Thread: Why no TDV6?

You're getting confused with the different 2.2 power plants... The Defender engine is the one used in the transit van, Freelander uses the one in the Mondeo.

As for the TDV6, I'd guess there's just not the market for it. Granted, there is A market for it but not one big enough to cover the initial and ongoing development of a product.

M

There would be a market....if Land Rover actually modernized and marketed the Defender...

Overpowered and difficult to get the engineering right from a safety point of view in an old chassis would be one of the reasons.
Imagine the issues getting the Defender past the EU certification bodies who already want it off the road if you could light up the tyres at will

Regards,
Tote

We've just taken delivery of our 90, and we knew the performance of the 2.2l engine before we bought, so it's not a worry for us, & I actually think it does a good job.
However, the option of a more powerful engine would have been good,...we'd certainly have optioned it, & I believe that a lot more Defenders would have been sold had they had the option of a bigger & more powerful engine in keeping with the opposition.
Pickles.

Originally Posted by specwarop

It seems disappointing, when the 2.2L seems like a ****ty Ford motor

Can you imagine a 2.2L doing 1 million kms? .

Guess what.......the TDV6 is a Ford motor as well !

And will it do 1,000,000K's I think not.

But I would love to able to buy a TDV6 or better still the 3.2 variant of the DuraTorq in a Defender from the dealer.

Originally Posted by Tote

Overpowered and difficult to get the engineering right from a safety point of view in an old chassis would be one of the reasons.
Imagine the issues getting the Defender past the EU certification bodies who already want it off the road if you could light up the tyres at will

Regards,
Tote

This^^.

A defender that can do 180+km/h would be a danger in the hands of many drivers.

Originally Posted by Tote

Overpowered and difficult to get the engineering right from a safety point of view in an old chassis would be one of the reasons.
Imagine the issues getting the Defender past the EU certification bodies who already want it off the road if you could light up the tyres at will

Regards,
Tote

And how old is the G- wagen? It gets not only a 3.0 tdv6 but also a 6.3 V8 AMG. Merc has already stated it has at least a 10 year time frame before redesign.
Jeep wrangler puts in a 2.8 tdi with similar power ( 2 solid axles 4 coils)to the older 2.7 tdv6 LR.
Finally toymota put a 4.4 tdv8 in a coil front LEAF rear.
The ford ranger is close to what the defender 130 could have been, it's on a 129in wheelbase (3.22m) but has IFS/ leaf rear, it has the 3.2td5 puma or a (20kW more powerful than defender) 2.2 puma which only cost cutting fleets buy.

The engineering excuse does not hold water and is simply a lack of global focus.
Merc has a market for G-wagen and has expanded to 3 engine types in Oz, the cheapest of which is still 3 time the defenders cost. Toymota add about $20k, jeep similar to cheaper depending on boxes ticked.

Originally Posted by frantic

And how old is the G- wagen? It gets not only a 3.0 tdv6 but also a 6.3 V8 AMG. Merc has already stated it has at least a 10 year time frame before redesign.

The AMG G-wagen has a completely different suspension setup and tune to the off-road military versions. The electronic oversight is also quite a lot more than any defender.

Can a higher power defender be made safe? Sure. But with detriment to it's off-road ability and it's purchase price.