Comparing a low boost tdi to a modern high BMEP engine is not really fair either.
Longer the hose the more susceptible to failure due to flexing.
Printable View
Comparing a low boost tdi to a modern high BMEP engine is not really fair either.
Longer the hose the more susceptible to failure due to flexing.
I too actually regret selling my last 300tdi.
But as I prolly see more Defender TDCi (puma) models than anything else now, well prolly not quite, D3/D4 have really become the most common...
IMHO... I'd rather own a Defender TDCi over just about anything else on the road, all quirks n clunks aside, its still a rather simplistic vehicle when compared to the rest, my opinions are the same in regards to the Jeep Wrangler JK diesel, though slightly more tech, but no factory clunks.
Regards
Daz
I know what you mean regarding the modern engine, but I feel after paying $52000 or so plus extras the design should match the performance set. Modern design engineers should account for this advancement, and design accordingly.
My wife's BMW X1 2.0 Diesel put's out 150kW and 400Nm, and she flogs it, and has never failed! I know that it can be done!
Interestingly, it was the shortest hose in the system that has failed! Anyway!
While we are sorta going off topic....
Dont think ur $50K plus gets you any kind of R & D, Land Rovers, especially Defenders have always been built by a company with no money, certainly no spare cash for good R & D, A Defender is quite simply a hodge bodge of a vehicle, as in "oh we have a new engine, lets use that, oh we have a new gearbox, lets use that". So any inherent faults with say an engine, part or supplier of a part from say Ford is only looked into as far as getting it to fit.
Which if you keep that in mind makes it a pretty dam good truckster and its one model thats kept true to the original Land Rover concept.
Regards
Daz