Why no TDV6?

[specwarop]

Question that has been running through my mind recently, is why did Land Rover decide not to use the TDV6 in the Defender.
It is used in the Discovery, well, the base model / cheapest Discovery. So why not in the Defender?

Its not even an option in the Defender, nor is the 8-speed auto that goes with it...It seems disappointing, when the 2.2L seems like a ****ty Ford motor that doesn't appear at first to have the capabilities one would expect a Defender needs. Can you imagine a 2.2L doing 1 million kms? I think it appears in the Ford Ranger, but with more power and torque there, and also comes with a bigger fuel tank...It also features in Mondeos.....Is this motor suited to the rigours of an agricultural Defender?

Also there is the issue of fuel economy. The TDV6 gets much better stats than the 2.2L.

What do you guys think.

[camel_landy]

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

[Red90]

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

[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:wasntme:

Regards,
Tote

[Pickles2]

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.

[Drover]

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.

[Dougal]

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:wasntme:

Regards,
Tote

This^^.

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

[frantic]

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:wasntme:

Regards,
Tote

And how old is the G- wagen? It gets not only a 3.0 tdv6 but also a 6.3 V8 AMG:twisted:. 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.

[Dougal]

And how old is the G- wagen? It gets not only a 3.0 tdv6 but also a 6.3 V8 AMG:twisted:. 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.

[specwarop]

An extra 20kw really isnt going to make the car unsafe. Some would argue it would make it safer.
In addition, that extra 20kw would work towards moving arguably the heaviest car out of all those mentioned above, a bit easier - and resulting in better fuel economy despite the extra power and size of the engine.

[Lotz-A-Landies]

There would be a market....if Land Rover actually modernized and marketed the Defender...Wait for 2015, there'll either be no Defenders or a more modern replacement.

Much to the chargrin of the Defender faithfulls! :BigCry:

[specwarop]

Well following the trend, the Defender will still get an underpowered powerplant. Freelander will get more horses and newtons..




Wait for 2015, there'll either be no Defenders or a more modern replacement.

Much to the chargrin of the Defender faithfulls! :BigCry:

[Dougal]

An extra 20kw really isnt going to make the car unsafe. Some would argue it would make it safer.
In addition, that extra 20kw would work towards moving arguably the heaviest car out of all those mentioned above, a bit easier - and resulting in better fuel economy despite the extra power and size of the engine.

20kw?
The TDV6 was 440Nm and 140kw.
The current defender is 360Nm and 90kw: http://www.landrover.co.nz/i/files/specs/my14/2014_defender_1.0.pdf

[specwarop]

Someone said 20kw more in the 3.2L Duratorq motor.
But yeh that 50kw extra from the TDV6 is a big jump, but then again 140kw is bugger all, my Subaru has 40kw more than that again, and the car weighs half as much...

[MR LR]

It's funny, if for once they put a motor in the Defender that wasn't a tiny, ****y piece of **** they might actually sell some, I know we'd have a new one here instead of a Navara.

Just think of how many Isuzu 110's are on the road still, just because they have a decent motor, people actually take them seriously.

[Drover]

It's not so much about the KW's, more about the NM's.

With my current BAS tune and associated bits, my PUMA 2.4L is estimated to be putting out 120kw's and 450nm's. It makes the D'fer so so much nicer to drive, it just wants to go, there is no reluctancey to excellerate or maintain speed even with my camper on behind.

Bottom line the Defender needs more power from what currently on offer.

[specwarop]

How was your fuel economy effected, if at all, Drover?
Was the $1000 to get the tune worthwhile?

[Drover]

To get the most out of the tune I have up graded the intercooler to AliSport, fitted Terra-Firma de-cat and centre muffler removal pipe and replaced the factory ducting to from the air box to the guard vent/snorkel with 90mm flexi tube.

Fuel consumption is about 11L/100k's and can be up to 13.5L/100 towing the camper.

Is it worth it - Yep

Would I do it again - in a heart beat

You cannot imagine how much more alive your defender can be !

[specwarop]

Would doing those mods, except the tune, be worthwhile on their own also?
11L/100km is better than factory isnt it? Better than the advertised rates I see!

[Dougal]

Would doing those mods, except the tune, be worthwhile on their own also?
11L/100km is better than factory isnt it? Better than the advertised rates I see!

Combined figures claimed are 10.2l/100 for the 90 and 11.1 for the 110.
So those results aren't better than factory.

But usage and kit-out of defenders varies so much that fuel economy readings from others may be of no use to you.

[Psimpson7]

BAS's development 2.2tdci is producing over 200bhp and 556nm which is very impressive. Also looks like it has well over 330nm at 1300rpm

Link to pic taken from Petes post on defender2 site

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2014/02/17.jpg

[Drover]

All of those mods will benifit the stock motor, especially the intercooler.

The intercooler provides cooler/denser air on the induction side, so better performance and lower EGT's

The factory ducting air box to snorkel is restrictive, twisted and varies in diameter from reasonable to rediculas. Replacing it with a constant 90mm tube is a great improvement. One of the members of here "Nugget"sell a kit that is perfect.

Exhaust will mods also add benifit and it is still quite.

