Printable View
I find the 300Tdi auto gets away from the lights quite quickly when the turbo comes on and that doesn't take long. In fact, it runs away from a lot of car drivers. There are few drivers out there who keep up with our 300Tdi D1 at the lights (when not towing anything :) )Quote:
Originally Posted by Taz
Exactly!Quote:
Originally Posted by loanrangie
MY wife hates driving my P38A but loves the D2 and even the D1. Go figure as the Yanks say.Quote:
Originally Posted by justinc
I have a 2003 disco with the TD5 auto ACE etc. I also have a 300 TDi defender. It has all been said before, horses for courses. Electronics will allways out perform, get better fuel economy/consumption, better reliability, smoother etc etc. If you can afford it go the newer vehicle. This issue was which motor is better was alive and well when the 200 TDi was the norm and the 300 came along. There have been a few throwbacks to the Isuzu but at the end of the day it is not going to be the motor that is going to let you down, it is going to be a stuffed aircon, broken shock absorber, holed radiator or some alternator failure. If you do breakdown out in the bush, you should not be out there by yourself anyway so there will be some one to help you out even if it is a tow.
The newer the vehicle the less worn the bits will be, go with what you can afford. All that said I just hope I never have to change an injector on the TD5. :-))
This is a bit like comparing the 4.6 P38A with the 3.5/3.9 Classic RR. Todays electronics can make or break a car.
My '86 Classic had a bored and stroked 3.5 which took it out to 4.6 litres. My current heavier and new 4.6 RR consistently outperforms the old classic for fuel consumption. I know this because I have logged every drop of fuel I've put into the two of them since I owned them.
Believe it or not, but I regularly get 13 litres/100 km out of the 4.6 petrol P38A on highway. However, having the roof bars on can increase that by 1-2 litres/100 km.
I had one of the owners of KLR Auto in the car one day and I pointed to the dash display - it was showing 9 litres/100 km on the freeway. He was amazed. (I didn't show him the 30 litres/100 km when I was pulling the trailer loaded with a tonne of fence posts :D )
Now would I own a Td5. Probably not.
Thats all I wanted to hear, some sort of conformation from someone else with some sort of proof and a reasonable explanation as to why.Quote:
Originally Posted by incisor
:D
From the original LR owners handbook for the Disco 1 :
on Page 147 - General Data Section.
FUEL CONSUMPTION
300TDi ( all in l/100km )
Simulated urban cycle .... Manual 8.6 Auto 9.3
Constant speed 90km/h .... M 6.6 A 6.4
Constand speed 120km/h ....M 10.0 A 9.4
V8i ( off topic but just for interest sake )
Simulated urban cycle .... Manual 18.2 Auto 19.6
Constant speed 90km/h .... M 10.5 A 10.5
Constand speed 120km/h ....M 13.4 A 13.4
Cheers
Why does the diesel auto do better at constant speed? Is it higher geared?Quote:
Originally Posted by waynep
best i've got out of 300 tdi disco is 9.5lt per 100 km when going up to rainbow beach on the highway. I do have a bull bar,roof racks and wider all terrain tyres on though. Interestingly though whilst fully loaded and towing 1.5 tonne van i was still able to maintain 13lt per 100km and that was whilst going up to Warwick. Hills are a big killer though as lack of power makes the motor have to work really hard. 145 km in a D1 mcrover you must be the stig, i've wound it up to 135 once and never again far too unstable at that speed barn doors are not meant to go that fast.
Good suspention helps and most of the time we sat around the 135kmh.Quote:
Originally Posted by dhard
Big wide straight road with no hills in sight and all you could see was road and dirt.
I wound it up to see how fast it would go and then to see if it would hold it easilly or not.
It held it fine until the road started on a slight incline and it dropped back to 135kmh so I kept it around that most of the time.