Dave64

Bowie69, Thanks for that, did as you suggested, no drama, better than removing the whole shooting match, Cheers, Dave64

HI All, Just a general purpose query on the water pump boss on the TD200 engine (12J ??). The actual boss which has the LEFT HAND thread for the viscuous fan! Because I am running a large electric fan and the offset of the fan itself is too large for my engine instillation, would be nice if I could shorten the threaded part, would give me an extra inch clearance between the water pump and the radiator itself. I should note this is NOT in a L/R or R/R ! I have turned the radiator on its side, 45 degrees fits in nicely width and height wise, up for a new core, so first question would be can you fit a 4 or 5 core to the brass tanks? I also know that I have to swap the inlet and outlet spouts, flus the brass filler plug and the line to the header tank, from one side to the other. Shouldn't be too much drama have a radiator bloke who made me something similar on another 4WD, albeit a few years ago. He said if it's a brass (it is) or copper one, can be done. So what's involved in removing the actual threaded boss? My workshop book tells you little about it. If I can remove it and fit it in the lathe, I could turn the thing down myself. Anyone ripped one apart? Thanks, Dave64

Thanks, Dave64

Thanks Dave64

Nonimouse wrote:-"Can you not mount it on the wing?" As in one of my replies above, it(200 engine) is in a small cab over truck, very confined, there is no "wing". Dave64

Yeah, can always do that, fair distance for the turbo to drag the air from though. Could always be helped a bit by a '" Ram Horn", one of those Donaldson type , but you have to be doing fifty km's an hour to jam the air down into the turbo. Cabin away at the moment. Dave64

All good and valuable info Guys. Thanks! As I pointed out previously, the 200 engine is going into a project vehicle (a small cab-over truck) where the only realistic place to mount the air cleaner is either by one of those tapered conical looking filters directly to the turbo inlet, mount the original canister type facing straight downwards, reluctant for reasons previously stated, OR maybe one of those rectangular box affairs similar to a 300 engine, mounted on some sort of frame sitting on top of the engine. Engine hatch would have to be modified for that. Keep scratching around, will come up with something. Cheers, Dave64

Yeah, might give one a try. There's a device available to suit a small diesel up to 2.5 litre, which is a simple centrifugal canister with a very fine washable element in it, which you can run your breather pipe into, through this device, then into the filter housing. Have ordered one so can try it whilst the cab still off the chassis. May be worthwhile looking at, cost around the A$35 mark, easily fitted and just may stop the air/vapour/oil being sucked through the turbo. Only thing I was a bit worried was how those conical type do on a diesel engine. Vehicle unlikely to be going on a a dirt road, or operating under similar conditions. Did have room where it could have been installed facing directly downwards, but would mean that the cartridge would have to have been removed from the bottom of the canister, also would be likely to pick up spray off the road. Easier to leave her parked up if it's wet! Dave64

Thanks, Snagger. I was particularly interested in those conical type filters which clamp directly to the turbo inlet. Not a replacement filter that went inside the existing canister, I am going to have to rethink just how I'm going to go about it. I'm wondering about the cost of throwing those conical types away, even though you can clean them somewhat. The standard air filter cartridge goes for about A$ 20-25 a throw, think those 3" conicals around the $75, but you should get at least 12 months out of one. Still leaves me with what to do with the breather pipe, could return it direct to the inlet manifold, maybe put some sort of small canister which could be washed out when servicing. Dave64

Thanks for a well balanced set of replies, Guys. Snagger, that was one of my worries, where the breather returms air/vapour to the original canister type. Any chance of putting up a snap showing where you hooked yours up and how you used the finned piece? Much appreciated, Dave64

HI ALL, Just wondering if anyone's had any success, or what they think of those "K&N" type conical filters? My project is going to be cramped around the engine area using the standard air canister that was on the original engine. Had a bit of a look at those aforementioned filters, easy to mount just about anywhere, but don't know just how efficient they would be on a diesel, just point out this engine in a non L/R chassis. Whatever air filter arrangement would have to be very compact, even thought of a single oil bath similar to the old dual Commer arrangement (just use one) that ran up the back of the cab, or an oil bath that sat on top of the manifold like the old Gardiner engines. But height may be a problem with one of those. Dave64

Thanks, makes sense to me. Dave64

Thanks for your view(s), It was more academic than anything really. I was interested to know just what the three different outputs were (a) As a normal TD! 200 12L (b) Without the intercooler but retain the turbo (c) without either the turbo or intercooler as in the case of these blokes fitting the 12L into earlier versions of Landrovers. As yet I haven't seem figures published, lots of "should make xxxx HP and zzzz torque" but nothing solid. My project ISN'T a Land Rover product, only using the engine, which is in exceptional nick (the body rotted away around it) and I had a use for it and so used it but running it derated. I'll take that on board about the injector cleaner, certainly wouldn't hurt to run a bottle through it. Vehicle drivable but can't take it out on the road, can't give it a decent run up and down the driveway. Thanks, Dave64

