whats the fascination?

[Chicken Drumstick]

For the disbelievers in 26mpg, here are a few things Brian and I did when it first came home, head off and busy as far as we could get inside the inlet with the die grinder to remove casting left overs, valves out and the ports opened up a little more then 1/2 filled it with ball bearings and very slow spin on the lathe to let the ball bearings smoothe away the rest of the imperfections, brand new old stock solex carb and vaporiser plate, exhaust valve seats pulled and new hardened seats fitted along with a little fettle of the exhaust ports. Brian was an oldschool farmer with more engineering experience forgotten than I will ever learn, I still miss that grumpy old man

It was the engine fettle and running a road biased tyre except for laning or planned P&P days that gave good mpg, tyres and their pressures have such impact on fuel economy!

Paul rebuilt the 2 1/4 to better than new standard, I remember sitting in his workshop while he disassembled the original carb, quick look over it in bits and he rolled up the cloth and put it in a card board box to be sent back to the uk for rebuilding, he said it is so worn up he's surprised it ran at all.

I am not at all surprised by negative comments towards elderly 2 1/4 petrols, a great many were worn up long before they got to you!

The comment about series owners being tight rings quite true, and the lack of servicing holds very true!!! I change oils annually or sooner if miles get racked up, but a petrol engine oil should not be black and stink! I saw a lot like this when looiing for my own series, and always got the "it's a Land Rover, they run forever".

I think Fridge nailed it quite good too, cost Vs cost and especially on longevity of ownership!

I also think there is an element of technophobia in there too as a more modern engine requires more than the 6 wires of a Tdi

I'm not sure which engines are you referring too exactly. Is the 26mpg the 2.25 or the 2.0 turbo? (assume it might be a T series?) As the rest of the post seems to be about the 2.25 I guess it could be that.

And honestly I still struggle to believe it. Maybe with the best of everything and driven the most gently you could garner 26mpg out of one, as a maximum. But I think the only way someone could truly "average" 26mpg would be to fiddle the figures, even is unintentionally.

For instance, the much more frugal 1.8 K Series is rated at 27mpg in the Freelander, a vehicle that likely weighs less, far superior aerodynamics and massively less rolling resistance.

http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/reviews/facts-and-figures/land-rover/freelander/station-wagon-1997/14360/

There is no way a carb 2.25 in a less efficient vehicle is within 1mpg of the 1.8

[Chicken Drumstick]

<dons tin hat>

IMHO a lot of it is because people don't really think it through - cost & compromise Vs potentially rather small MPG saving on a truck you don't do lost of miles in makes no sense to me.

It's the same as LPG conversions, you save money on fuel but pay out a load to do the conversion and then have a compromise (EG less boot space, shorter range) on top. You have to work out if the saving over the miles/years is really worth it, and IMHO most people are very bad at really working that out.

The 4 & 6cyl petrols aren't very economical, but if tuned up right they're not so far off the 2/300TDi to be worth the hassle to save a few gallons of petrol here & there unless you're doing mega mileage.

Also (and I will get shouted at for this) some of the TDi fanboys shout REALLY loudly and give the impression no other engine is worth considering.

As asked earlier, what other engines offer the same mix of:

-conversion cost inc engine

-running costs

-performance

-ease of install

I certainly don't dislike the 2.25, but mine was managing approx 14mpg. And as smooth as it could be, they just lack grunt on some steep inclines, where you really need 2nd, but it'll only pull 1st and not have the wheel speed.

I know you can tune them, but the cost of doing so means you've got to really want to and even then only by ignoring obvious options such as engine swaps that will likely be cheaper.

A Tdi will easily offer 23-26mpg in a Series, so will be a lot more frugal to run. And importantly will massively improve it's range.

I wouldn't say mine was unloved either. It was owned by a mechanic for 10 years prior to me owning it. It had recently had a replacement carb. I also replaced the head and had the valves lapped and adjusted the rockers. Before taking it off the road for it's rebuild I was running a new SU carb on it.

