Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 25

Thread: D4 2.7TDV6 and 3.0TDV6

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    58
    Total Downloaded
    0

    D4 2.7TDV6 and 3.0TDV6

    Hi people, First post. I have been lurking about for a few weeks and have searched through many posts, read FAQ etc.

    I am considering purchasing a D4 and cant find much info on how the D4 2.7 and 3.0 compare against each other for on road use.

    I would be using the vehicle for towing a van (2.5 ton) and don't anticipate a great deal of heavy off-road use. I have not had the opportunity of driving either of these vehicles yet so I thought I would ask if any member has done a comparison between the two.

    The D3 2.7TD could also be an option based on my intended use so I would be interested if anyone has compared the three vehicles... Thanks for any advice.


    Craig

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Coffs Harbour
    Posts
    504
    Total Downloaded
    0
    I can only suggest driving both and then start to make up your mind as to which will suit your needs.
    I admit I am biased as I have the 3.0 and is nothing short of being a fantastic vehicle.
    You have come to the right place as you have obviously decided you want a D3 or D4; now you are looking for information to narrow down your choice of models. There are many wise people on this forum who will give you very good advice.
    Hope you find a good vehicle.
    2012 Fuji White 3.0 D4, Rear view camera, Hi-line sound, E-diff, Xenon lights, ARB winch bar, Lightforce 240 50w HID. Brads sliders.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    18,616
    Total Downloaded
    0
    There is no doubt the 3.0 is the more capable vehicle engine power wise - it will clearly out perform the 2.7 which is no slouch itself. The issue is the extra $10-$15K extra for the 3.0 worth it.

    Also there are threads on this so if you do a google search on aulro they should show up.

    Garry
    REMLR 243

    2007 Range Rover Sport TDV6
    1977 FC 101
    1976 Jaguar XJ12C
    1973 Haflinger AP700
    1971 Jaguar V12 E-Type Series 3 Roadster
    1957 Series 1 88"
    1957 Series 1 88" Station Wagon

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    191
    Total Downloaded
    0
    I have had both 2.7 LR3 and 3.0 litre RRS.
    Engine wise the 3.0 litre engine is light years infront. Instant power with no lag. 600nm of torque within less than a second of opening the throttle.
    Its worth the money, no comparison.
    Regards
    Barryp

  5. #5
    SBD4's Avatar
    SBD4 is offline A Keeper of the TGO Gold Subscriber
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Bundeena
    Posts
    2,809
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Cheers,

    Sean

    “Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.” - Albert Einstein

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Leongatha
    Posts
    267
    Total Downloaded
    0

    To Do or Don't

    G-day Craig
    The wife & I looked into both these models & engine options when we were looking at replacing our TD5 Disco. We test drove both engines in both models.
    Discovery 3 & D4. The 3ltr was exceptionally smooth & responsive. The 2.7ltr which we were told by the dealer was a brand new complete engine replaced in this vehicle because of a total failure ( he would not elaborate further ) was coarse in comparison but still very impressive in performance to our TD5. What concerned me about the 2.7ltr was its use of belts for cam timing & there expense of replacement compared to the 3ltr using chains. In the end we went the other end of the spectrum & purchased a TDCI Defender. But thats a whole other story. I still think that if your budget allows for regular specialist servicing or you truly can do it yourself then either engine would be a pleasure to own.
    Good luck Hunting.
    Regards Chris.
    PS; or

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    191
    Total Downloaded
    0
    I think that the 3 Litre with chains is the petrol, I was referring to the 3 litre diesel with twin turbos, which still has rubber belts for cam timing unfortunately.
    No comparison between the 3 litre diesel and the 3 litre petrol!

    Regards
    Barryp

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    18,616
    Total Downloaded
    0
    There is no 3 litre petrol - 4 litre V6, 4.4 Litre V8 and now go fast V8
    REMLR 243

    2007 Range Rover Sport TDV6
    1977 FC 101
    1976 Jaguar XJ12C
    1973 Haflinger AP700
    1971 Jaguar V12 E-Type Series 3 Roadster
    1957 Series 1 88"
    1957 Series 1 88" Station Wagon

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Palmerston NT
    Posts
    292
    Total Downloaded
    0
    If cost isn't an issue go the 3l - the only advantage the 2.7l has other than cost is it could be argued to be better for offroad because the model allows for 17" rims - whereas the 3l will come with 19" with an 18" aftermarket option. I see that offroad performance isn't a big issue for you though.

    If cost is an issue, the 2.7l is still a great motor and does most things pretty effortlessly, including towing. Although I guess the extra low down torque of the 3l will be even better for towing

    They're an awesome towing vehicle.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    191
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Gary,
    Obvious blunder, of course the petrol is 4 litre.
    Confusing bit was the reference to chain cam drive by Bess!
    Regards
    Barryp

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Search AULRO.com ONLY!
Search All the Web!