
Originally Posted by
isuzurover
Good points - however the iceberg was a spectacular failure by all accounts (possibly ahead of its time though?).
The fact that LR and Perkins were developing the iceberg proves there was a market there and they were interested in a larger diesel. They could have saved a lot of money and used the 3.4.
The Iceberg was a failure, but I don't know that spectacular is the right word. I'm not sure why it was abandoned exactly, or what vehicle it was intended for (Rangerover?) - perhaps the fact that this was unclear contributed to its demise.
The attraction of the Rover V8 was that it was lighter than the 2.25 petrol - and the diesel version of it probably would have been lighter than the 2.25 diesel, which the 3.4 certainly would not have been - it would have been 50% heavier.
John
JDNSW
1986 110 County 3.9 diesel
1970 2a 109 2.25 petrol
Bookmarks