Thread: S2 v S2A differences

No. Diesels are still 12volt too.

Diesel's don't go too bad in a shorty, but a bit slow in the long wheel bases.

The thing to remember, landies are not the quietest of vehicles at the best of times, the diesels make this much worse.

Depends on your usage, and you have a modern tourer. I'd probably stick with a petrol.

CC

In my area the diesels are quite rare, most have had their motors replaced with Holdens. This fate is not reserved solely for diesels, all LR engines seem to have been fair game for replacement, but the diesels and the 6 cylinders seem to have been replaced more often than the 4 cylinder petrol version.

It's always struck me as strange, because the tractors and machinery of the same era were largely diesel powered, so diesel fuel was on hand which should make it the preferred power source - the same reason why most farmers drive diesels now!

I guess warb the farmers probably stuck with the diesel, accepting any downside for it intended purpose. However what sells cars today probably was not what old diesels had back then, POWER. This alone probably inspired the transplant of an aged diesel to a holden donk in a second hand car or original car.
I'm not opposed to a diesel, however part of me likes the idea of having the same 2lt motor as the S1 to simplify knowledge and parts at my end. It sounds like a 2.25 petrol is not all that different anyway.
In the end either one shops for a long time looking for "the right car" in the right budget. Or accepts what they can live with. It's not like you go down the local dealer and pick and choose.

Originally Posted by Warb

In my area the diesels are quite rare, most have had their motors replaced with Holdens. This fate is not reserved solely for diesels, all LR engines seem to have been fair game for replacement, but the diesels and the 6 cylinders seem to have been replaced more often than the 4 cylinder petrol version.

Landrover engines were, in my experience, usually replaced by Holden engines because this could be done for much less than the cost of overhauling the existing engine. In addition it gave the promise of better performance (certainly better than the worn out engine) and readily available and cheap parts, plus an engine that all mechanics were familiar with - this last becoming important as sales of new Landrovers and numbers of dealers shrank.

The same applied to the diesels, with the increase in performance being larger, and petrol relatively cheap at the time. And the cost of overhauling the diesel was also much higher, and many mechanics and overhaulers were reluctant to touch diesels, especially unfamiliar pommy ones.

John

Originally Posted by Warb

....
It's always struck me as strange, because the tractors and machinery of the same era were largely diesel powered, so diesel fuel was on hand which should make it the preferred power source - the same reason why most farmers drive diesels now!

Except the LR 2 1/4 diesel was exceptionally poor performer, usually topping out at about 80KPH and were hopeless negotiating obstacles where momentum was required. Just as the diesel was getting up to speed and need to keep the revs up the governor would cut in and the Landy would be stuck in the middle of the mud etc.

Those Landys fitted with Perkins diesels were better performers than the OEM variety.

Originally Posted by Lotz-A-Landies

Except the LR 2 1/4 diesel was exceptionally poor performer, usually topping out at about 80KPH and were hopeless negotiating obstacles where momentum was required. Just as the diesel was getting up to speed and need to keep the revs up the governor would cut in and the Landy would be stuck in the middle of the mud etc.

Those Landys fitted with Perkins diesels were better performers than the OEM variety.

Thanks Dian, you and VK3UTE have just sold me on NOT getting a diesel.

My diesel goes like a rocket to 75kph! and with all the noise it feels like your doing 130kph.

I still love her, even if she's a bit slow