Thread: Modified 300tdi v standard td5 power?

Designed by Land Rover - Approved by BMW. I like the sound of that endorsement. (-;


David
'02 Td5 Disco
'08 BMW 320d

Originally Posted by Lionel

What is your evidence for this statement?

All the information I have been able to find is that Les Wilkins & his team at Rover
did all the development work for this engine. It was originally supposed to be made in 4 cyl (2.0l for the Freelander) & 6cyl (3.0l for the Range Rover) versions as well, but BMW canned these versions after they purchased Landrover from British Aerospace because they competed with BMW's own diesels in these sizes.

BMW approved completion of development on the TD5, but the only help they gave was financial support - not technical, as far as I can gather. The design philosophy of the TD5 is closely related to previous engines produced by Landrover - very different to the BMW's, which are also excellent engines.

Cheers,

Lionel

I have read from several sources that BMW improved the design shortly prior to production. This included incorporating split-fracture Conrods and an improved camshaft design which were both manufactured by BMW and supplied to LR.

Originally Posted by isuzurover

I would like to see any facts you have to back this conjecture. There are TD5s turning up with 400k and 500k km on the clock which have never had the head off. Very few 300Tdi's on the other hand seem to make it past 250k km without needing a head and/or head gasket replacement.

There is only 6 years difference in age between the oldest 300tdi and the oldest TD5.

Of course it is conjecture. Would it be possible to compare the combined mileage of every singe TDI vs every single TD5 after both motors are no longer on the road? This would be the only way to settle it.

If you have a crystal ball my bet would be on the TDI, because from all sensible deductions the engine is more the more likely to get flogged and rebuilt and then flogged again.

Consider:

• The reasons the British military kept the TDI over the TD5 - not just because they could be disabled by EMP.
• Parts of the world where servicing simplicity/cost decides longevity, and where fuel quality can be very poor.
• The ability of these motors to run bio/alternative fuels.

Anyway, just my 2c however irrelevant to the OP.



Right I'm off to clean up my deefer - its covered in glorious holiday filth!

Originally Posted by manic

• The reasons the British military kept the TDI over the TD5 - not just because they could be disabled by EMP.

Actually mostly it was because they (Solihull) couldn't electronically 'quieten' the TD5.


Land Rover Australia did
And then Ford (PAG) took over and canned Military Vehicles.

Currently holed up in a cabin at the Birdsville caravan park after crossing the Simpson Desert.

The 'unreliable' 300TDi cruised through the desert dunes without an issue. Didn't get stuck once, rolled up Big Red without a care in the world (first time) and averaged 12.8 L/100 from Mt Dare to Birdsville loaded to the hilt.

Didn't overheat (remarkable I know ), didn't lack for power on any dune (equally remarkable ), didn't use a drop of oil, do a head gasket or use a lot of diesel.

Fancy that!

Bumped into a couple of Puma 130s on a salt flat between a couple of dunes which was cool.

Saw plenty of 200 Series yobs tearing up the tracks in their unbreakable piles of puss which seems to be standard fare in the outback these days. One was even towing a boat through and not giving a damn about what he did to the tracks. Was all a bit of joke for them.

There are 4wders and then there are Toyota owners.

Good to hear Steane, hope to do it in the future myself
cheers Gerald

My Dad has a TD5 D2 and my modified 300 D1 EATS it...

There's something quite wrong with your dads Td5 then.
Although.
Dave has suggested that a 300tdi can get up to stock Td5 levels.
Is your dad's Td5 chipped? Auto vs Manual? Specs on yours?