Td5 Vs Puma Economy (Gav)

There is definitely an advantage in older diesel injection. The new ones are very sensitive to water. Cheers

I wonder if having a DPF on the 2.2ltr and not having one on the 2.4ltr puma makes the difference in getting better fuel economy in the 2.4ltrs??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DiscoMick

Just did the latest calculation on the Defender and it showed 10.9 l/100kms over 475 kms, about half of it highway cruising. Can't complain about that.
My BIL is only getting 16 out of his 80 series!
For comparison, our Mazda 2 did 5.6 on a cruise to Sydney and back.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dorian

Towing my 15ft Al boat on the hiway with kayak on the roof racks my old D2 would do 10.5l/100L day in day out. Towing same rig with 2.2 Puma I've never been better than 11/100, a couple of times around 12.5.
Having just been without Dorian for 5 weeks, getting new injectors and HP pump, I can guarantee that the 2.2 is a fair bit more sensitive than the TD5.
Two weeks before Easter Got a bit of water in the fuel, engine ran for 1/2 the tank, a few error lights, limp mode and then new fuel injection system
Did similar in D2, ran rough for about 50 K, realised the problem, drove 5 k home, dropped the fuel, refuelled with clean and off I went. No further problems. A year after that I ran it on petrol, blew the head gasket but no problems with the fuel system.

fair enough to say that I drove the Puma a lot further with water in the fuel but the difference in the outcome was huge.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robmacca

I wonder if having a DPF on the 2.2ltr and not having one on the 2.4ltr puma makes the difference in getting better fuel economy in the 2.4ltrs??

---

I,m pretty sure none of the 2.2s in Aust have DPF. Mine certainly doesn't, just EGR but the TD5 has that as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dorian

I,m pretty sure none of the 2.2s in Aust have DPF. Mine certainly doesn't, just EGR but the TD5 has that as well.

---

Wow, that's interesting as I was told ALL 2.2ltrs had the DPF.... wonder how u would find out for sure ??

My 2012 Puma doesnt have the DPF either. I think it was the MY14 models onwards that had them fitted but I will stand corrected if I am wrong. Mine does 11-12 L/100 atm. Running in a new long range tank so we will see if i can get 1000km out of the tank

Nope. No DPF on a '15 [emoji3]

I've got a theory on fuel economy,the Tdi gets good economy but it does feel steeper grade hills so you tend to sit back and let it clamber over,the TDCi doesn't feel hills so you leave it in 6th and race over,same for cruising,the Tdi is comfortable around 100-110km/hr,the TDCi any speed so you do any speed,like 120,with a camper on the back[bigsmile1].For that reason the Td5 and more so TDCi will never match the Tdi for economy,thats my theory anyway.

Just changing course here slightly then......

If there's no DPF until probably the last few, then, other than the engine size, what is the difference between the 2, if any?

Is the 2.4lt ECU more easily remapped than the 2.2? Does the 2.2lt ECU have more security in it that makes it harder to remap (if it can be done at all)?

MY 2015,..No DPF Filter and combined economy approx 10l per 100km

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robmacca

Just changing course here slightly then......

If there's no DPF until probably the last few, then, other than the engine size, what is the difference between the 2, if any?

Is the 2.4lt ECU more easily remapped than the 2.2? Does the 2.2lt ECU have more security in it that makes it harder to remap (if it can be done at all)?

---

Well funny enough the 2.2 replaced the 2.4 but the 2.2 is the older engine,don't know why they changed to be honest.