It all about making it easier to put the air/fuel in and get the exhaust out.

[Drover]

BAS's development 2.2tdci is producing over 200bhp and 556nm which is very impressive. Also looks like it has well over 330nm at 1300rpm

Link to pic taken from Petes post on defender2 site

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2014/02/17.jpg

Very impressive !

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

[specwarop]

Does the tune void the warranty? And has Bell sorted out that issue with the 2.2L where things had to be sent back and forth? Whats the latest pricing?

[Dougal]

BAS's development 2.2tdci is producing over 200bhp and 556nm which is very impressive. Also looks like it has well over 330nm at 1300rpm

Boost and A/F numbers for that tune would be very interesting.

[Psimpson7]

Best to send him a PM to check , but last time I spoke to him ECU's still need to be sent to him. I have bought a spare new one to make this easier.

He posts heaps on Defender2 and is normally very quick to answer questions. I believe he also did the mapping on the Bowler 90's

[specwarop]

A new spare ECU would be expensive...?

[Psimpson7]

A new spare ECU would be expensive...?

Not really! I got mine for 75pounds from this seller. I had it shipped in the UK and then got my family to send it on.

New Genuine Land Rover Defender 2.2 D ECU S180139001D CH12-12C520-AD | eBay (http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/New-Genuine-Land-Rover-Defender-2-2-D-ECU-S180139001D-CH12-12C520-AD-/321331274880?pt=UK_CarsParts_Vehicles_CarParts_SM&hash=item4ad0d62480)

[solmanic]

Defender development is, and has always been the minimum possible for the smallest selling vehicle in Land Rover's range - period. The Puma (Transit) engine was Ford's way of achieving this and Tata have just stuck with it. Cheaper than putting in a TDV6. Need to meet the next EU emissions target? Just drop in a slightly smaller engine and send the development team on a long lunch as a reward for their sterling efforts.

I suspect when Ford were reluctantly refreshing the Defender in 2007 they asked the marketing guys whether the Transit engined Defender would still sell and after a poofteenth of a second they replied - "I guess so, it can't make Defender sales any worse." And here we are. At the tail end of the cheapest 65 year development program of any vehicle ever.

[uninformed]

This^^.

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

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???

[pannawonica]

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.

[Psimpson7]

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

[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. :)

[Pickles2]

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.

[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.

[uninformed]

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.....

[101RRS]

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

[Dougal]

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.....


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.

[uninformed]

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

[Dougal]

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

[voltron]

Just saw the add for the new Colorado on T.V. 500nm of Torque they are advertised from the stock motor. That depressed me a little. Keep in mind I am comparing motors , not the vehicle.

I don't want a bigger motor to go faster, I just want to be able to flow with the traffic . With a load on I am constantly changing to try and keep witht he flow of traffic in the hilly bits, but more often then not I tend to hold back the people behind me a little.

[uninformed]

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....

[Lotz-A-Landies]

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.

[PAT303]

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

[uninformed]

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.

[2stroke]

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.

[frantic]

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:eek: 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.

[Dougal]

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.

[alittlebitconcerned]

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.

[uninformed]

It has been a known fact for quite a few years now, that LR have used engines 2.5 and under to avoid extra taxes when exporting them to other European countries. That being their bread and butter sales wise. They do not care about Aus, USA or Africa. Which is evident in, among other things, the design of their cooling systems.

[Dougal]

It has been a known fact for quite a few years now, that LR have used engines 2.5 and under to avoid extra taxes when exporting them to other European countries. That being their bread and butter sales wise. They do not care about Aus, USA or Africa. Which is evident in, among other things, the design of their cooling systems.

European vehicle tax brackets used to be on engine size. But at some point they switched to CO2 emissions (which is fuel economy).
But both of course have the same outcome. Engines being down-sized and boosted more heavily in all vehicles.

The toyota 4.5 V8 in the 70 series is IMO an example of an engine with poor performance and fuel economy for it's size.

A family member has a 4.2 tdv8 vehicle and it has continual issues. Issues which I put down to the engine being oversized for the work it has to do. It literally doesn't work hard enough to burn itself clean internally. Fuel economy is also terrible.

[specwarop]

Spoke to a dealer yesterday about the lack of TDV6, and he said that LR tried it.
But they decided against it for 2 reasons:
1) Lack of space in the engine bay without major redesign,
2) Because the Defender has a tow capacity of 3500kg, they found that if you tried to tow with that weight, and lots of power, you would just spin the wheels all the time.

Not sure how that stacks up really.

[uninformed]

Spoke to a dealer yesterday about the lack of TDV6, and he said that LR tried it.
But they decided against it for 2 reasons:
1) Lack of space in the engine bay without major redesign,
2) Because the Defender has a tow capacity of 3500kg, they found that if you tried to tow with that weight, and lots of power, you would just spin the wheels all the time.

Not sure how that stacks up really.

What a load of BS! Typical dealer ego....

[PAT303]

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.

