 | Home > Series Land Rovers > I want a Series III, Question from owners |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 
|
|
|
| Dinnu Member Since: 24 Dec 2019 Location: Lija Posts: 3414   
|
My first car was a Series 3, ex Coast Guard, blue bodywork with yellow roof. It came originally with the 2.25 petrol, but since back in the days diesel was far cheaper locally, it was agreed to change to the 2.25 diesel before taking ownership. The diesel was loud, and very slow especially since it had low ratio diffs - unsure if the petrol versions has lower ratio diffs as standard but from memory I had counted about 4.7 by just counting prop shaft rotation to wheels rotation.
If it was today, I would go for petrol. Unfortunately I had to pass on in a very short tome, as could not manage my rust phobia too well. 1988 90 Hard Top, 19J Diesel Turbo, Shire Blue - Restoration ongoing 2012 90 CSW, 2.2TDCI, Santorini Black |
||
17th Nov 2020 12:11pm |
|
| blackwolf Member Since: 03 Nov 2009 Location: South West England Posts: 17372  
|
Remember with the petrol engine that it was not designed for unleaded so unless someone has modded it to fit hardened valve seat inserts you are likely to suffer from seat recession unless you take some kind of precautions. Many will have been modded by now. There was also a low-compression version of the 2286cc engine, although I don't think the option survived into the SIII era (I may be wrong). The three-bearing engine is also generally considered superior to the five-bering one, three bearings being quite sufficient for this application. It is said that the five bearing crank is actually weaker due to the need to cram the extra bearings in between each pair of cylinders.
I find that the 2286cc diesel is a bit too pedestrian for modern road conditions now, and give the choice would opt for the 2286cc petrol. Better still if you can find one would be an SIII with the 2.6L six-cylinder engine, which is a smooth and more powerful motor but can be a bit of a parts nightmare and cash black hole now, I believe. I have a 2286cc 3-bearing petrol engine in my '54 SI 86, with a SI (non-synchro) gearbox and Fairy overdrive riunning on 7.50 Michelin XCL tyres, and it can go much faster than I want to, and (driven sensibly) returns between 25 and 30 to the gallon. I wouldn't expect quite such high figures from a SIII, but mid-20s should be achievable. A Series Landrover is a wonderful way to escape from the 21st century for a while, great therapy! |
||
|
17th Nov 2020 1:29pm |
|
| Chicken Drumstick Member Since: 17 Aug 2020 Location: Near MK Posts: 720
|
What are you wanting to use it for? The petrol is much more refined and quieter. But will like a drink. Personally I'd avoid a Tdi (or the dreaded and pointless Di conversions). The Tdi is a great engine and will go well. But it'll have horrendous refinement, even compared to the 2 1/4 diesel. Personally I'd look for a V8 conversion or consider putting a V8 in one. Nothing too crazy, a good 3.5 or 3.9 on carbs would do. Better mpg than the 2 1/4 petrol, much better soundtrack and will go really well. |
||
|
18th Nov 2020 12:58am |
|
| Gareth Member Since: 12 Dec 2011 Location: Bramhall Posts: 1102 
|
I’ve got 2 petrol 2a’s, virtually the same as a S3 except for the synchromeshed gears.
A good, well sorted 2.25 petrol engine is a joy. If your in a rush, get a V8. If you going 2.25, try and get a 5 main bearing engine, I think all S3’s are 5 mb but stand to be corrected. Difference is webbing ridges cast into block sides and I think painted red? They are pretty much indestructible, and both of mine return 15-16mpg in general use. I did recondition both engines, apart from bore wear and timing chains, the only other parts needing replacement were the valves. Get an unleaded conversion and raise the compression to 9-1 if your getting any head work done. Another option is the 2.5 petrol engine from early 90. Not seen many around though. 2021 Defender 110 X-Dynamic HSE D300 MHEV 1966 S2a 109 aka Betsy 1968 S2a 88 aka Bob 2014 Jaaaag F Type 3.0 Supercharged. |
||
|
18th Nov 2020 8:32am |
|
| blackwolf Member Since: 03 Nov 2009 Location: South West England Posts: 17372
|
Why? You're actually the first person I have (ever!) heard recommend the 5 bearing crank over the 3, and I'd be genuinely interested to know why you rate it. |
||
|
18th Nov 2020 8:40am |
|
| Bluericky Member Since: 26 Jun 2014 Location: Cornwall Posts: 647 
|
I had a 1982 series 3 diesel for a few years , it was unbearably slow on the road. I’m not a fast driver, nor am I in a rush often but it really was gutless. A couple of good friends have petrol series and with an overdrive they really are a totally different kettle of fish.
