Thread: buying a new D4 2.7 - rim swap

Originally Posted by DiscoWeb

RecMec,

The D4 2.7 with e-diff will, in MHO leave the ML for dead in almost every respect. On road would be only thing that is close possibly close.

There is a long and raging debate on this forum about rim sizes. I would surmise that the broad (but by no means unanimous consensus) is that 17's are strongly preferred if you plan on doing lots of remote area off road touring. Plenty of options, easily available and relatively cheap also have L/T options.

The 18's are fine for 99% of most people use of the D3 or D4 and with a growing list of tyre option to choose from in both AT and MT continue to get better. Greatest problem would seem to be availability when you are remote and increased risk of rim damage due to less side wall. They are reasonably costly as well.

19's on the 3.0 lt seem to concern some but not many who own one and there are a couple of good M/T tyres in 19's that a few here are very happy with, but again rim damage and availability seem to have some very scared about using them for real outback travel. Oh and they are pretty expensive.

There is also discussions about Performance BB6(I think) rims that some have purchased as a specific second set and shod with off road tyres.

Regards,

George

There are some other problems too George. A tyre that allows for deflation and moulding around rocks etc allows for MUCH improved traction - a 17 does that much better than a 19 and a 16 is better again but not possible on a D4. There is also the flotation issue by the ability of a 17 to significantly increase its length of footprint in deep deep soft sand where the ability to do that can make all the difference in my opinion.

Cheers

Originally Posted by ozscott

There are some other problems too George. A tyre that allows for deflation and moulding around rocks etc allows for MUCH improved traction - a 17 does that much better than a 19 and a 16 is better again but not possible on a D4. There is also the flotation issue by the ability of a 17 to significantly increase its length of footprint in deep deep soft sand where the ability to do that can make all the difference in my opinion.

Cheers

ozscott,

I think as I mentioned above, i acknowledged there is an ongoing debate raging about the pro's and cons of rime sizes and I was in no way trying to encapsulate all arguments into my brief summation above.

Improved capability off road is obviously one point of discussion and consideration.

However without knowing RecMec's requirement, but making the "big" assumption that if he is considering the ML300 with an off road pack then it is unlikely he is planning to test the outer limits of a D4's off road ability, no offense to RecMec or his intention. I think I use my D3 for its intended purpose but have little desire to really stretching its capabilities as I think this would beyond my comfort levels anyway.

I do recognise that the extra "flotation" would be really handy if you planned on doing lots of sand work as the D3 or D4 is a pretty heavy beast and sand may not be considered one of it strongest points.

Not trying to hijack this to a rim size thread so I will leave it at that.


Regards,

George

No worries mate. Good comments.

Cheers

DiscoWeb's summary is excellent.

As mentioned above, please everyone read the many other posts on this topic, and feel free to revive them if necessary, but that's as far as we want to take the 17" vs 19" argument here. Thank you.

I also agree the difference between the ML onroad and the D4 onroad is much smaller than the difference onroad. Put it this way you'll arrive at your destination no quicker in the ML.

While the LR/Jag 2.7 is indeed going into the Territory it won't be precisely the same engine, and all Discos are made in England where they'd want to reduce the number of options on the production line. Basically, Land Rover will be looking at how many 2.7s vs detuned 3.0s they can sell and decide on that whether it's commercially viable. The answer may be no, and if so it'd be a sad day for Aussie offroading Landie drivers.

Unless they keep the same brakes from the 2.7. Which knowing LR I doubt, why should they sart to listen now?

Originally Posted by rmp

DiscoWeb's summary is excellent.

As mentioned above, please everyone read the many other posts on this topic, and feel free to revive them if necessary, but that's as far as we want to take the 17" vs 19" argument here. Thank you.

I also agree the difference between the ML onroad and the D4 onroad is much smaller than the difference onroad. Put it this way you'll arrive at your destination no quicker in the ML.

While the LR/Jag 2.7 is indeed going into the Territory it won't be precisely the same engine, and all Discos are made in England where they'd want to reduce the number of options on the production line. Basically, Land Rover will be looking at how many 2.7s vs detuned 3.0s they can sell and decide on that whether it's commercially viable. The answer may be no, and if so it'd be a sad day for Aussie offroading Landie drivers.

Rmp - when you say detuned 3.0 are they talking a single turbo 3.0? If so AND (the big AND) if LR can keep to the same price as a 2.7 in changing to a 3.0 TD and leaving the 3.0TTD for the higher cost again, then that would be very sweet...

Cheers

Looks like D4 TD3.0 has around 155kw,& 520nm.The 3.0 as we know it is a S3.0,presume as said TD has one turbo.



And looks like 17"s are gone for good


Sorry mods.....

"The 11MY comes with 19" wheels ad standard now an the bigger discs. The 245ps has a different manifold too so is a back to factory upgrade I was told, not sure why they can't do it at the dealers though."

from:

DISCO3.CO.UK - View topic - D4 Power Upgrade and Locking Diff