Thread: New 2.2 Puma

FWIW - The 2.2 is basically a 'tweaked' 2.4... i.e, it's not the same donk as the Freelander!

...and yes, GKN make the chassis.

M

i think it will be awesome if the new platform landrover is heavier than current and they go with a 2.0ltr engine......

Hey Bill.

Probably a bit soon but are you happy with your 2.2 Puma?
My order in Sept for a 130 HCPU is due in Feb. I also was expecting a 2.4. When I found out from Aulro forum (even the dealer didnt know about the up/downgrade until I raised the issue). At the time I was tempted to cancel my order.

The engine covers are a haven for pesky mice in the bush, and the DPF has been reported as problematic

Any feedback from owners of the latest Defender 130 would be appreciated.

The short answer is yes.

It behaves exactly like my 2.4 did. The only noticeable differences being that it is quieter (but I have a suspicion that it is getting noisier as it gets older - difficult to tell) and the traction control seems far more advanced and less intrusive. In my 2.4 the ABS or traction control would flutter whenever I went over the gutter, roundabout or any other insignificant bumps. (It sounded like someone flicking a ruler which is held over the edge of a desk - although I suspect this may have been a fault).

I had a good lock underneath the other day and I feel the that LR might have made some retrograde design changes. From memory in my 2.4 nothing really hung down beneath the level of the chassis rails but now the hand brake drum protrudes slightly (~10mm) and the random cross member that sits beneath the gear box but isn't bolted to anything might be a little lower too! Most of the comparisons are difficult to verify unless you get the two side by side.

With regards to the two specific thins you mention:
DPF....can't say as it hasn't gone off yet and if it has I haven't noticed. But I do get the feeling that at some stage in the near future you won't get a new diesel without one.
Engine Cover....hadn't considered the nesting issue. It is a tight fit but not so tight that things won't get in. But I can't see it being any different from the other tight little nooks and crannies that things could nest in.

Ultimately I am happy that the driver experience is equivalent between the 2.4 and the 2.2. Even it it wasn't, I'd still be driving the 2.2 because that's what they now put in the Defender - and I wouldn't want to drive anything else!

Hey Bill,

In the 2.4 the handbrake drum definitely hangs down below the chassis rail, not sure about the other bits.

Sorry Guys & Gals bit off topic but does anyone know why the LR 2.2L
Power rating is 90 & Torque is 360
Yet the Ford Ranger & Mazda BT50 2.2L are rated higher at
Power 110/Torque 375.
Is it a Turbo Boost, Computer Chip thing or something else

Originally Posted by Rickoz

Sorry Guys & Gals bit off topic but does anyone know why the LR 2.2L
Power rating is 90 & Torque is 360
Yet the Ford Ranger & Mazda BT50 2.2L are rated higher at
Power 110/Torque 375.
Is it a Turbo Boost, Computer Chip thing or something else

Bump

Originally Posted by Rickoz

Sorry Guys & Gals bit off topic but does anyone know why the LR 2.2L
Power rating is 90 & Torque is 360
Yet the Ford Ranger & Mazda BT50 2.2L are rated higher at
Power 110/Torque 375.
Is it a Turbo Boost, Computer Chip thing or something else

I am guessing its all in the tune, the reflash offered by Alive etc make a big difference, totally transforms the way the 2.4 makes power, so no doubt theres 20HP to be had in the tune if not alot more.