Thread: WHAT WERE THEY THINKING...

Originally Posted by Leo109

Hmmm, would that be the Jackeroo engine with the reputation of burning out turbos every 50K or so? <snip>
Ian

Hadn't heard of that Ian ?
They had a few O ring problems on the injectors, (what unit injector/CRD engines haven't in their early days) but that was as far as problems went on the ones I knew of.

Originally Posted by Leo109

Hmmm, would that be the Jackeroo engine with the reputation of burning out turbos every 50K or so? By the way, the 2.7TD in the first series Mercedes ML270s put out 400Nm as standard. Maybe not much of a 'real' 4WD, but our neighbours towed an 18' full height caravan all over Oz for several years in one with absolutely no problems and plenty of grunt. Now that sounds lke a nice engine.
Ian

Mercedes diesels nice engines full stop.

Sorry if it is a repost, but WWTT?

YouTube - What were they thinking?

CC

Very nice!

Originally Posted by Lotz-A-Landies

What they were thinking was that unless they put in a diesel engine that will cope with Australian conditions, we will never get any market share back nor have any chance at any Australian Army supply contracts. i.e the Perentie would have been still born with the 200TDi.
One on the only occasions in the last 30 years they got their thinking straight and away from Euro zone.

Ha Ha, can you IMAGINE a field 6X6 workshop truck trying to get up a hill with that 200Tdi
Oh, and although you know a LOT more than I do Diana about LR's and their variants and history, I would have to disagree with you about the 200Tdi. As an engine they are a beautifully simple mixture of economy and power with the simplicity and reliability of the unkillable series engine.

And Whereas I agree that the Isuzu engined Landy isn't really a PURE rover, I love mine to death!

JC
JC

Yes I guess this is STILL off topic, but I have to add my bit about Td5's and electronic engines. About the only constant problems that I have come across in Td5's that actually will STOP the vehicle have been fuel pump failures. (And maybe intercooler hoses etc but they are easily rectified and won't STOP the vehicle per se) other than that and the catastrophic oil pump bolt issue I maintain they are a fantastic engine able to take years of hard use. The fuel pump issue is one more concerned with the pump motor actually failing IME, and is something that ANY fuel injected vehicle could suffer from, at any time. Petes 90 radiator was just bad luck, those roads are pretty rough. At least it was a rad and not the chassis or a broken leaf spring mount etc. I CHOOSE to take my Isuzu RRC on remote trips etc, but if I didn't have any mechanical aptitude etc and I wanted a tourer, I would take a 2002 Defender 130 with the sals diff, a chipped Td5 and Maxi crawler gears. I'd fit some decent seats etc and enjoy the ride.

JC

Originally Posted by justinc

Ha Ha, can you IMAGINE a field 6X6 workshop truck trying to get up a hill with that 200Tdi
Oh, and although you know a LOT more than I do Diana about LR's and their variants and history, I would have to disagree with you about the 200Tdi. As an engine they are a beautifully simple mixture of economy and power with the simplicity and reliability of the unkillable series engine.

And Whereas I agree that the Isuzu engined Landy isn't really a PURE rover, I love mine to death!

JC
JC

The Army wanterd more power to cope with the expected gross weights, and they did not want a pre-chamber engine or any other engine that needed to warm up glow plugs to start. Quite important when someone is shooting at you.

Originally Posted by Brian Hjelm

The Army wanterd more power to cope with the expected gross weights, and they did not want a pre-chamber engine or any other engine that needed to warm up glow plugs to start. Quite important when someone is shooting at you.

The 300Tdi can be started without waiting for the glow plug, cant the 200Tdi?