Thread: Why no TDV6?

Originally Posted by Dougal

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

no idea, but a slightly uprated version of the same box sits behind the 3.2 5cyl and would only have a different tail housing....

Originally Posted by Pickles2

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.

We've been arguing that with Land Rover from the 1960s.

The series III should never have been born, in 1972 they should have built the Stage 1 or maybe even the OneTen (they had all the technology in 1970) and in 1980 when the Stage One 4BD1 we had a faint hope, but all was lost when production left Australia and South Africa.

Its a bit late wanting it now when the stone masons are already chiselling the words on the Defender's tombstone.

Originally Posted by cewilson

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.

Sorry mate but your mistaken,it's a proven fact that Tdi's can't do that many K's because their under 3.0ltres. Pat

Originally Posted by PAT303

Sorry mate but your mistaken,it's a proven fact that Tdi's can't do that many K's because their under 3.0ltres. Pat

So Pat, can you honestly say the Defender would not be a better vehicle with the 3.2 5cyl?

cewilson, While the 200tdi was good in its day, and has served you well. It was and still is underpowered for work use. If you are returning 10/100 towing 1.5t I would hate to be stuck behind you.

I saw a sticker once saying "if I'm so slow how come you're behind me then?" Might have to get one for mine.

Personally I believe it was a deliberate tactic by ford to kill the defender.
In most cities, here's a 130 dual cab for $55k with a 2.2 puma putting out 90kw.
Walk 50m south (in Wollongong their 2 doors apart)to the ford dealer and here's another 130 in wheelbase ford ranger dual cab for $42k with a 2.2 puma with 110kw and if you want the 147kw td5 it's still under fifty grand.
Last year the ford ranger in 4x4 spec alone sold over 16,000. It's identical under the (Fugly)skin brother the Mazda BT50 which only sells in 3.2td5 spec sold over 9,000. But we will never know how many sales of these 2 the defender would have taken with ether the 3.2td5 or 3.0tdv6.

Originally Posted by frantic

Personally I believe it was a deliberate tactic by ford to kill the defender.

Except the 2.2 was put in there after Tata bought them.

Performance wise I've got the BAS remap, Allisport intercooler, decat removed, EGR off, and I feel no need for any more power.
The performance mods I did was for a better breathing, smoother/cooler running engine that had more oomph but with the main focus being on economy, which is excellant. Compared to what others have done its a very mild tune but I can crank it anytime by swapping the program, I've just never felt the need or wanted to.

Adding to that the Ford 2.4 has been absolutely trouble free and has never skipped a beat. Wish I could say the same for everything else. I think tweeked properly it is an excellant choice for the Defender.