Cheap TD5 Defenders - a good deal - or not?

[joe1]

Having not looked at values in the last few years I was surprised to see some early-ish (2001, 2002)  TD5s on offer around £4k - which these days is cheaper than a decent 300tdi equivalent. Obviously there are the usual structural defender issues to be aware of at that price point, and warning lights may be on, and there may be the odd gearbox issue, however the basic condition seems to have been light road only use with bodies and interiors that are generally in a far superior state to the older 300's.

From my pov though TD5 engines are the big money / reliability problem in what possibly looks like an otherwise attractive deal - if the head fuel galleries haven't already self destructed, or worse, (both 10p and 15p)  then they soon will, and I would want to remove that unreliability aspect. So I'd be thinking about either a Spanish AMC head (budget £1400), or convert the lump to 300tdi with 300 input shaft for the gearbox (budget cost of donor Disco). The other option of course is to use the TD5 as is until it goes bang and then do one of the above - but you'd never really know were you where with that last option. So would you buy one?   

[Tanuki]

Whatever you're buying, look at overall condition. Any 15-year-old car can be a total heap if it's been neglected.

 

I run a 2001 90TD5, owned from new so I know all its history.  Now at 155K miles.  It's had a set of copper injector-washers, the cylinder-head injector-loom's been replaced, and the in-tank fuel-pump too. But - unlike a TDi it's not needed regular cambelt/tensioner service work because it has a chain. So I reckon what I've spent on TD5-specific repairs I've saved on cambelt-replacement costs.

Personally, having driven 200/300TDIs and TD5s (and Pumas) I prefer the TD5 - it revs a lot more-freely and eagerly than any of the others (65 in 3rd, great for fast-twisty-road work) and the DMF takes away a lot of the nasty Diesel-rattle at idle/low speed and is easier on the gearbox too.. Can't see why anyone would want a clockwork injection-system when they have the option to get proper 21st-century electronics to do the job. The TD5 at least lets you read out error-codes *before* you start spending money on replacement parts.

 

The idea of downgrading a TD5 to a 300TDi just seems strange to me: maintainability/parts-availability's going to be worse [though it has to be admitted that genuine TD5 parts-availability from official LR dealers isn't good either these days!].  Buy a good TD5, look after it, and it'll last.

 

 

Edited September 15, 2018 by Tanuki

[Dan D90]

4K for a decent TD5 seems cheap to me, I must have viewed a dozen defenders before I purchased mine, all of them were over 4K and all of the has rust issues, either on the chassis or the bulkhead.

If something brakes why not just fix it when/if it does? What do you plan using it for that you are worried about reliability?

[joe1]

Fair points. I agree that when the TD5s are running they are pretty good with lots of smooth torquey pulling power. I ran one such engine - it never overheated, coolant temp was always where it should be - seemed like a great engine, until one day it dumped fuel in the sump. Injector seals were done, and it still happened, so I got rid rather than get into the inevitable a) endless searching for a good head or b) paying out shed loads of cash for a new head. Once bitten! My point is not that TD5s are not good engines when they're running well, but to me they will always have an edge of unpredictability as the mileage creeps up. And I like to be able to schedule 'major' (ie£££) work so I can plan around it, partly because I don't see why any vehicle should eat a huge percentage of its value on a single repair, and partly because I don't like vehicle maintenance requirements to suddenly dominate my schedules. And yes fair point also that there may be a nice shiny body sitting on top of a 'family owned' rusty bulkhead and chassis - still, good paint jobs and decent interiors are probably as costly as chassis / bulkhead repairs. I'll still keep an eye out for these 'cheap' TD5s

[Bowie69]

21 minutes ago, joe1 said:

partly because I don't see why any vehicle should eat a huge percentage of its value on a single repair

Welcome to modern vehicle ownership.

[Scotts90]

Ok, so if it's cheap and got a td5 lump it's a ticking time bomb but if it's cheap with a 300tdi it's not? The prices of td5 engines are less than 200/300tdi units these days and if a 300 needs a head then the downtime will be similar. You also have the same problems when trying to find a decent second hand unit regardless of variant. Personally I think the td5 is a great engine well suited to the defender and discovery alike.

As Bowie mentioned nothing vaguely modern is cheap to repair and if you baulk at a td5 then go and have a look at tdv6 repairs....