I had a 2.25 petrol in the series 1 I just sold, that was lovely to drive and ran like a sewing machine, it was so quiet you sometimes weren’t sure if you’d stalled ! Having said that , I found the 2.25 diesel a wonderful engine to work on, so simple and utterly bombproof. Oh apart from the CAV fuel pump, that was a nightmare. https://www.instagram.com/hustynminepark/ |
||
|
18th Nov 2020 8:49am |
|
| Philip Member Since: 09 Mar 2018 Location: England Posts: 510
|
Definitely petrol (albeit mine’s a six cylinder).
|
||
|
18th Nov 2020 12:54pm |
|
| excossack Member Since: 22 Feb 2012 Location: North West Posts: 5843 
|
A mate as a 6 pot landy rotting in his drive. Its well rotten. the bottom of the engine is there as is the gearbox and transfer case (from memory) The head is in Texas!
Drove one once towing a horse box. Towed well and sounded sweet. 1999 Defender TD5 110 Regards John M0VAZ Econet Station 48 no clock |
||
|
18th Nov 2020 1:55pm |
|
| LandRoverAnorak Member Since: 17 Jul 2011 Location: Surrey Posts: 11324
|
The six pot petrol is one of the nicest engines you'll ever hear. It's old technology though, even by Series LR standards. ISTR they had a habit of burning out exhaust valves and the sloping head makes sorting them out more complicated than you'd typically expect. Darren
110 USW BUILD THREAD - EXPEDITION TRAILER - 200tdi 90 BUILD THREAD - SANKEY TRAILER - IG@landroveranorak "You came in that thing? You're braver than I thought!" - Princess Leia |
||
|
18th Nov 2020 2:03pm |
|
| excossack Member Since: 22 Feb 2012 Location: North West Posts: 5843
|
They are very nice sweet sounding engines albeit a bit thirsty 1999 Defender TD5 110
Regards John M0VAZ Econet Station 48 no clock |
||
|
18th Nov 2020 2:26pm |
|
| 22900013A Member Since: 23 Dec 2010 Location: Oxfordshire Posts: 3149 
|
Very confused here about 3 vs 5 bearing engines - ever since I got into Landrovers the five bearing has been considered the better engine. Never heard anyone,suggest the 3 bearing is stronger before.
I used to run a 2.25 diesel, very noisy, slow, unreliable and a total pain in the arse to work on. Used almost as much oil as diesel. Swapped out for a mint 2.25 petrol which was much more civilised but thirsty. I only have a 2 6 petrol now, sounds amazing but hard to get bits for (rare and expensive) and very heavy on fuel. 2011 110 USW 1973 Series III 1-Ton 1972 Series III 1-Ton Cherrypicker 1969 IIA 1-Ton 1966 IIA 88" |
||
|
19th Nov 2020 5:45pm |
|
| blackwolf Member Since: 03 Nov 2009 Location: South West England Posts: 17372
|
^^ Interesting!
It probably means that there's really not much to choose between them, but there must have been some reason why LR developed the five from the three. I think broken cranks on either are extremely rare and unless you're planning something epic or stupid I doubt it matters which you have. I have heard of a three bearing engine being driven several hundred miles with a broken oil pump and the sump overfilled to provide splash lubrication, without failing or becoming ruined. That says "tough engine" to me. |
||
|
19th Nov 2020 6:04pm |
|
| LandRoverAnorak Member Since: 17 Jul 2011 Location: Surrey Posts: 11324
|
ISTR the five bearing engine was developed with an eye on future plans to extract more power - turbocharging maybe, which LR had experimented with in the '60's.
It's a long time since I last owned one but I must admit I don't recall anybody saying that the five bearing engines were less strong, unlike gearboxes where every man and his dog were keen to point out how earlier ones were. Darren 110 USW BUILD THREAD - EXPEDITION TRAILER - 200tdi 90 BUILD THREAD - SANKEY TRAILER - IG@landroveranorak "You came in that thing? You're braver than I thought!" - Princess Leia |
||
|
20th Nov 2020 8:35am |
|
| defender9 Member Since: 12 Mar 2016 Location: Fylde Coast Posts: 1629 
|
I have a 5MB Petrol, my understanding which may well be wrong was that LR were trying to refine vehicles due to the increasing use of 4WD’s for leisure purposes and a 5MB engine may well run smoother, however after driving both 3MB and 5MB I’m not sure I could ascertain any real differences with all the other noises which accompany these vehicles. I haven’t heard that the 5MB crank is any less strong than the 3MB version.
|
||
|
20th Nov 2020 10:52am |
|
|
|
| All times are GMT |
< Previous Topic | Next Topic > |
Posting Rules
|
Site Copyright © 2006-2024 Futuranet Ltd & Martin Lewis
