 | Home > Series Land Rovers > Series 3 - engine choice |
 
|
|
|
| LR90XS2011 Member Since: 05 Apr 2011 Location: bickenhill Posts: 3645   
|
i had a 2.25 petrol and it was extremely quiet and was just about pokey enough however with enthusiastic driving I used too only get about 20mpg average and never saw more than about 70mph DEFENDER 90 TDCI XS,
I hope everyone is well and your land rovers make you happy |
||
29th Jan 2016 9:57pm |
|
| blackwolf Member Since: 03 Nov 2009 Location: South West England Posts: 17450 
|
The petrol 2286cc is vastly preferable to the diesel.
If you're not worried about originality, go for a 200Tdi. |
||
|
29th Jan 2016 10:14pm |
|
| PCA42 Member Since: 15 Jun 2014 Location: Church Stretton Posts: 468  
|
As others have said, the 2.25 is the much preferred option. The diesel is extremely lethargic, noisy and not all that economical.
The petrol on the other hand is a lot more sprightly (still not 'fast' by any means!) and smooth... they tick over very satisfyingly. Pete 2010 Discovery 4 GS TDV6 1972 Series III 88" 2.25P |
||
|
29th Jan 2016 11:13pm |
|
| Gareth Member Since: 12 Dec 2011 Location: Woodford Posts: 1110
|
The petrol is a lovely engine when looked after. Virtually bullet proof too. 2021 Defender 110 X-Dynamic HSE D300 MHEV
1966 S2a 109 aka Betsy |
||
|
29th Jan 2016 11:22pm |
|
| Likeomg Member Since: 29 Jun 2012 Location: Lake District / Newcastle Posts: 2642 
|
i actually enjoy driving my series 3 with the diesel... facial expressions like mr bean but..
i also have 2 with a 200tdi from a defender and 1 with a 200tdi from a disco which actually go really well.. the 109 having range rover diffs etc.. |
||
|
29th Jan 2016 11:23pm |
|
| LR90XS2011 Member Since: 05 Apr 2011 Location: bickenhill Posts: 3645
|
forgot to mention my son had for a short time a S3 88 with a 200tdi with no turbo fitted and it went OK cant quote top speed or MPG but as a passenger it was adequate. My fathers S3 88 rebuild is progressing and has just reached the no body but drivable stage, it has a 2.25 with a home ported head, twin 1 and 1/2 inch SUs on home made manifold, tubular exhaust manifold and free flowing silencers, it also has RR diffs. He let me have a go in the yard and although I did not get above about 30 mph it is currently feels very quick to that speed, however I'm sure some bodywork will slow it down, it also sounds more like a MGB than a landy which isnt quite right DEFENDER 90 TDCI XS,
I hope everyone is well and your land rovers make you happy |
||
|
30th Jan 2016 7:58am |
|
| sgilmour Member Since: 21 Jul 2015 Location: Essex Posts: 232 
|
 Pictures please! |
||
|
30th Jan 2016 10:48am |
|
| Chrismcc Member Since: 22 May 2013 Location: Bergen Posts: 29 
|
Thanks guys,
This isn't a project I'm about to undertake straight away more of a pipeline dream but as I've been looking at it recently its good to know which motor might be the preferred choice. Chris |
||
|
2nd Feb 2016 7:56am |
|
| LR90XS2011 Member Since: 05 Apr 2011 Location: bickenhill Posts: 3645
|
Will get some up to date photos next time I visit him, his attention to detail is amazing, (not a wiggly brake pipe to be found) but he is not much bothered about originality so it will offend some. DEFENDER 90 TDCI XS, I hope everyone is well and your land rovers make you happy |
||
|
2nd Feb 2016 6:37pm |
|
| Eduardo Member Since: 28 Aug 2008 Location: RegiĆ³n Metropolitana Posts: 2110  
|
Only an idea
In Chile (if the originality is not an issue) several mates have changed the original motor by a Nissan BD30 or the TD27 with good results. Easy to maintain and with a lot of spares averywhere. Cheers Eduardo MY 2007 110 SW PUMA 2.4: Big Fog of 64' MY 1994 Jayco 1207 Folding camper: "El Tremendo"  Click image to enlarge |
||
|
2nd Feb 2016 7:16pm |
|
| 22900013A Member Since: 23 Dec 2010 Location: Oxfordshire Posts: 3150 
|
With series IIIs you have a choice of four factory fitted engines. 2.25 in petrol or diesel, 2.6 petrol six cylinder, of 3.5 V8. The 2.25 petrol is well regarded, simple and reliable. The diesel can be a pain, is not as powerful and is noisy, it also seems to require more looking after. It does do better on fuel than the petrol though, and can be ran on veg oil so I understand. I had one in a swb and it was fine, but I imagine it would struggle a bit in a loaded lwb. I have a 109 with the six cylinder engine (it was never available in the swb) which is in many ways superior to the 2.25, although it is more thirsty. It offers more torque and power, but bits are getting rare now. I have never ran a V8 myself but know people who do. Like the six, the sound is great, but the stage 1 V8 is now quite rare (like the six again) and specialist, some parts are just not available.
If you are looking for your first series motor I would suggest sticking to the 2.25 petrol. 2011 110 USW 1973 Series III 1-Ton 1972 Series III 1-Ton Cherrypicker 1969 IIA 1-Ton 1966 IIA 88" |
||
|
2nd Feb 2016 8:02pm |
|
| Chrismcc Member Since: 22 May 2013 Location: Bergen Posts: 29
|
With that just said, I have also read about people getting their 2,25 petrol motors 'upgraded' to run on modern unleaded.
is this a wise or recommended view? cheers Chris |
||
|
4th Feb 2016 12:14pm |
|
| 1978 Member Since: 04 Aug 2015 Location: Lancashire Posts: 519 
|
I would recommend the fitting of a lead free cylinder head assembly, both my series 2 and series 3 have been treated to one of these from Turner Engineering:
http://www.turnerengineering.co.uk/acatalog/info_583.html They are £575 plus fitting, but you get £250 back when you send them your old one. It is well worth doing, if you use your vehicle frequently you will soon see the cost of fuel additive mount up otherwise! With regard to the choice between Petrol & Diesel 2.25 engines, I would go for petrol every time, the diesels are painfully slow and noisy. |
||
|
4th Feb 2016 1:36pm |
|
| blackwolf Member Since: 03 Nov 2009 Location: South West England Posts: 17450
|
It seems generally to be considered a good idea to fit hardened exhaust valve seats now that leaded is unavailable.
It is also worth bearing in mind that the 2286cc petrol engine was available with two difference compression rations, I think (from memory) 7:1 and 8:1. The low compressin engine is noticeably less powerful than the high compression, and the HC is preferable. I think that the only physical difference was the size of the combustyion chamber in the head, and the block etc is identical. |
||
|
4th Feb 2016 1:42pm |
|
|
|
| All times are GMT |
< Previous Topic | Next Topic > |
Posting Rules
|
Site Copyright © 2006-2024 Futuranet Ltd & Martin Lewis