[dailysleaze]

300Tdis also have better economy. I would run a Td5 but only a 15p and as late a model as I could get.

[Lightning]

65mph in third in a Defender TD5? Good grief.

You can get a good Defender TD5 in the £5-8,000 range if you look at private sales and generally not on Ebay.

As prices can be a bit silly on there, although they don’t sell if you look at completed listings.

Almost all “sold” are in the £5-10,000 range.

[monkie]

The arguments of why would you want to put to one side - legally speaking, are you even allowed to down grade Td5 engine to a 300Tdi from an emissions point of view? I've got it in my head that you are not, but I don't know where this has come from. I think a Td5 is Euro III and a 300 Tdi is Euro II or even Euro I.....?

I've never had a Td5, but I understand that the fears over poor reliability of electronic diesel fuel systems turned out to be misplaced. The reality as I see it no matter whether it is a Tdi, Td5 or even a puma they are all getting on abit - it totally depends on how it has been looked after which is often a leap of faith with a second hand car.

[Scotts90]

2 hours ago, dailysleaze said:

300Tdis also have better economy. I would run a Td5 but only a 15p and as late a model as I could get.

Does anyone buy a defender on grounds of fuel economy? I think we all buy them safe in the knowledge that most foreign 4x4s can out perform them on the mpg stakes. My td5 was better on fuel than the tdi but not by a huge margin.

[dailysleaze]

No, but if we're talking about money then economy is a consideration.

[joe1]

On 9/16/2018 at 8:40 PM, monkie said:

legally speaking, are you even allowed to down grade Td5 engine to a 300Tdi from an emissions point of view?

Interesting - hadn't thought of the emissions angle, but I'm not sure an mot tester would apply different criteria to a TD5 than a TDi - might be a d be ifferent result if the original engine had a DPF and the replacement engine didn't. Would an averagely worn TD5 engine be any better/worse than a reasonable condition TDi (on the basis that if a conversion was done it wouldnt be done with a smoky worn TDi)?

[joe1]

On 9/16/2018 at 6:22 PM, Bowie69 said:

Welcome to modern vehicle ownership.

Lol, That reminds me of a consumer complaint I read from a guy about his £10,000 gearbox replacement on his RR Evoque at 60k miles. It was 3 months out of warranty, with all servicing done by JLR. A very modern vehicle indeed.

[joe1]

On 9/16/2018 at 7:00 PM, Scotts90 said:

The prices of td5 engines are less than 200/300tdi units these days

Not sure about that. Looking just at remanufactured heads though, Turners quote £546inc for a TDi and £1350inc for a TD5. 

[muddy]

IMHO the td5 is the best engine lr ever made, perhaps a sorted rover v8 is a nicer lump but you are never going to achieve similar economy if thats a major factor(if so don't buy a landcover) they can be made reasonably powerful without becoming too thirsty or unreliable and are revvy and light making for a nice driving experience.

buying a td5 gets you many other refinments in the way of gauges and tank ect.

 

 

[Scotts90]

16 minutes ago, joe1 said:

Not sure about that. Looking just at remanufactured heads though, Turners quote £546inc for a TDi and £1350inc for a TD5. 

Second hand  200/300 units are making up to £1k if eBay is to be believed, td5 units between £5-600, as with all pre-owned you're taking an educated gamble. Think simmonites were advertising remanufactured 2/300 units for just under £8k. Td5 short block with new crank/rebored etc and a new fully built  AMC head from turners will set you back about £4.5k. 

My td5 is sitting just shy of a quarter million miles...if it needs a head and a rebore then so be it. At 250k with unknown servicing it's done ok, still purrs well!

[monkie]

9 hours ago, joe1 said:

Interesting - hadn't thought of the emissions angle, but I'm not sure an mot tester would apply different criteria to a TD5 than a TDi - might be a d be ifferent result if the original engine had a DPF and the replacement engine didn't. Would an averagely worn TD5 engine be any better/worse than a reasonable condition TDi (on the basis that if a conversion was done it wouldnt be done with a smoky worn TDi)?

Here is a disclaimer - I don't really know as I have not done this, but I think I have heard of this somewhere so I am advising caution and look into this further before doing anything or maybe someone who knows for sure can clarify if this is true or not:

You've kind of said it yourself with the DPF, that is just another way of meeting certain emissions criteria for diesel engines, but it isn't the only way a diesel engine can be made to meet emissions regulations of the time of introduction for that engine.

