Power ratings for 12L 200TD

[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

[western]

When new it would of been 111bhp & 195lbft torque at 1800 rpm. 

The Defender spec 200tdi with the high mounted turbo was 107bhp & 188lbft torque at 1800 rpm. 

For 200tdi engine a without turbo/intercooler go to

 http://www.glencoyne.co.uk/200di.htm

there is lots of info on Tdi use in Series land rovers. 

[Carloz]

Generally speaking without intercooler you get less air into the engine and more smoke going out of it. And injecting the same amount of fuel resulting in less power, so worse mpg.

I did fit a quite big intercooler in a car with limited space... If I was going to do it again I would go for an air to water cooler when space is limited. Also much better when going slow and need short bursts of power (while off roading for example). Air to air coolers are much simpler of course but need more space for plumbing and are most effective when having enough road speed.

 

Edited June 14, 2020 by Carloz

[Dave64]

Thanks Guys

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

Edited July 17, 2020 by Dave64
addition

[Snagger]

I think turning down the fuel to get rid of the smoke would be necessary if running without intercooler, but that is only an educated guess. It’d help with fuel economy.  I think you’d be looking at similar economy to the Tdi, though - you don’t need full power often and as long as you’re not smoking, then you must be burning about the right amount of fuel.  A Tdi and a Di are going to need the same amount of energy to do the same job, so I think it’s really just the peak torque and power that’ll be affected, not the fuel economy by much.

[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

[Snagger]

The extra performance from the turbo does make it’s a much easier drive - no slowing on hills or into wind, and you can pull out in traffic or overtake so much more easily and safely.  But not everyone is bothered by that.  I wouldn’t have installed one without, but some do and are happy.  But I agree about the intercooler.  It does make a performance difference, and a significant one at that, but if your coming from  a 10 or 12j, the Tdi without intercooler is going to be such a big change you probably wouldn’t worry about those few missing horses you could have had.  If you don’t mind the extra effort of the plumbing of an intercooler, then it’s probably worth having, but if space is really tight or the budget doesn’t stretch far enough, then you’d still be pleased with the drive without it.

[Maverik]

As I've been doing some... tweeks to my 200tdi recently I've been doing all sorts of reading on the topic, there was some good testing done (I think it was Daan) about what a standard LR intercooler does, he measured a 60deg C temp drop over the inlet/outlet which is pretty interesting.

[Chicken Drumstick]

1 hour ago, Dave64 said:

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

I personally wouldn't consider running without the turbo. You'll make about the same power as a 2.25 petrol or 2.5NAD, but with less refinement due to direct injection. I do really struggle to see the point in doing such a conversion.

The intercooler is a different matter. It will run fine without one, but ultimately expect less performance and potentially higher EGT's. On a bone stock Tdi in a lighter vehicle I think you'll be fine (is there such a thing as stock untuned Tdi these days???).

I ran a 200Tdi in my 88 leafer. Without an intercooler and it went really well. I also didn't smoke at all and I recorded a high of 43mpg when laning. However I did find it'd run a little bit hotter for prolonged high speed running. So in somewhere hot like Australia, I think this might be more of a concern. Of course you can always slow down and it won't be an issue. But something you may want to think about.

Had I kept my 88 leafer, my plan was to fit an intercooler from a Tdci, as it would have been a lot easier than the stock Tdi intercooler. I had the intercooler ready to fit, but sold the vehicle before getting round to doing it. The 88 leafer is slightly lighter than a Ninety, but performance wise my 88 would happily keep pace with Tdi powered 90's (tweaked and running intercoolers).

 

As for smoke. If an engine has been sitting a while, I'd say get it running first. And maybe run some injector cleaner through it and see how it goes. Unless you are happy spending the money up front. But it might just want running. And tbh all the Tdi's smoke a bit.

[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

[Chicken Drumstick]

Not sure you'll find any cast iron output figures. Car makers rate engines on an engine dyno under strict testing conditions. But these vary from country to country and standard to standard. There are even things like imperial and metric units to consider too.

Most owners will only likely have access to a chassis dyno (aka rolling road). Which also have all the same variables as above, but usually much wider margins. Plus operator error (or tampering) and even different types of dynos that produce different figures in different ways. And all of these will be at the wheels, not the flywheel. Getting a flywheel figure from a rolling road is always going to be a guess, sometimes a semi educated one. But it is always a guess. Therefore I would not take any rolling road figure seriously. The best you could hope for would be someone testing at a rolling road with before and after turbo runs on the same day, run to the same correction factors and standards.

[Dave64]

Thanks, makes sense to me.

Dave64