Thread: Say ta ta to the Puma next year...

Originally Posted by Loubrey

PC3, Land Rover World Magasine ran a series of articles, last year I think, of a TDV8 into a Defender.

They got the engine out of a Rangie that got badly rear ended and they followed the build with pictures, not a bad read.

Europe is losing the plot with this emmision lark. Like earlier said, fine for big cities, but the rest of the world don't live in them...!

True and as it was when making my decision on a new car....the big worry for me was motor size coming from a 4.2 Toyota any smaller and don think I would have bought a defender............even after purchaseing now its stil la consideration, can this motor handle the miles the 4.2 did. I suppose time will tell, I will be suprised if it (2.4 Transit engine)has the same longevity as the Toyota 4.2 diesel.

I agree Europe is going over board with the "small motor". The VW amorak coming out has a 2 litre twin turbo.

Thing is I feel the motor size is the wrong way around in the LR line up. The bigger motors should be in the Defender lineup as there the heavy duty work horse IMHO...............or at least give an option of having a small TD or a larger 6cyl.

The Ford DuraTorq engine comes in a variety of sizes.

2.0 L (1998 cc)
2.2 L (2198 cc)
2.4 L (2402 cc)
2.5 L
3.0 L
3.2 L

It would be my guess that the 2.4PUMA will be replaced with 2.2PUMA engine. The assemble plant wont even notice the difference.

The 2.2PUMA is listed for transit as -

Engine: 4cyl / 2198cc
Engine Type Common-rail Turbo diesel
Maximum Power 85ps @ 3500 rpm
Maximum Torque 184 lb/ft @ 1500 rpm

There is also a "Up-Grade" version of 2.2 used in 2005–2007 Ford Mondeo and X-Type Jags

Maximum Power 155 PS (153 hp/114 kW)
Maximum Torque 262 ft·lbf (355N·m)

I have to say it but LR management must employ all their relations in the parts dept.!
Why you ask, well why the hell would you have 5-6 different diesel engines in your line up?freelander 2.0, puma 2.4(now maybe a 2.2), disco,2.7+3.0+3.6 and the RR/sport who get the 3.0 and 3.6 shared with the disco.
Why did they ever fit the puma and now it's replacement when they could have and still could fit the 2.7 diesel v6 from the disco. Maybe it would do some of their unemployable relo's out of a job! Even with the cost difference between the puma and the 2.7TDV6 their direct competition a toyota troopy/workmate would still be more expensive with the same power and better of road ability and comfort!

Originally Posted by rick130

Torque off idle and engine braking are two things I'm constantly reminded of when jumping from the Defender to the Patrol John.

You just can't beat displacement in those two areas.

Two more reasons why i want go 4BD1T

But you know what, even the Isuzu truck that created the 4BD1-T has down sized the engines to meet Euro emission standards.

As John says in today's engineering the capacity of an engine does not bear the same relevance to power or even efficiency as it used to, even in the short period 1970s/80's when the 4BD1 was developed to now this is true.

I also notice that the Defender shown in the article is the 90, these are frequently fitted with smaller engines. Take the 90 when the 110 and County were the full sized vehicles, the 90 had the 2.5 litre petrol while the 110 usually had the 3.5 litre V8

it will be interesting to see how this new small motor will go but i dont know how the defender is so bad compared to alot of other suvs the fuel economy is pretty good and yes i know it is for europe but i would assume the gasses what be the same for other diesels i would think that the more fumes would come down to the amount of fuel getting used.hybrid i think they need to improve the technology before putting it in cars they are really not that much more economical when driving but think of the batteries they have a life span think of the extra resourses used to make these etra components.concept is there but the technology isnt quite there.i know some people will probably disagree with what i have to say but that is just want i think

Originally Posted by schmierer LR at singleton

it will be interesting to see how this new small motor will go but i dont know how the defender is so bad compared to alot of other suvs the fuel economy is pretty good and yes i know it is for europe but i would assume the gasses what be the same for other diesels i would think that the more fumes would come down to the amount of fuel getting used.hybrid i think they need to improve the technology before putting it in cars they are really not that much more economical when driving but think of the batteries they have a life span think of the extra resourses used to make these etra components.concept is there but the technology isnt quite there.i know some people will probably disagree with what i have to say but that is just want i think

is the Defender an SUV or a worktruck...

Originally Posted by Pedro_The_Swift

I'm sorry Rick,,

I just had too---

Originally Posted by Lotz-A-Landies

But you know what, even the Isuzu truck that created the 4BD1-T has down sized the engines to meet Euro emission standards.

As John says in today's engineering the capacity of an engine does not bear the same relevance to power or even efficiency as it used to, even in the short period 1970s/80's when the 4BD1 was developed to now this is true.

I also notice that the Defender shown in the article is the 90, these are frequently fitted with smaller engines. Take the 90 when the 110 and County were the full sized vehicles, the 90 had the 2.5 litre petrol while the 110 usually had the 3.5 litre V8

Of course modern engines are pumping out more power and torque/litre than ever, but how it is delivered in a commercial off road vehicle is as important as outright numbers, and generally speaking a larger displacement engine will deliver the torque in a more usable, unstressed manner.

Then, as Sergio points out I wonder what the useful life of the small, powerful engine will be compared to a larger displacement one ?
Outright commercial operators wouldn't care, as long as it lasts 50-75,000km or two-three years, which ever occurs first, however the rest of us tend to hang onto our cars for a fair while....

Anyway, a 2.2 litre 130 rated to carry 1300kg and tow 3500?
No thanks, and I'd reckon that's what most of Australia would say too, particularly when the direct opposition has engines ranging in capacity from 3-4.5 litres.