Why no TDV6?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drover

Very impressive !

I have been thinking Pete's "hy-bird turbo" replacment should find its way onto the shopping list and after those numbers ..........

---

Whilst this is a good advert to the ability of Pete, another well Know tuner from the UK informed me that 200 Horse was available or more. However he would generally supply 180/185 due to our conditions in respect to engine life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pannawonica

Whilst this is a good advert to the ability of Pete, another well Know tuner from the UK informed me that 200 Horse was available or more. However he would generally supply 180/185 due to our conditions in respect to engine life.

---

Exactly the same as BAS. That graph is their development car. Not a commercially available remap

Mmmm I remember when I was told that a 2.5 litre 4 cylinder will never be any good, won't last and isn't suited to Australian conditions (200tdi).

I serviced it yesterday at 762,000km's. And I'm about to drive it back to Tassie from Perth after doing the reverse trip mid last year.

As anyone who knows me would attest, it certainly isn't pampered. It has spent more time off-road than most vehicles, spends a great deal of time towing a 1.5 ton camper trailer off-road, as well as firewood carting and farm hack. All at a consistent 10 litres per 100km's.

Don't let the lack of 'figures' or 'small engine' detract from the vehicle. Personally if a Defender isn't fast or powerful enough, choose another vehicle.


Look after her and she'll pay you back in turn. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by uninformed

Are you serious? You of all people should know that a multitude of tunes could be set so it had proper torque and not stupid high end, that with electronic top speed control etc

Does anyone here really think the likes of the current defenders (110 and 130 at least) should have less than 450nm stock for what they are ment to be able to do???

---

Yes, a TDV6 is certainly not about top speed. It's about making the vehicle a generally more responsive,driveable unit, putting it on a more even footing with the competition.
I am certain that whilst a bigger engine will never happen now, had it happened years ago, it would've maintained the vehicle's appeal, and there would have been greater Defender sales.
Pickles.

Don't forget about brand hierarchy either.

If a defender and a base spec disco had the same power/torque the defender would likely be lighter and quicker.
That will never be allowed to happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dougal

Don't forget about brand hierarchy either.

If a defender and a base spec disco had the same power/torque the defender would likely be lighter and quicker.
That will never be allowed to happen.

---

they could have taken a leaf from toyota's book and offered both in the Defender and Disco, obviously the Disco having the higher state of tune.

oh they did do that already with the 200, 300Tdi and the Td5.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by uninformed

oh they did do that already with the 200, 300Tdi and the Td5.....

---

The Defender versions were in a slightly lower state of tune than the Disco version of those engines.

Garry

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by uninformed

they could have taken a leaf from toyota's book and offered both in the Defender and Disco, obviously the Disco having the higher state of tune.

oh they did do that already with the 200, 300Tdi and the Td5.....

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by garrycol

The Defender versions were in a slightly lower state of tune than the Disco version of those engines.

Garry

---

Yeah I think that's what Serge was getting at.
The weight difference increased significantly since then so the power difference would have to increase too.

I am a firm believer in fewer cylinders = less internal friction and better fuel economy. But exactly how much difference this would make between a 2.2L four and a 3.0v6 I don't know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dougal

Yeah I think that's what Serge was getting at.
The weight difference increased significantly since then so the power difference would have to increase too.

I am a firm believer in fewer cylinders = less internal friction and better fuel economy. But exactly how much difference this would make between a 2.2L four and a 3.0v6 I don't know.

---

yes that was what I was getting at, just like Toyota with its 70-whatever-series and the 200 series TDV8

I agree about the less cylinders, but that is not the point. Regardless, how many engines did they have a choice from in that family? the Defender could have been the 3.2 5cyl, the 2.7 V6...basicly anything with more capacity and better torque.

The figures for the little 2.2 are impressive, but those 2 combined in a work vehicle just dont make me feel warm and fuzzy

What's the recommended torque limit on the 6sp MT82 gearbox they used?