I don't think you'd get as far as an MOT, its the paperwork side when you register the engine swap. The Td5 was introduced to meet stricter regulations on emissions than the Tdi. I reckon when you try to register the change on your V5 is when you would potentially run into trouble. I would speak with the DVLA before doing anything. You don't want to spend money and time on a project to be told computer says no!

A vehicle made in 2001 for example would have to meet emissions regulations of 2001 or regulations coming up a year or two down the line. Fitting it with an engine from 1996 would mean that the vehicle would no longer meet the regulations it was designed to meet by 5 years! That is the problem I think you would run into.

[paime]

I'm a big fan of the TD5 as, for my tastes anyway, it strikes the right balance between refinement and farm, for a Defender at least. That aside, from an economical point of view i believe running costs are probably too close to call, particularly when the age of engine, degree of wear, history etc come in to it. Could you compare them on costs to maintain confidence in the unit i.e. what would you do to tdi and TD5 units as preventative maintenance (injector seals, head work etc) before anything major occurs? Let's say you have two engines, both at 150k miles, one a tdi and the other a TD5. Which is going to cost more for a bit of TLC?

On 9/15/2018 at 5:16 PM, Tanuki said:

(65 in 3rd, great for fast-twisty-road work)

I'm assuming that's kph as mine will have blown up looooooong before i reach 65mph in 3rd!

[Lightning]

Well, a TD5 WILL do 65mph in third gear, at around 4500 rpm.

But l wouldn’t like to try it! I have hit 4,000 rpm in my remapped TD5 and it’s really pulling well by that point.

but normally l never exceed 3,000

[RedLineMike]

td5 rev limiter is 4850 rpm,

#SendIt

[joe1]

On 9/18/2018 at 7:12 AM, monkie said:

A vehicle made in 2001 for example would have to meet emissions regulations of 2001 or regulations coming up a year or two down the line. Fitting it with an engine from 1996 would mean that the vehicle would no longer meet the regulations it was designed to meet by 5 years! That is the problem I think you would run into.

Yes, and I think thats probably the showstopper. I think DVLA are more worried about possible VED differences, which in turn relates to the euro emission categories. But I think tangle with agencies at your peril - it requires extreme patience and persistence, loads of time, and in most cases money as well. And I've got very little of any of the aforementioned to splash around willy nilly. Trouble is I remember the good old days when any conversion was easily possible. But of course I appreciate the need for scrutiny and evidence. Some of the tribulations are here: https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&f=10&t=1725579. And that was even for a 3.5v8 change to a 3.9i. But thanks to everyone for their thoughts on this.

 

[Eightpot]

The engine is only one factor, frankly I'd rather buy a great solid Defender with a buggered engine than a rusty heap with a mint engine.  

I find the TD5 era onwards stuff is more rust-prone due to lower quality and thinner steel.  Pick up a rusty one with a sick engine and you've got yourself a deep moneypit. 

[joe1]

4 hours ago, Eightpot said:

I find the TD5 era onwards stuff is more rust-prone due to lower quality and thinner steel.  Pick up a rusty one with a sick engine and you've got yourself a deep moneypit. 

Certainly the case for some TD5 bulkheads I've seen that have been rusting from the insides of the A pillar seams outwards (can't beat a series bulkhead for build quality). But was the TD5 Def chassis made thinner in the same way the Disco 2 chassis was, or is it just less well made? I've never actually investigated. 

[Eightpot]

The gauge of the later chassis' certainly seems thinner, though I've never put a micrometer on them.

I think that over the years, the quality of steel declined and possibly cut corners in painting them - I have a '79 Range Rover which is going to get it's first chassis patch this year, can't see many Td5/puma defenders getting that far.  

Out of the hundreds of Defenders I've worked with I would definitely say that up to 1988 the chassis/doors/bulkhead were made of much better stuff, mid 90s was ok then after 2000 they don't fare so well.   Not scientific of course, just a general finding.  

 

[smallfry]

Everything is reliable. Until it breaks down. Everything will in the end, no matter what you do.

Just because something is new(er) does not mean it will be any more reliable than something old