RPR Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 Like many with a 2.25 petrol, I am constantly thinking about engine conversions. There are good V8 and V6 petrol options in the States but virtually no readily available diesel options. So, of course I am thinking of the 200 TDI. But that means buying one sight unseen from the UK and while allegedly a fairly straightforward fit to a Series, still not exactly drop in and bolt up. Now I find a US source for reman MOD 2.5 na diesels. The HP figures that I dig up are pretty unimpressive at 85 at 4000 rpm ( vs the nearly 110 at @ 4200 that I get out of the ACR 2.25) but the 150 lbs/ft torque at 1800 rpm is much better than the @135 at 2500 rpm that I get now. With top speed well down on the Tonka due to gearing and the nearly 36" SS tyres, HP is no longer the name of the game anyway, it's all about the torque. Are the 2.5 na engine mounts located in the same place as the 2.25 petrol ones? Presumably they will bolt up to an SIII gearbox without problem? Any issues to be aware of? Considering the lack of diesel options in the States, what do you think to a 2.5 na in a Series SWB? I know that they cannot be reliably turbo'd but are there any performance tweaks out there, bit more fuel and air, slight upping of the compression ratio etc. ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Les Henson Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 I have the 2.5TD engine in catflap, same thing with the exception of the turbo, and the same amount of work pretty much. I had the N/A in the original catflap (109 S3), but that was the sherpa lump, so a small, but important difference that means fitting the L/R 2.5 is harder to fit that the sherpa, even though they are both made by L/R. Look at catflap thread in the members veh section to get an idea. Les. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reads90 Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 2.5 diesel engine is a fantastic engine and bullet proof. go for it it will be the best thing you have ever done to your truck. Will give it a new lease of life and you will wonder why you did not do it years ago Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RPR Posted February 12, 2006 Author Share Posted February 12, 2006 Les, the Catflap build is incredibly helpful - especially the engine mount pics. Thanks. As someone pointed out on the other forum, it seems as if I have mixed up hp/torque numbers for the NA diesel and the TD. 68hp at 4000 rpm and 117 lbs/ft at 1800 rpm is no real improvement on my 2.25 p. Although gas flowing the head, tweaking the pump and easing the breathing should help a bit. I'm in a bit of a qunadry now.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars L Posted February 13, 2006 Share Posted February 13, 2006 Since the thread in the other forum has turned into an mpg debate, I'll continue here. The n/a is indeed a diesel, so don't expect any brisk acceleration. But it has a certain determination that isn't found in a petrol engine. Due to the fact that a diesel doesn't have any throttle butterfly, the reaction is instant when you push a little on the go pedal. The Turner head also made it a new engine. It maintains speed a lot better uphill on the open road, and is not that much of a nuisance for other traffic any more. The most common speed limit here is some 55 mph and that is reached fairly swift. It's impossible for me to know what the head made in hp and lbs/feet, but the difference is way more than I had expected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Les Henson Posted February 13, 2006 Share Posted February 13, 2006 The thing I noticed the most with the sherpa angine in my 109 was fewer gear changes. There was nothing really wrong with the old 2.25D engine - I had completely re-built it and sold it afterwards. Don't know about the TD engine yet as catflap isn't finished. but going by it's performance in a 90, I would expect it will be a good conversion. Les. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astro_Al Posted February 13, 2006 Share Posted February 13, 2006 RPR - couple of thoughts occur: 1. I guess the diseasle wont rev as high as your petrol unit, and given your low gearing already, I wonder whether any reasonable road speed could be reached at all? Propbably worth figuring out the revs/gearing. 2. Never take steps backwards! Looking at the figures, it really seems like you're losing about as much as you're gaining (or more?). I know it's 'all about torque', but HP does have its uses too! Good luck, Al. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FridgeFreezer Posted February 13, 2006 Share Posted February 13, 2006 For the path less travelled, why not fit something that's not been done quite so often? (this from the man putting a V8 into a series ) Someone in the member's vehicles section is raving about an Audi 1.4TDi lump in a series - if you believe the man it's the mutts nutts, more power, torque, economy and higher revving than the LR lumps. Modern engines have come a long way since the LR lump was dug up by archeaologists in the 40's Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jules Posted February 13, 2006 Share Posted February 13, 2006 I also had a 90 with a 2.5 na which is the car that now has the 4.2 in it there was nothing wrong with it I found that it was fantasicly relyable and very easy to work on but nothing ever went wrong with it. It would down hill wind behind do 80 mph and 60 up hill with 235,85's on. The work is easy I could do a clutch change on one in less than 2 hours and I think Ali could do a head gasket change in just over a hour. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diff Posted February 13, 2006 Share Posted February 13, 2006 Les,the Catflap build is incredibly helpful - especially the engine mount pics. Thanks. As someone pointed out on the other forum, it seems as if I have mixed up hp/torque numbers for the NA diesel and the TD. 68hp at 4000 rpm and 117 lbs/ft at 1800 rpm is no real improvement on my 2.25 p. Although gas flowing the head, tweaking the pump and easing the breathing should help a bit. I'm in a bit of a qunadry now.... Richard, don't do it ! Compared to your curent ACR petrol engine, it will feel gutless. You need to go for an engine with more performance, not less! Regards, Diff 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.