Thread: Pro's and con's of a 2.2 puma

I would have thought that considering it is virtually the same motor, the performance and reliability would be pretty much the same.

Transit vans, Ford Rangers and Mazda BT 50's all seem to be going okay and they all use versions of the 2.2.

2.4 v 2.2 is only 50cc per cylinder, SFA really.

Good points

I am fairly sure that AUS models do not have the dreaded DPF.......
I agree, why not go for the 2.2L

I went from a 2.4 my09 to a new one a few weeks ago. The new 2.2 is a much nicer engine to drive and live with. So much smoother and less noisey. There seem to be quite a few changes to the engine, a silent and water cooled egr for example.

Originally Posted by Tomo

I am fairly sure that AUS models do not have the dreaded DPF.......
I agree, why not go for the 2.2L

I'm fairly sure they do. There's a blinkin' big shiny "thing" in the exhaust system just after the turbo that looks awfully like a DPF and there's a dash light to tell you that it needs regenerating - orange for warning and red for "do it now". Then there's the owners manual explaining it and the dealer telling me about it. Having said all that, maybe you're correct and the AUS models don't get the "dreaded" version, just the version that works fine and causes no issues if you don't muck with it and drive the car properly?

I'd be interested in getting rid of everything emissions related ... Laws are there to be broken
I didn't notice any power loss between the 2.4 & 2.2 really I must say

Definitely the 2.2 - much smoother, quieter and now BAS have cracked the ECU and remaps are available. This means you can ask for the South African map which does not have the DPF

Was just quoted $61,000 for cab chassis there's less extras on them than my 110 which had snorkel,sidesteps,towbar,traction control,ABS and bullbar that came to $54,000 must be extra for supply and demand...