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

Originally Posted by solmanic

Not sure I agree with all the talk that the smaller Defender engine will necessarily be more stressed. I have never had cause to rev mine to 3000rpm and it motors along quite comfortably between 1000 & 2000rpm.

It's all in the gearing and the Defender's is so low they could probably put a 1.9l engine in and get similar real world performance. I'd hardly say the Puma engine thrashes about at all. It seems as relaxed and lazy as much larger engined diesels.

yes agree that gearing defintly makes a difference...mine is a 98 so doesnt have the new 6 speed with deep 1st....BUT tow a 2 tonne trailer around and you will find flaws in the small engine, especially with the spread of ratios....I cant recall but remember there being a bit of a jump from either 2nd-3rd or 3-4th....while yes you would have momentume...if you arnt on flat ground or going down hill you will suffer...

also as Rick said, engine braking is important in a work truck..

YES the Def is MENT to be a work truck....but some parts it falls short

Originally Posted by pc3

The bit I dont follow with all this "meeting emissions" bull**** is the fact that they have a 3.0 TDV6 that meets emissions...............why not just use that motor ??

However after having a decent drive in my PUMA 2.4 it certainly is not lacking power and on the highway eats the naturally aspirated 4.2 that was in the cruiser ute I used to own.

Maybe the ICON will be the bees knees and they will just use one of the disco motors in it.

So when will the Aussie Market see the Defenders with the new 2.2 motor ?

And I suppose you could buy a 3.2 Transit motor from Ford and drop that in if you wanted ?? That would be an improvement over the 2.4 too I suppose.

I believe its more to do with their exports...some countries that Defs go to have a huge tax increase when engine is over 2.5 so LR deems this to be important.....which is just stupid becasue basicly they are letting someone else dictate their market rather than dictate their own market.....yes I agree they should offer a small high tech FID for those countries and a larger cap FID for ROW that needs maybe a strong lower tech motor....Id be happy with 3.5lt well sorted

But they would have to change a few other things which would mean pulling their heads out of their butts which aint going to happen

I'm with you there.I would not be hard to change to hypoid diffs and a long stroke 3.0ltr,people do it in thier back yard so LR should able to manage it. Pat

Originally Posted by PAT303

I'm with you there.I would not be hard to change to hypoid diffs and a long stroke 3.0ltr,people do it in thier back yard so LR should able to manage it. Pat

Would the Transit 3.2 litre drop in too a PUMA ?

is that a good motor in comparison to the 2.4 ?

Is the 3.2 a four or V6?,it would be the defender they should have made from the start. Pat

Originally Posted by PAT303

Is the 3.2 a four or V6?,it would be the defender they should have made from the start. Pat

Unsure....I am guessing larger capacity 4cyl. Definitely should have been the Ford motor they used...........I reckon they would have sold quite a few more in Australia if they had of. The cabin of the PUMA really is a nice place to be, I like it better than my mates Triton.

If my numbers came up..................I'd spend a bucket load on my 130 PUMA bigger diffs, motor etc. as it is I love the thing, but if I was made of money I'd do a transplant.

which is just stupid becasue basicly they are letting someone else dictate their market rather than dictate their own market.....

erm did they not do this in 70's and lost the australian and south african markets, ohh and a huge chunk of europe.

Hmmm, a hybrid.....c'mon fellas need to think outside the square here.

A decent solar panel setup and you could do the Canning on one tank of fuel!