Spoke to a diesel injector bloke couple of days ago, asked about symptoms and explained that engine has been sitting around for a few years, although I have been starting it at least once a month, let it run up to operating temp at about 1750rpm, and was making "fuel" smoke, dark but not excessive. He suggested it is more a waxing in the fuel problem, reckons ripping the injectors out first and then see what transpires. I have no idea how many miles are on the motor, or when the pump was last done as I inherited it out of the vehicle. Injector bloke says we do the squirters first and try tweaking the pump back a touch, if still "Smoky", then have a look at the pump. Seems a fair call to me. He also reckons that it would be a bit of a waste in this application, to remove the Turbo, Intercooler not so much. At one time I considered installing a full size intercooler in front of the radiator itself, plenty of room, get the thing going first. Dave64

Thanks for the replies, Men.will shoot twodoorgaz a P/M as suggested. Dave64

Thanks Guys Just read all that and he suggests "around 75HP" but doesn't go any deeper into proposed torque figures.

Hi All, Know this is an old post, but I only came onto it by pure chance. I too have often wondered just what the results would be as per twodoorgaz's project. I too have a project very similar to that he's doing where I neither need nor require either the Turbocharger or the intercooler. My own thoughts are/were that the main points of Gaz's thrust were being treated just a little disdainfully. I'm with him in many ways, he posted a topic asking for input, which was readily responded to but to be fair, as an outsider some of the comments were a little offhand. He openly stated that this is what he wanted to achieve, he was prepared to go about it in such a way and be damned with the consequences! Can't ask for anything straighter than that! Quite a few of responses were from people whom i respect on this forum, have gleaned some good info myself to suit my own particular project. I did notice that the topic seemed to have just dispersed into thin air with no apparent confirmation, after about three pages. Does this mean that consensus couldn't be reached? I for one would like to know if twodoor gaz and his "Project Gemini" ever came to fruition and just how successful it was, especially relating to derating the actual engine. I'm one of these blokes who like to not only think outside the box, but also enjoy seeing others doing the same. When a lot younger I was one of those who would race out and buy the latest "hottest" gear available to bolt onto my Yank Iron. Learnt after a while that sometimes it is not ONLY about squeezing the maximum HP out of a known volume, nowadays it is about a thing called reliability and longevity. Unless I'm mistaken or reading it wrong, this was the main gist of twodoorgaz's letter in the first place. He openly stated, "it's my money, my time, it's a lifetime project and I'm gonna give it a shot"!. Well, all I can do is agree with him and say more power to your arm! Like a lot of forums, sometimes people get sidetracked from the original topic, that's not to say it's not entertaining, but often the main thrust of the query gets bogged down. So, again I ask his question. The basic guts of it seems to be, turf the turbo, the intercooler, reset the pump back to an N/A setting and let the HP/torque figures fall where they may. AND, nobody had came up with expected figures. Or I missed that as well? Cheers to All Dave64

Hi All, Really only a general question and one that you blokes should be able to confirm/deny pretty easily. 12L engine came from a manual trans vehicle. Just seems to be a minor disparity in published BHP and Torque figures. I'm working out of a Haynes Discovery Manual covering 1989 to 1998. The figures given in the book are as follows:- 111 BHP @ 4000RPM, peak Torque of 196ft/lbs @1800 RPM. Figures I gleaned from this forum are given as (Disco) 113 BHP @4250-- 195ft/lbs@ 1800RPM---------(Defender) 109BHP@ 3900RPM--188ft/lb @ 1800RPM. Really not going to worry me too much, but in my application I want to run the engine without an intercooler, at least for a while. Going by several reports of blokes retrofitting the 200TDI 12L engine into earlier L/R's, doesn't really hurt them and you can leave your fuel settings as is (i.e. std as in TDI) I can't even remember just where I got these figures from, perhaps here or somewhere on the net, but these are the ones I copied down for a TDI less the intercooler:- 105 HP and 175 ft/lb torque. (I'm assuming would be at same RPM as TDI). So, if the figures in the Haynes manual are to be taken seriously, as well as the ones for running NO intercooler, stand to lose 6 bhp BUT 21ft/lb of torque. Not much of a loss in gross HP, but 21 ft/lb of torque is worth considering. Still way above and beyond the original engines figures and obviously would benefit by replacing an intercooler at a later date. Probably have to be custom made to fit in with original vehicles radiator. Not insurmountable by any means, ways and means of working your way around most problems. Like to know your thoughts, Dave64

