ibexman Posted November 2, 2007 Share Posted November 2, 2007 I see in todays paper ford are bringing out a new transit with 3.2 200 BHP diesel now that would be very nice in a defender dont know how drive train would cope though????? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BogMonster Posted November 2, 2007 Share Posted November 2, 2007 I do... Ping! Nice idea but much the same problem as the TDV6 would have had in a Defender - nothing else in the drivetrain is strong enough to cope with the torque. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roverdrive Posted November 2, 2007 Share Posted November 2, 2007 Yeah but it won't stop someone trying it as soon as the costs come down enough Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ex Member Posted November 2, 2007 Share Posted November 2, 2007 I do...Ping! Nice idea but much the same problem as the TDV6 would have had in a Defender - nothing else in the drivetrain is strong enough to cope with the torque. It is just the axles... They "could" put in stronger axles if they wanted to. They do have access to Ford buying power...... They don't have to keep using the same low volume carp that they have been dishing out for decades.... If Jeep can sell diff locked Dana 44 axled trucks for much less than Rover sells a Defender, one could imagine Ford could manage....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctor Who ? Posted November 2, 2007 Share Posted November 2, 2007 It is just the axles... They "could" put in stronger axles if they wanted to. They do have access to Ford buying power...... They don't have to keep using the same low volume carp that they have been dishing out for decades.... If Jeep can sell diff locked Dana 44 axled trucks for much less than Rover sells a Defender, one could imagine Ford could manage....... Unfortunately, its all to do with "Consumerism ?" isn't it ... Sadly I suspect the "Transit ?" is more important to "Fords' future" (?) than the Defender ... Land Rover is "For Sale" remember ... (what ever that corporate speak means ........ ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alantd Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 People already claim to remap the TD5 to close to 200bhp. Presumably they think the transmission can take it. Is the 3.2 small enough to fit in the Defender engine bay, I wonder. That's the main reason the TDV6 didn't make it in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BogMonster Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 People already claim to remap the TD5 to close to 200bhp. Presumably they think the transmission can take it.Is the 3.2 small enough to fit in the Defender engine bay, I wonder. That's the main reason the TDV6 didn't make it in. The R380's design limit is 380nm (hence the name) which is about 280lbft. TDV6 is 325 (?) lb ft not sure about the chipped Td5s I guess some are up towards this figure. I'm guessing that since the R380 is not the strongest gearbox in the world to start with, exceeding its design limit whether its with a Td5 chipped and intercooled, or whatever else, probably doesn't make for 200,000 miles of reliable motoring I'd be surprised if you couldn't fit a TDV6 with a bit of faffing around the edges. The engine bay has after all had both a straight six (BMW 2.8) and a V8 in it in the past. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Twig Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 I presume putting in different axles would be a bit excessive/expensive/impossible then... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
q-rover Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 Just use a autobox. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JST Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 i was going to wait for the bigger tdv6 to come out and fit that.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ex Member Posted November 4, 2007 Share Posted November 4, 2007 The R380's design limit is 380nm (hence the name) which is about 280lbft. TDV6 is 325 (?) lb ft not sure about the chipped Td5s I guess some are up towards this figure. I'm guessing that since the R380 is not the strongest gearbox in the world to start with, exceeding its design limit whether its with a Td5 chipped and intercooled, or whatever else, probably doesn't make for 200,000 miles of reliable motoring I'd be surprised if you couldn't fit a TDV6 with a bit of faffing around the edges. The engine bay has after all had both a straight six (BMW 2.8) and a V8 in it in the past. They aren't using the R380 anymore...... The engine would come with a gearbox...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alantd Posted November 4, 2007 Share Posted November 4, 2007 They aren't using the R380 anymore...... The engine would come with a gearbox...... Like the TD4. Good point BogMonster about the V8 and straight 6 - I recall from somewhere that the reason they ended up with 5 cylinders was because the engine bay wasn't big enough for 6. But like you say, it's had one in before (and a V6 should be shorter). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ibexman Posted November 4, 2007 Author Share Posted November 4, 2007 I recall a few years back engine conversion companys were fitting 6 pot nissan engines Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lewis Posted November 4, 2007 Share Posted November 4, 2007 Is the 3.2 small enough to fit in the Defender engine bay, I wonder. That's the main reason the TDV6 didn't make it in. Whoever told you that is wrong. The 5cyl ford engine mentioned above would fit with ease in terms of length assuming you are using the puma bellhousing and an MT82 Of all the vapour transplants people keep thinking up on the various forums I visit this 5cyl is by far the most feasable. Ford have already kindly supplied a suitable box that mates to the LT230 too Regarding fitting a Lion engine (TDV6 or TDV8) in a def engine bay, yes, they physically both fit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smo Posted November 4, 2007 Share Posted November 4, 2007 TDV8 would be awsome, but id imagine that electrics, gearbox, t-box etc would be a right pain to sort?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BogMonster Posted November 4, 2007 Share Posted November 4, 2007 Like the TD4.Good point BogMonster about the V8 and straight 6 - I recall from somewhere that the reason they ended up with 5 cylinders was because the engine bay wasn't big enough for 6. But like you say, it's had one in before (and a V6 should be shorter). I read that the 5 was part of an intended range of 4, 5 and 6 cyl engines based on the same main dimensions, intended for Freelander, Discovery and RR respectively. The four and six engines were sunk when BMW bought the company and used the Td4 from the 3 series and the TD6 from whatever BMW that came out of in the RR. Not sure if it was true but it made sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave78 Posted November 4, 2007 Share Posted November 4, 2007 I read that the 5 was part of an intended range of 4, 5 and 6 cyl engines based on the same main dimensions, intended for Freelander, Discovery and RR respectively. The four and six engines were sunk when BMW bought the company and used the Td4 from the 3 series and the TD6 from whatever BMW that came out of in the RR. Not sure if it was true but it made sense. Yep - correct from what I've been told. The reason that SII disco had a TD5 was that the engine bay was too small for the TD6 that BMW brought to the table - and the TD4 wasn't man enough for the job - oh and they had already started the development of the TD5 engine ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alantd Posted November 5, 2007 Share Posted November 5, 2007 Yep - correct from what I've been told. The reason that SII disco had a TD5 was that the engine bay was too small for the TD6 that BMW brought to the table - and the TD4 wasn't man enough for the job - oh and they had already started the development of the TD5 engine ... That's obviously what I was thinking about. Must have been the disco bay that was too tight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.