things to be the other way around. (Maybe the dampers/mountings of the 2.0 are just more effective.)
    Last edited by 949BFN; 2019/02/04 at 06:45 PM.
    2019 Amarok 3.0 Extreme Auto with Roll-n-Lock tonneau cover.
    Gone: 2013 Amarok 2.0 Auto
    2018 Audi SQ5
    Gone: 2015 Audi S8

  10. #48
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Cape Town
    Age
    48
    Posts
    52
    Thanked: 43

    Default Re: Amarok a better bakkie than the X-Class

    I am on my 3rd 4 Motion Amarok, Manual 2010, Auto 2013 and V6 2018. The 2013 was a perfect car in most aspects except it does not compare to the V6 for sheer towing power, I tow a 2014 Jurgens Explorer. The 2013 had a more refined feel to it but I always needed more power for towing and this is where the V6 ticks all the boxes. It is a different car and on its own merits a class above but then again so was the 2013. We prefer the V6 at the moment.
    Always look for reasons why things can be done

    Amarok 4motion 8 speed Auto
    Golf 7 GTi DSG 2015

  11. #49
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Pretoria
    Age
    43
    Posts
    440
    Thanked: 53

    Default Re: Amarok a better bakkie than the X-Class

    Quote Originally Posted by BobMabena View Post
    Can I ask how you consumption compares when towing? (for interests sake)
    I've only towed one significant trip down to the coast and back and averaged around 13.5l/100km. This is about the same as I got with the 2lt, but the variance is less with the V6. I suppose because it has more power and torque for towing.
    2018 VW Amarok V6 4Motion Auto

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to Wazza For This Useful Post:


  13. #50
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Cape Town
    Age
    70
    Posts
    138
    Thanked: 123

    Default Re: Amarok a better bakkie than the X-Class

    Quote Originally Posted by 949BFN View Post
    I am so glad you say this. I was worried that I'm the only one with this view.

    After driving the V6 (Extreme) for 2 weeks/1,500km, I am convinced that it only beats the 2.0 in respect of engine performance. The ride of the V6 is terrible compared to that of the 2.0 I had (2013 Auto). I never felt any vibration from the engine in case of the 2.0. One is, however, almost always aware of the V6. Engine vibration can be felt through the seats and steering at idle. Even at 120, a slight vibration can be felt when the accelerator is depressed. With the 2.0, I thought the auto gearbox was flawless. With the V6, downshifts (usually around 2nd) are sometimes what can almost be described as harsh. (Interestingly, I had a similar experience with the (similar) auto gearbox in case of my Audi S8. Shifting to of from 2nd is sometimes very noticeable and almost harsh. Maybe the increased torque of the more powerful engines brings out the flaws of the otherwise almost perfect gearbox.)

    Make no mistake, the acceleration in case of the V6 is fantastic, and when it comes to towing, there will probably be no contest. The 3.0, however, made me realise what a masterpiece the 2.0 was (and still is.)

    Note: I was concerned about the ride quality of the 3.0 and had to bargain hard with the dealer to replace the 20" wheels with 19" wheels. The profile is however still too low, and even at (too low) tyre pressures of 2.1 bar, the ride is bumpy over anything but a perfectly flat road surface. The 2.0 with 17" tyres (75 profile if I remember correctly), had a silky smooth ride over uneven surfaces.

    I am full in concurrence with all your findings on the V6 compared to the 2 litre Amarok. Ride can be rough and hard as you describe. And box not smooth around D2/D3. I also wanted 17" rims when i ordered the vehicle but dealer wanted me to pay additional 8k for down sizing, which I refused!! Have 18" rims. The 2 litre vehicle was / is a far better ride (superb) and also took me off roading & towing trailer. I have recently installed Michelin LTX Force tires and am very happy with them. But the V6 has power for sure....
    "To look is one thing, to understand what what you see, is something else"

    Amarok AUTO 4X4
    Out fitted Offroad Trailer

  14. #51
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Bloemfontein
    Age
    57
    Posts
    200
    Thanked: 18

    Default Re: Amarok a better bakkie than the X-Class

    Quote Originally Posted by XisBo View Post
    I am full in concurrence with all your findings on the V6 compared to the 2 litre Amarok. Ride can be rough and hard as you describe. And box not smooth around D2/D3. I also wanted 17" rims when i ordered the vehicle but dealer wanted me to pay additional 8k for down sizing, which I refused!! Have 18" rims. The 2 litre vehicle was / is a far better ride (superb) and also took me off roading & towing trailer. I have recently installed Michelin LTX Force tires and am very happy with them. But the V6 has power for sure....
    I appreciate your remarks regarding the 18" rims. I was considering going down one more size (to 18") to get a better ride, but from your comments, it appears that it will not be worth the costs as the improvement will be minimal. My current tires are 255/55 R19. It appears that the highest profile 18" tires available in SA (apart from off-road tires), is 255/60, which means I'll only gain 5mm of sidewall going to the smaller rim size. (I was hoping to go to at least a 65 profile.) The 5mm gain will probably not make much of a difference, as your experience with the 18's appears to confirm.