Nonimouse, Thanks for your reply, have taken note. As it is at the moment, running the stock standard 200TDI canister type air cleaner, with a short 2+1/2" exhaust with virtually full flow muffler, Had considered going up to a 3" from the first elbow (about 10" from turbo), out under the chassis, but can do that anytime. Was given the engine quite a few years ago as a project, so am unsure just how many KM's are on the injectors, probably wouldn't hurt to have the pump looked at, at the same time. Engine has virtually cost me nothing except a few "O"rings and seals. Starts very easily, even in the dead of winter here , only gets down to zero and being under cover, requires no Glow plug or any help of any kind. Always fires first touch of the starter, holds good oil pressure even when warmed up to 160-180 F, around the 45lb/sq in, so am reluctant to touch the engine itself, pump and injectors probably yes. Thanks again, Dave64

Hi Maverik, Thanks again for the heads up. Since last posting have been doing a bit of reading up on the 200TDI, certainly getting some varied views! Reason I started looking into it is that the vehicle its in, is undrivable at the moment, I do go out once every couple of weeks and fire her up, let it warm the engine up, check for leaks etc. One thing grabbed my attention at first was the amount of smoke generated when either at low, or high idle, but if the throttle is set up to run around the 1800-2000RPM, once the engine warms, the smoke seems to lessen somewhat. Could be simply needs a good run on the road to "blow the cobwebs out", i.e. put under a load. Going by what I have been reading, it would seem that around the 2700RPM seems to be the "sweet spot" for these engines. I know blokes say they will rev out to over 4 grand, but my application and what gearing I expect of it, 3000RPM MAX would suit me down to the ground. I originally plumped for 2500 RPM "change points" with the transmission (NP435) behind it, but a few blokes are telling me I may get good economy but after a while it will start to "gum up". Don't really believe that, bought a 3 litre TDI Prado brand new in 2004, drove it conservatively and now 16 years and well over 200,000Km still as sprightly as ever, with no seemingly adverse problems. That particular vehicle has been driven like that since new, I'm the only one who does drive it and a lifetime of driving trucks on interstate taught me a few fundamentals. So, unless that "tinkering" with the boost pin thingo has any benefits for a smoky engine at idle (I'm hearing and reading the opposite!). i think I will leave it alone (at least for the time being!). The other thing I didn't mention is that at this stage I will probably run this vehicle as just straight turbocharged, WITHOUT the intercooler. Again, going by what I have read by some blokes over your way who have dropped these 200 TDI engines into earlier L/R's, they do quite well WITHOUT the intercooler and sometimes even as naturally aspirated. AND, without major adjustments to the injector pump. Personally, I would try just the turbo, but without the intercooler and leave all the fuel settings alone. Cheers, Dave64

Thanks, Maverik. Bit further research required before tampering. In my application, maybe "If it ain't broken, don't fix it !" Dave 64

Thanks anyway, only ran it long enough to test for leaks etc. Dave

"No, that would not cause that problem. If the boost compensation diaphragm failed, you would have low power. In your first photo, it does not look like anything is connected to the fuel return pipe on the injection pump." Photo taken when fitting removed to get correct size return line, which has since been re-installed, Leaks stopped. Engine is only sitting in chassis, so can't test it under any type of "Load" conditions. When started after new return line installed, also added boost gauge, went to flight revs (no load) turbo pumped manifold pressure up to around 7-8 lb, (what's normal?), blew what I would call excessive smoke, didn't sustain that, shut it down after idling for a short time. Can actually smell "raw" fuel, so maybe the injectors need looking at. Pump had already been done not long before I inherited this engine. Dave64

Fitted a new excess fuel return line, whatever the problem seems to have stopped leaking, fair amount of fuel being returned though. Gave it a big bootful and just about choked myself on the smoke. Reading on another forum over here that a bloke over the West (Australia) had similar symptoms and he posted a link back to this one. Seems that there is a diaphragm affair on top of the pump which monitors the fuel and when the turbo is working under load, meters the fuel. If I have this right, IF the diaphragm goes bad, it can let fuel back into the system causing "overfuelling". The link to this forum was regarding a 19J engine, looking at the photos, mine being a 12L has a different pump. What looks like a diaphragm housing sits on top facing upwards. Don't know if the 12L suffers from similar symptoms as a 19J as I'm unfamiliar with them. Easy enough to get at, haven't taken the top cover off yet but maybe could have something to do with the initial problem??

Thanks! Dave