[jai_landrover]

If you couldn't pull 2nd low box on your 2.25 it wasn't right. Even back years ago 2nd gear on some of the steepest hills over sundon. Some looking back was silly to even attempt. A tdi will not pull 3rd gear low box very well on steep hills I'd say it's better if you can get to max torque by then run out of revs in 2nd gear usually

I wouldnt mind some reliable data tho from a std sorted 2.25 torque data v's tdi torque data and for the hell of it TD5, I would assume possibly wrongly that the petrol Has a flatter torque curve but the Tdi has a higher max torque and the TD5 higher still and not as flat as the TDI or 2.25.

Who drives a peak torque 4k RPM ok on the motorway letting it Rev but pulling up a steep hill from Tickover or towing a trailer up heavy gradient slowly it's pants.

[Bowie69]

Indeed, lotsa torque from a 2.25, 2nd low was a lovely gear for climbs that needed just a little speed.

2.25 = instant torque, not waiting for a few seconds while the turbo spools...

[Snagger]

The benefits of the Tdi over the 2.25 petrol are double the range, little more than half the fuel cost per mile, a 50%+ increase in power and torque, immunity to damp and even deep wading with simple additions of a snorkel and wading plug, and far better starting and reliability with much less maintenance. The downside is the noise and vibration, which isn't too bad with a 300.

If I was to build my 109 over again, I would consider a gas fed V8 for better driving manners and better comfort, but even though the gas costs per mile are comparable (ish) to the Tdi costs, you still have less than half the range of the Tdi, which is an issue for exped vehicles, and have an especially hydrophobic engine. You also lose foot well space in the passenger side, which is already narrow enough.

The Tdi is by no means a perfect SII/SIII solution, but it is one of the best. For petrol, I think a stroked and tuned 2.5 4-pot made 2.8l would be preferable to a 3.5 V8, but for my application, range and water resistance are still an issue.

It all comes down to what you use the vehicle for. For low mileage play things, V8s will generally be best, but for long distance workhorses, Tdis are better.

[pat_pending]

It's a Land Rover, what's the fascination with making them unduly civilised ?

Go buy something Japanese ya bunch of big girls blouses!

[Nigelw]

I'm not sure which engines are you referring too exactly. Is the 26mpg the 2.25 or the 2.0 turbo? (assume it might be a T series?) As the rest of the post seems to be about the 2.25 I guess it could be that.

And honestly I still struggle to believe it. Maybe with the best of everything and driven the most gently you could garner 26mpg out of one, as a maximum. But I think the only way someone could truly "average" 26mpg would be to fiddle the figures, even is unintentionally.

For instance, the much more frugal 1.8 K Series is rated at 27mpg in the Freelander, a vehicle that likely weighs less, far superior aerodynamics and massively less rolling resistance.

http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/reviews/facts-and-figures/land-rover/freelander/station-wagon-1997/14360/

There is no way a carb 2.25 in a less efficient vehicle is within 1mpg of the 1.8

No not a 2.25, I had a 2.6 6cylinder, have a look through this https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IOE_engine#Rover_IOE_engines nothing like a 2.25 OHV engine.

Quite interesting how there seems to be an idea that this thread is about saving 2.25 petrol series, infact, I do believe there to be better engines that could be better fitted. T16 from Rover, M30 from BMW, hell even a K series engine is actually quite good, just got bad press for its early life in a hippo probably manly enough for a SWB or a light weight too.

[Bowie69]

Ehm, just so you know, a Lightweight is heavier than a SWB series in same spec

[FridgeFreezer]

Bowie - true, but a Freelander is ~1600kg and a SWB Series is not far off so it wouldn't be a terrible match. I reckon the TD4 (M47) would be brilliant in a Series.

This is going to turn into the Engine Bunfight Thread soon...

The original question being "what's the fascination?" rather than "how do I save fuel" or "please explain to me why TDi's are the best engine in the world ever and everything else sucks" I can see a few positives:

- Fairly bolt-in conversion

- Mechanically & electrically simple lump (wiring is kryptonite to most LR owners)

- Improved performance all-round over the original

- All Land Rover parts

- Reasonably easy to come by (but getting harder to find a good one these days)

- More waterproof than standard V8's

- Very fashionable (see TDi fanboys for more info )

But those are not all exclusive to the TDi, aside from fuel saving and a degree of wiring a V8 or TD5 swap can be done more or less from the parts-bin and keeps it in the family. Both can be waterproof with a bit of effort.

I think a lot of people fitted them in off-roaders as they were the next best thing to a V8 power-wise and would run in water without any effort.

[GW8IZR]

Not a bunfight but a vigorous discussion :0)

Not sure a 2.25 or 2.5 appeals any more.. got many scars and a tee shirt for that but maybe petrol will be forced on us by legislation. If so I really fancy going down the line of a Rover 620 engine or similar.. I'm not phased by getting something to run outside of its usual domicile in fact that is part of the interest.

However! I just started the theoretical design of my Polaris RZR.. I had the pleasure of a Hyabusa powered one in Norway a short while ago and that *really* appeals for my next retirement project.

[Daan]

Low down torque, fuel consumption and oh yes fuel consumption. That turbo whine I like and it doesn't mind getting wet. This thread is now going to the good old diesel vs. petrol debate. The conversion cost can potentially be ignored, because I dont think you can get a minter of an engine for nothing, regardless of which fuel you use. I have had a 2.25 petrol, than a 2.5 petrol, with 9:1 compression ratio and double chock webber, later powered on LPG. Now 300 tdi, all good engines, but that TDI is the best by miles for what I want. Saying you are doing little miles can make a difference, but I know very few people who take their petrol powered landrover to wales, or abroad, or anywhere far (except fridge), but loads with diesel engines. Those fuel consumption figures in the original post are just too good to be true, sorry , i just can't see it.

Daan

[steve b]

many years ago a mate had a IIA 109 with a 3 litre F head 6cyl with the twin carb head off a P4 105S which used to regularly manage low twenties mpg , and what a lovely sound too . More low end than you can ever imagine in todays world of revvy engines

Another mate had a SIII 88 2.25 petrol with a turbo on which went pretty well

cheers

Steveb

[qwakers]

MPi Disco's and Defenders will be 23-28mpg sort of range. A turbo in a Lightweight will be no better. Maybe worse. Just think what sort of mpg a Rover 620ti would get and then take some off for the extra weight, worse aero and additional drag.

I used to get 18mpg on a run from my mpi disco and 3!! Mpg with 3.5 ton behind it.... Your better off with a v8, seriously!

[Bowie69]

Yeah fridge, was referring to Nigel's post

[wanger]

whats the fascination with a series? cannot understand anyone buying one tbh

[discomikey]

The use of soundproofing will happily put a series on par with. 300tdi county spec defender for noise. Not bad at all.

For me it was the fuel saving more than anytjing , the 32+mpg on day to day driving compared to 18 or less from the 2.25 petrol, and the oil consumption was massive too.

The reliability and cold morning starting etc is also a bonus as is the ability to up the gearing and as a result happily travel from one end of the country to another.

Yeah you cAn just buy a defender to so that in the first place, but I like the look of a series better. And the character.

[Nigelw]

I totally see the easy fitting std parts and economy, the simple wiring, the minimal servicing aspects of Tdi conversions.

Daan I totally get the turbo whine when under full load, mines been much more enthusiastic since fitting the new turbo a few months back

Bowie, I was aware that an air portable light weight is indeed heavier than a civvy SWB

Its all horses for courses, everyone has different ideas of what they want from their series and there seems to be very few who will ever fully realize the potential from their conversions, either they barely do 3,000 miles in a year pottering to the tip and back maybe venture down a lane or two(no I'm not knocking those types of owners!!) But for those who do jump into Tdi conversions, a great many started off with a worn out engine to start and never got to enjoy a 2.25 in goed health and state of tune, the Tdi is just the easy route with the promise of good economy(which is never revealed due to limited miles traveled and by the time they covered the cost of conversion they sold up in favor of a D4)

One engine floats my boat for an early 90 repower or a swb https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rover_KV6_Engine

[discomikey]

*10,000 miles a year on average, almost 20,000 miles last year. I think I am making use of the Gained driveability and economy! ?

[Mo Murphy]

I'd just like to say you're all missing the point about the 2 1/4 petrol.

It's not fast, it's not economical but it is a smooth and willing engine of the old school.

One of the nicest things you can do is lift the bonnet of a nicely warmed one, close your eyes and listen to engine. You can hear all of the internals doing their jobs, taps and little squeaks, rattles and whirrs, a mechanical orchestra playing to your soul ?. Sounds that are all drowned out in a diesel engine bay.

I drove a Tdi however, because it's faster and more economical.

Mo

[landroversforever]

I love my old Tdi, the only reason it has been replaced is my quest for more power.

What Mo says, the 2.25 petrol in my friends SIII is a lovely smooth little engine, purrs along like a sewing machine.

[steve b]

...........if you think a 2 1/4 petrol ticking over at 300rpm sounds sweet Mo, I refer you to my post about the 6 pot F head , just so smooth and quiet , and yes

I have stood a 10p coin on edge on the engine ticking over , similarly with the engine in my very first 4x4 , an Austin Champ with the B40 RollsRoyce engine.

All my LandRover driving now is Tdi powered and is indeed a whole different drive , but they do have their own character and sounds - the 109 has clocked up 120k in the last 10yrs and has taken me to southern France and Poland and around the UK towing or solo.

At my core though I'm a petrolhead and always will be - the 109 was built to allow the fitting of a V8 when I win the lottery

I've had a couple of IIA 88's petrol's through the workshop this year and it was a real pleasure spending a few minutes setting the carb/timing/points (All of which were out of adjustment ) to optimum and taking them out for a road run after

cheers

Steveb

[discomikey]

I'd just like to say you're all missing the point about the 2 1/4 petrol.

It's not fast, it's not economical but it is a smooth and willing engine of the old school.

One of the nicest things you can do is lift the bonnet of a nicely warmed one, close your eyes and listen to engine. You can hear all of the internals doing their jobs, taps and little squeaks, rattles and whirrs, a mechanical orchestra playing to your soul ?. Sounds that are all drowned out in a diesel engine bay.

I drove a Tdi however, because it's faster and more economical.

Mo

I fully agree, every time I get chance to drive a 2.25p series I jump at it. It's so nostalgic and almost makes me want to put one back in my series 3. But for modern day to day workhorse use they just aren't a particularly viable engine.

[Mo Murphy]

I should like to have joined you Steve, at the open bonnet of that 109 ?

Mo

[steve b]

I saw a P4 6cyl leaving a well known supermarket the other day as I was walking in and all I could hear as it approached was the gentle tick of 12 well set tappets and a smooth burble as it went past from the exhaust . Still quieter than many modern petrols.

.....can you tell I have a bit of a thing for old rover engines?

cheers

Steveb

[deep]

I saw a P4 6cyl leaving a well known supermarket the other day as I was walking in and all I could hear as it approached was the gentle tick of 12 well set tappets and a smooth burble as it went past from the exhaust . Still quieter than many modern petrols.

.....can you tell I have a bit of a thing for old rover engines?

cheers

Steveb

I've had a handful of P5 Rovers and a P4 in the past (and a few other Rovers). Those inlet over exhaust sixes really are wonderful engines, which ooze quality. I love the way they pull from crazy low revs without a murmur.