Sorry mate just having a dig :p.The 3.2 isn't fitted so why bother worrying about it?. Pat

[PAT303]

It has been a known fact for quite a few years now, that LR have used engines 2.5 and under to avoid extra taxes when exporting them to other European countries. That being their bread and butter sales wise. They do not care about Aus, USA or Africa. Which is evident in, among other things, the design of their cooling systems.

So why did Toyota sell the LC with no A/C,with suspension that has never worked,have overheated since day one,has a motor that wasn't designed nor fits properly in it and has different width axles because of the above motor in Aus but somehow they look after Aus?.We are a tiny market and will never have vehicles built just for us because we don't count on the Global market. Pat

[PAT303]

What a load of BS! Typical dealer ego....

Service vehicles for a living Serg before commenting on engine fit,people complain about how mechanics rip them off all the time,it's down to fiddely time wasting on poorly designed engine bays. Pat

[sheerluck]

Service vehicles for a living Serg before commenting on engine fit,people complain about how mechanics rip them off all the time,it's down to fiddely time wasting on poorly designed engine bays. Pat

But then again, the TDV6 conversion has already been done in the UK. I assume that Land Rover lacked the appetite to spend megabucks on the R&D required to do the conversion themselves for what would be a tiny market.

[specwarop]

I have no idea the size of the TDV6 compared to the 2.2L - but the current Defender with the 2.2L has bugger all room as it is...

[101RRS]

I have no idea the size of the TDV6 compared to the 2.2L - but the current Defender with the 2.2L has bugger all room as it is...

Well the 110/Defender - even the 109 engine bay can take the petrol V8, the Isuzu 3.9, TDI and TD5 so i doubt there would be an issue putting the TDV6 in there - and it has been done in the UK.

[camel_landy]

Don't you just love all this speculation... :rolleyes:

M

[uninformed]

Don't you just love all this speculation... :rolleyes:

M

Why don't you clear it up with some facts then!

[pannawonica]

With the 3.2 all you have to do is decide which bits you are going to break first! :D

[Dougal]

With the 3.2 all you have to do is decide which bits you are going to break first! :D

What is there to decide? The bank gets broken first.

[OffTrack]

Why don't you clear it up with some facts then!

At a guess, LR fitted the 2.2 to get past the Euro5 emissions regs. Euro 6 was enough to kill off the Defender even with the Puma 2.2.

The TDv6 wouldn't meet new emissions reg that kick in this year for category N1 vehicles. The regs require 75% of a manufacturers N1 production to be compliant with a 175g/km CO2 emissions target. This ramps up to 100% by 2019. The D90 has an emissions spec of 266g/km and the Disco 4 is something like 230g/km.

Currently there is a small ramp up in the per g/km cost to manufacturers but from once the above the 175g/km threshold the penalty is €95 per g/km per vehicle, or roughly €8300//$12800AU on a D90.

You have to ask the question: why would LR invest in R&D towards fitting an engine that did nothing to improve the longevity of a model that was well past it's use by date anyway?

The obvious trend is to smaller turbo diesel's with fewer cylinders and lighter body/chassis construction to meet increasingly strict emissions regs, so don't be too surprised if LR release a Defender Replacement powered by sub-2.0L engines with 4 or fewer cylinders.

cheers
Paul

[pannawonica]

At a guess, LR fitted the 2.2 to get past the Euro5 emissions regs. Euro 6 was enough to kill off the Defender even with the Puma 2.2.

The TDv6 wouldn't meet new emissions reg that kick in this year for category N1 vehicles. The regs require 75% of a manufacturers N1 production to be compliant with a 175g/km CO2 emissions target. This ramps up to 100% by 2019. The D90 has an emissions spec of 266g/km and the Disco 4 is something like 230g/km.

Currently there is a small ramp up in the per g/km cost to manufacturers but from once the above the 175g/km threshold the penalty is €95 per g/km per vehicle, or roughly €8300//$12800AU on a D90.

You have to ask the question: why would LR invest in R&D towards fitting an engine that did nothing to improve the longevity of a model that was well past it's use by date anyway?

The obvious trend is to smaller turbo diesel's with fewer cylinders and lighter body/chassis construction to meet increasingly strict emissions regs, so don't be too surprised if LR release a Defender Replacement powered by sub-2.0L engines with 4 or fewer cylinders.

cheers
Paul
You have got to wonder where all this emission stuff is going to end. :(

[camel_landy]

Why don't you clear it up with some facts then!
Where I can, I do but it often gets overlooked by the 'armchair experts'... ;)

M

[RVR110]

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.

MI can only speak for myself. I've bought 3 new Defenders in the last 4 years. Every one of them would have been a TDv6 or Duratorq 3.2 if either of those options were available. However I'm just one small data point. I'll buy one of the "new" (post Puma) Defenders if it appeals to me, but that is a wait-and-see game with lots of variables.

[jakeslouw]

Issues:

1) TDV6 bottom end has proven to be unreliable in the long run. Plenty of people complaining about big-end bearing and crank issues

2) Electronics: BAS invested a huge amount of effort and money into that conversion.

3) Space: while the TDV6 isn't an LS3 or a Hemi, it's still wide.

I'd say the 3.2 Ford Durotorq with matched gearbox would be the best option today.

But hey, why would LR actually want to sell any more Deadenders?