    I had the same tires (Mitchelin LTX but in 17") on my 2.0l and the ride was wonderfully smooth. I know the new owner of my 2.0l, and I'll ask him if we could put the 17's on the 3.0l for a test and to see if the bigger rims are the sole reason for the harsh ride. I'll report back if I manage to make the comparison.
    2019 Amarok 3.0 Extreme Auto with Roll-n-Lock tonneau cover.
    Gone: 2013 Amarok 2.0 Auto
    2018 Audi SQ5
    Gone: 2015 Audi S8

  15. #52
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Putfontein, Benoni
    Age
    52
    Posts
    2,820
    Thanked: 1978

    Default Re: Amarok a better bakkie than the X-Class

    Realistically the V6 will have firmer springs in the front to handle the additional engine weight and maybe that is what brings this firmer ride into the equation. Maybe they slightly over compensated for the weight to avoid future sagging.
    Any bigger engined car you normally feel the weight in terms of handling like the turn in to corners is a little slower and they fell less nimble. That is possibly the other things you feel?. Does the V6 have bigger brakes?. if yes then there is more unsprung weight you feel as well.
    Audi Q7 - 3l TDi - 2010 - steel suspension - wife's daily
    VW Touareg - 2005 - V10 TDI
    VW Touareg - 2009 - V6 TDI
    VW Passat CC - 2013 - 2l TDi bluemotion(repair project)

  16. #53
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Pretoria
    Age
    44
    Posts
    1,145
    Thanked: 1051

    Default Re: Amarok a better bakkie than the X-Class

    Quote Originally Posted by 949BFN View Post
    I appreciate your remarks regarding the 18" rims. I was considering going down one more size (to 18") to get a better ride, but from your comments, it appears that it will not be worth the costs as the improvement will be minimal. My current tires are 255/55 R19. It appears that the highest profile 18" tires available in SA (apart from off-road tires), is 255/60, which means I'll only gain 5mm of sidewall going to the smaller rim size. (I was hoping to go to at least a 65 profile.) The 5mm gain will probably not make much of a difference, as your experience with the 18's appears to confirm.

    I had the same tires (Mitchelin LTX but in 17") on my 2.0l and the ride was wonderfully smooth. I know the new owner of my 2.0l, and I'll ask him if we could put the 17's on the 3.0l for a test and to see if the bigger rims are the sole reason for the harsh ride. I'll report back if I manage to make the comparison.
    A buddy of mine has a 2.0l Amarok with 265/65/18 inch BFG AT KO2s on. He's very happy with them. The bakkie has the Seikel entry level suspension (I think they call it forrest?) so is lifted by about 30mm.

    I also had 265/70/17s (Cooper ST MAXX) on my Amarok, with the Seikel Desert suspension and it was superb. It was better on dirt roads than my FJ - slightly firmer but I preferred the Amarok. The tyres touched a bit at full lock though but the Coopers are a very agressive AT with chunky sidewalls, a less aggressive tyre will probably be better.

    P.s. The rolling circumference of the 265/65/18 and the 265/70/17 is basically the same.

  17. #54
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Bloemfontein
    Age
    57
    Posts
    200
    Thanked: 18

    Default Re: Amarok a better bakkie than the X-Class

    Quote Originally Posted by Stephan van Tonder View Post
    Realistically the V6 will have firmer springs in the front to handle the additional engine weight and maybe that is what brings this firmer ride into the equation. Maybe they slightly over compensated for the weight to avoid future sagging.
    Any bigger engined car you normally feel the weight in terms of handling like the turn in to corners is a little slower and they fell less nimble. That is possibly the other things you feel?. Does the V6 have bigger brakes?. if yes then there is more unsprung weight you feel as well.
    Not sure how the front discs compare. The 3.0l has discs at the back.

    Can't say that I can feel a difference in handling. If anything, the V6 is a tad sharper, but that is probably due to the lower profile tires.
    2019 Amarok 3.0 Extreme Auto with Roll-n-Lock tonneau cover.
    Gone: 2013 Amarok 2.0 Auto
    2018 Audi SQ5
    Gone: 2015 Audi S8

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •