Thread: 2016 'Defender'

Originally Posted by tact

Err.. dear Pat - I own, drive (into very remote places as well as city commute), and love, my TDCi Defender.

I certainly was not bagging TDCis for having electrickery. I love all that the electrickery delivers with my TDCi.

Did you not notice my post about not being paranoid around water in a Puma? Which doesn't mean go crazy in water, just a casual STFU to those with puma-paranoia saying "don't get it wet!".

Even my comment about the immobiliser wasn't pointing out any fault in the system (though there are those too) or based on puma-phobic electrickery hate thinking.

Its a fact of life for those Puma's with immobilisers - lose or damage the key fob and you'll be pushing your TDCi home if there are no latte vendors or flatbeds around. Unless you have a way around it. Its just common sense to prep for that.

Or else prep for discussions like this:
"Yeah holiday of the century spoiled... had to leave the vehicle deep inside the hard stuff. Going to take weeks for it to be towed out to somewhere where a flattop can get it back to LR."

"What happened!? Gearbox fall out? Engine exploded? Vicious emus?"

"Nah... nothing serious like that! Key fell from my pocket and I stepped on the remote. Couldn't disarm the immobiliser to start the car."

Your shout.

My mate got the key in his 80 series jammed in the ignition,you ever tried getting one started like that?,I can drop my Tdi's keys out hiking,or 20 other things leaving me stuck. Pat

Originally Posted by PAT303

My mate got the key in his 80 series jammed in the ignition,you ever tried getting one started like that?,I can drop my Tdi's keys out hiking,or 20 other things leaving me stuck. Pat

...or break the key fob and be unable to disable the immobiliser on a TDCi. All the same things. None are a fault in pumas nor a criticism of electrickery. (which is how you seem to take it - certainly not how it is intended).

There are steps you can take to mitigate some of the examples you gave. Leave a spare key etc...

There are steps that can be taken to protect against being immobilised when you'd rather not be.

So your issue with this is?

Originally Posted by Summiitt

Ill give you guys an example of how this idea that electrics and sensors etc is crap.. Many years ago, air bag suspension on 4wds was considered unreliable and temporary.. Yet most long distance buses and trucks were already running airbags for years with good results, now, I'd guess 95% of all long distance/ roadtrain/outback truck applications are running on airbags, yes, heavy haulage is still split on old school 6 rod style systems, but most operators are seeing the advantage in airbag. Similarly, every truck running the toughest roads in Australia is running a totally computer controlled motor, sensors on every possible point in the motor, transmission and drivetrain is monitored..today you can't buy a truck that isn't this advanced..they survive because the systems work, I can get a fault code in one of my western stars and and the driver can diagnose it on the spot, locate the sensor, tell whether it's a faulty sensor or a real issue and arrange parts to suit or clear the code and keep driving.. i love my old 300tdi for its simplicity, but the dark side ain't that dark, would take my puma to the Cape without any hesitation..

Nice example summitt. All teasing and provocation aside, My concern is not about electrics per se. It is about long term durability in very harsh environments and serviceability outside cities. You are right about the benefits of electronic fault clearing and a different kind of reliability that ECU's provide. Water and and electrics don't mix though so design changes needed for a serious off roader IMO - different usage to a truck. The disappointment with electric engine management is definitely in fuel consumption. My 2.2 puma uses more fuel than my 18 year old 300tdi. But long term durability in harsh environments is what I'm most concerned about in terms of the softening of 4WDs. There really aren't many truly work oriented 4WDs on the market anymore. I find it exceedingly disappointing that Land Rover have turned their back on their origins in this way, both in terms of working vehicles and regional servicing. Blind faith in a new Defender is not warranted for these reasons IMO.
Cheers,

Originally Posted by MrLandy

[...] The disappointment with electric engine management is definitely in fuel consumption. My 2.2 puma uses more fuel than my 18 year old 300tdi.
Cheers,

Hey MrLandy,

Have seen this comment before. I have no experience with the tdi's so accept what's said on face value.

Hard to reconcile with a belief that a modern engine must be more efficient. My thought that this is simply a case of the TDCi producing more power than a tdi? Much more, and you using those extra ponies - Yes? (TNSTAAFL - you pay at the pump)

Thought experiment: If you were to somehow limit the amount of hp/torque you could call for in a TDCi (imagine a smart brick under the throttle), limit it to the max hp/torque actually available in your old tdi..... My bet is the TDCi would return better mileage

It's the same when installing a tune on a TDCi. You had 120hp/360NM originally. Now you have 150hp/450NM. If you applied a driving style that plants the right foot to the floor in every gear, up shifting at 3500rpm, before and after applying the tune. Guess what - you burn more fuel with the 150hp tune (and get everywhere faster!). You pay for that at the pump.

However if your driving style was never to exceed 25% throttle, and keep revs between 2000-3000. Idealistically there is no reason a good 150hp tune would burn more fuel than the original 120hp tune. (Because you never demand more hp/NM than the 120hp tune could deliver)

If there is any truth in my suggestion then it's not the TDCi electronic engine management you should be disappointed with. It's actually doing you proud and much more efficient than the tdi. It's the lead in your right foot you need to be "disappointed" with.

Originally Posted by Summiitt

........they survive because the systems work, I can get a fault code in one of my western stars and and the driver can diagnose it on the spot, locate the sensor, tell whether it's a faulty sensor or a real issue and arrange parts to suit or clear the code and keep driving.. i love my old 300tdi for its simplicity, but the dark side ain't that dark, would take my puma to the Cape without any hesitation..

And much of the concern expressed with electronics in this thread is that this is precisely what you cannot do with any consumer four wheel drive or car today.

If this capability was included with modern four wheel drives, there would be little to worry about - even water ingress could be pinpointed, and the right bit of the gear stripped and laid out in the sun for a day halfway up the cape. But providing this is not likely to happen in the near future, because it works against the desire of the manufacturer to tie the buyer to the dealer, and in any case, would almost certainly be illegal under immobiliser laws in some states (which do not apply to heavy vehicles such as your Western Stars!).

John

Originally Posted by tact

Hey MrLandy,

Have seen this comment before. I have no experience with the tdi's so accept what's said on face value.

Hard to reconcile with a belief that a modern engine must be more efficient. My thought that this is simply a case of the TDCi producing more power than a tdi? Much more, and you using those extra ponies - Yes? (TNSTAAFL - you pay at the pump)

Thought experiment: If you were to somehow limit the amount of hp/torque you could call for in a TDCi (imagine a smart brick under the throttle), limit it to the max hp/torque actually available in your old tdi..... My bet is the TDCi would return better mileage

It's the same when installing a tune on a TDCi. You had 120hp/360NM originally. Now you have 150hp/450NM. If you applied a driving style that plants the right foot to the floor in every gear, up shifting at 3500rpm, before and after applying the tune. Guess what - you burn more fuel with the 150hp tune (and get everywhere faster!). You pay for that at the pump.

However if your driving style was never to exceed 25% throttle, and keep revs between 2000-3000. Idealistically there is no reason a good 150hp tune would burn more fuel than the original 120hp tune. (Because you never demand more hp/NM than the 120hp tune could deliver)

If there is any truth in my suggestion then it's not the TDCi electronic engine management you should be disappointed with. It's actually doing you proud and much more efficient than the tdi. It's the lead in your right foot you need to be "disappointed" with.

I respect your thinking tact, but of course I've tried that. On a straight 600km highway run at the speed limit of 100 / 110 kmh, which I've done too many times to remember in both vehicles...same driving style.
1998 Tdi 2.5 - 10-11litres per 100k. / 2014 Puma 2.2 - 12-14 litres per 100k.
If I drive at 100kmh or less, tdci puma will get 11-13 litres per 100kmh, but never 10L/100km. Tdi consumption doesn't change. My puma has done 25,000km. Tdi has done 320,000km.

The electronic engine management and design are more complicated, get a bit more power out of a smaller engine but with worse fuel consumption figures. The automatic throttle control also increases fuel consumption in my opinion, it actually prevents me driving economically by keeping revs up all the time. The puma is not a relaxed engine to drive because of this.

Don't get me wrong, I still love driving the puma, but it doesn't make any sense to me for anyone to claim that a far more technologically advanced engine with a smaller capacity using more fuel is a good thing? It goes against all aims around reduction of fossil fuel burning and meeting emissions laws, quite apart from costing more to run. A clear mark against this ECU managed engine.

Originally Posted by JDNSW

And much of the concern expressed with electronics in this thread is that this is precisely what you cannot do with any consumer four wheel drive or car today.

If this capability was included with modern four wheel drives, there would be little to worry about - even water ingress could be pinpointed, and the right bit of the gear stripped and laid out in the sun for a day halfway up the cape. But providing this is not likely to happen in the near future, because it works against the desire of the manufacturer to tie the buyer to the dealer, and in any case, would almost certainly be illegal under immobiliser laws in some states (which do not apply to heavy vehicles such as your Western Stars!).

John

Exactly John. "...because it works against the desire of the manufacturer to tie the buyer to the dealer..." And this is a problem for 4WD customers because? THERE ARE NO SERVICE AGENTS ANYWHERE NEAR WHERE WE USE OUR 4WD's!! It makes a mockery of the Land Rover name itself. In English parlance... 'Urban Rover' would seem more befitting going forward old chaps.

Originally Posted by JDNSW

And much of the concern expressed with electronics in this thread is that this is precisely what you cannot do with any consumer four wheel drive or car today.

If this capability was included with modern four wheel drives, there would be little to worry about - [...]
John

John,

It's true LR don't supply anything as sophisticated as we might like. But there are "tools":
- LR have this EKA code thing to at least allow us to bypass immobiliser should the fob battery die, or the fob is lost/damaged.
- 3rd party tools allow turning of immobiliser functions and read fault codes

My complaint is NOT that TDCis have electrickery. It's that I cannot get my EKA out of LRM. And my backup plan to get my EKA myself (nanocom evo purchase ) - also is not working.