 | Home > Puma (Tdci) > 2.2. and 2.4 power difference. |
 
|
|
|
| Dinnu Member Since: 24 Dec 2019 Location: Lija Posts: 3414   
|
Are they exactly same? Both hard tops or both CSWs for example?
Are they both running same tyres, same tyre pressures? Do they have similar milage? If dpf is clogged, it should get detected by the pressure difference sensor (bolted to the bulkhead, behind coolant reservoir). It should throw the mil light on. Sorry, maybe a stupid comment... but I very interested on what others have to say as well. I am becoming a paranoid when it comes to dpf, probably due to the fact that I cannot do motorway miles to help clear it up. My only option is to drive like a maniac in 2nd or 3rd gear! 1988 90 Hard Top, 19J Diesel Turbo, Shire Blue - Restoration ongoing 2012 90 CSW, 2.2TDCI, Santorini Black |
||
8th Apr 2021 8:15pm |
|
| Howard Member Since: 06 Nov 2012 Location: Oxfordshire Posts: 41  
|
The 2.4 is a 110 utility and the 2.2 a 110 tipper . Both the same size tyres. 2.4 on BF all terrain. 2.2 on BF muds.
|
||
|
8th Apr 2021 8:35pm |
|
| Howard Member Since: 06 Nov 2012 Location: Oxfordshire Posts: 41
|
 Click image to enlarge Click image to enlarge The 2.4 is a 110 utility and the 2.2 a 110 tipper . Both the same size tyres. 2.4 on BF all terrain. 2.2 on BF muds. |
||
|
8th Apr 2021 8:36pm |
|
| Fat Cog Member Since: 19 Mar 2012 Location: Oxfordshire & Devon Posts: 502 
|
Not sure about the DPF being blocked but having had 2 2.4's & a 2.2 I would say I didn't notice much difference, if anything the 2.4 felt more lower down grunt & the 2.2 marginally quicker on motorways etc. Since 1973...S1, Air Portable's, Defender's, but only my Wolf TUL HS GS remains
|
||
|
8th Apr 2021 8:46pm |
|
| Co1 Member Since: 19 Aug 2018 Location: North Yorkshire Posts: 3674 
|
While neither are exactly what you would call aerodynamic, the tipper with roof rack and mud tyres would add some drag and weight so I’m not that surprised that you see a difference.
|
||
|
9th Apr 2021 5:09am |
|
| Leamreject Member Since: 19 Dec 2020 Location: Middle Earth - Leamington Spa Posts: 970  
|
The dreaded DPF.....
DPF’s are only really suitable for vehicles that do long runs as they need to regenerate and burn off particulates. Not really ideal for most Landys. I would try adding a DPF fuel additive when you only have a quarter tank of fuel and take it for a long blast up the motorway, at least 50 miles. And do this every year to try to prevent problems. I avoided the 2.2 DPF variant specifically, as I only ever do short runs. To overcome this burn off, many manufacturers use adblue systems, they still have inherent problems but work better for lower mileage use. Ride like you stole it!! If I’m not on a bike it’s because only a 4x4 will do… 2011 2.4 Puma 90 HT |
||
|
9th Apr 2021 5:34am |
|
| Scotm Member Since: 28 Feb 2014 Location: Aberdeenshire Posts: 666  
|
I think you are being unfair. Owning a 2.2 for 7 years and having been on this forum for at least as long, I struggle to recall any significant issues with DPFs. Mainly the odd query on how they operate and a very occasional warning light issue. |
||
|
9th Apr 2021 2:08pm |
|
| Supacat Member Since: 16 Oct 2012 Location: West Yorkshire Posts: 11018 
|
I think I'd have to agree with you there, DPF no issues... but don't mention EGR...
|
||
|
9th Apr 2021 3:51pm |
|
| Co1 Member Since: 19 Aug 2018 Location: North Yorkshire Posts: 3674
|
I have never had DPF issues (EGR is a different story). However I do have a few friends that only really do short journeys and they have perpetual issues.
|
||
|
9th Apr 2021 4:11pm |
|
| JPE Member Since: 19 Nov 2018 Location: South West England Posts: 334 
|
I had an issue where my dpf was doing an active regen far more frequently than I thought it should be.
Turned out to be a leak between the turbo and dpf. But the dpf technology itself seems to be pretty rock solid from my experience. |
||
|
9th Apr 2021 5:25pm |
|
| DEF4 Member Since: 11 Dec 2017 Location: West Sussex Posts: 12
|
While both engines produce 122BHP, the torque is different - 2.4 has 221 ft lbs but the 2.2 has 265
|
||
|
10th Apr 2021 6:08am |
|
| JOW240725 Member Since: 04 May 2015 Location: Suffolk Posts: 7905 
|
No experience of the 2.4, but when I remapped my 2.2 it made a huge difference. Are you sure the utility isn't mapped? James
MY2012 110 2.2TDCi XS SW Orkney Grey - http://www.defender2.net/forum/topic43410.html MY1990 110 200TDi SW beautifully faded Portofino Red - https://www.defender2.net/forum/post743641.html#743641 MY1984 90 V8 Slate Grey - https://www.defender2.net/forum/post744557.html#744557 Instagram @suffolk_rovers |
||
|
10th Apr 2021 6:23am |
|
| Supacat Member Since: 16 Oct 2012 Location: West Yorkshire Posts: 11018
|
You wouldn't happen to have the torque curves for them would you? |
||
|
10th Apr 2021 6:26am |
|
| LandRoverAnorak Member Since: 17 Jul 2011 Location: Surrey Posts: 11324
|
That's not right - the 2.4 is also 265 ft lbs. 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 |
||
|
10th Apr 2021 6:28am |
|
|
|
| All times are GMT |
< Previous Topic | Next Topic > |
Posting Rules
|
Site Copyright © 2006-2024 Futuranet Ltd & Martin Lewis
