Jump to content
If you value this forum's future please support us
the_mouse_man

Transition from td5 to Puma.

Recommended Posts

When the transition from the td5 engined Defender to the Puma based version was made what was changed regarding the transmission/Drive train. I presume the gearbox was a new version but what else if anything in the drive train was altered?

 

And does any body have any comments on td5 v puma relaibility/performance.

 

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gearbox was changed to the Ford/Getrag MT82 6 speed. Transfer box was changed to the 1.2:1 version. The diffs/axles all stayed the same as far as I know. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From driving both TD5 and 2.2-Puma-engined 90s I must admit i didn't like the Puma much.

Noisier than a TD5. There was a noticeable gearlever-vibration at idle

Though it's got a 6-speed box the Puma ratios are wierd: 1st feels much too low for normal use - I found myself pulling-away in 2nd most of the time. You might need 1st if you were pulling away when towing a heavily-laden trailer though.

At the top-end, 6th seems much too high: OK if you just want to bimble along a lightly-trafficked motorway at a steady 65 and save fuel, but not if you're playing with the BMWs and Sprinter-vans in the middle/outside lanes of the M4 on a hectic Friday night.

The gearbox action on the Puma had a bit more feel and less slop in it than the TD5.

The Puma seemed to have a narrower rev-range than the TD5 - OK, it's not as peaky as the TD5 (the variable-nozzle turbo helps deliver a flatter torque-curve) but it just didn't feel as enthusiastic to respond as the TD5.

[The Puma-90 in question has around 25,000 miles on the clock, the TD5 140,000 so both can be counted as properly loosened-up]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bash my knee getting into Puma Defenders,the dash sticks out too much and makes the cab claustrophobic - I'm  only 5'7"... Puma gearboxes cause me more trouble than the older R380 in TD5's,and I have diagnosed too many failed rear diffs on Puma's often at the 24,000m service the oil in the axle is full of metal.

The Puma engine is a cheap throwaway heap of junk, the TD5 is a far better long term prospect,but parts are expensive.(Cylinder heads mainly come to mind) But at least they are worth fixing.

The 200/300TDI's were the golden era...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Tanuki said:

At the top-end, 6th seems much too high: OK if you just want to bimble along a lightly-trafficked motorway at a steady 65 and save fuel, but not if you're playing with the BMWs and Sprinter-vans in the middle/outside lanes of the M4 on a hectic Friday night.

I'm not sure ANY Defender was designed to do this!

Any more than any other farmer's vehicle

Edited by Lightning
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Lightning said:

I'm not sure ANY Defender was designed to do this!

Any more than any other farmer's vehicle

When I put a 3.9 in my Stage One and raised the gearing, it hummed along in the fast lane!  Fine if you didn't have to take any quick, evasive action....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My 90TD5 is happy hunting the BMWs on motorways at 75-85MPH... Bilstein gas-shocks deal with any stability issues [they've got an outline of the Nurburgring on them so they must be good!] and so long as I only need to stop *once* from such speeds the brakes are up to it too.

As a "21st century Defender" engine I honestly consider the TD5 to be the best - shame that parts-availability is starting to get worryingly problematic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, gerrymc123 said:

Isn't the Puma engine the same as in a Ford transit van?

Essentially, yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, the 2.2 and 2.4 engines are lovely in the Transits :huh:...my 120k transit 2.2 sounds like the proverbial bag of spanners...I'm waiting with baited breath for its catastrophic failure. The 256k td5 in the new project purred like a kitten in comparison.

At work we've had numerous failings from cranks, to cams and timing chain failures although mainly on the 2.4 145 version. 

 

And lets face it, as dirty diesels go an unsilenced td5 sounds lovely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Scotts90 said:

Yes, the 2.2 and 2.4 engines are lovely in the Transits :huh:...my 120k transit 2.2 sounds like the proverbial bag of spanners...I'm waiting with baited breath for its catastrophic failure. The 256k td5 in the new project purred like a kitten in comparison.

At work we've had numerous failings from cranks, to cams and timing chain failures although mainly on the 2.4 145 version. 

 

And lets face it, as dirty diesels go an unsilenced td5 sounds lovely.

The transits and Rangers just don't sound very nice, even when new. The same obviously going for the Puma defenders. 

On the other hand... a TD5 has to be one of the best sounding engines in the world :wub:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Too much electrickery, give me clockwork any day 😆

Mo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must admit the simplicity of the tdi where only one electrical input is required to keep it running has its benefits. Still, as things go the td5 isn't the most complicated setup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now




×