↓ Advertise on Defender2 ↓

Home > Puma (Tdci) > Enough of the 2.2 slagging!!
Post Reply  Down to end
Page 6 of 6 <123456
Print this entire topic · 
Supacat



Member Since: 16 Oct 2012
Location: West Yorkshire
Posts: 11018

United Kingdom 2013 Defender 110 Puma 2.2 XS DCPU Keswick Green
and breathe... Rolling with laughter
Post #276609 25th Oct 2013 3:03pm
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
Supacat



Member Since: 16 Oct 2012
Location: West Yorkshire
Posts: 11018

United Kingdom 2013 Defender 110 Puma 2.2 XS DCPU Keswick Green
RockJaw wrote:
So what you're actually saying Supacat is that adding technology to the vehicle at almost 5% extra cost, which has the SOLE purpose of IMMOBILISING the vehicle is a GOOD thing?

Really?


No - where am I even alluding to that? You should argue against the points I am making rather than against a fictious nonsense if we are to have a grown up discussion.

RockJaw wrote:
The study you referred to is not credible in the first instance, and even if it was credible, how would the act of DELIBERATELY immobilising a vehicle help prevent the loss of one single life you complain about?


The dpf reduces the particulates to 0.001 g/km according to LR figures, the standard for Euro 5 is 0.005; I think this is down from 0.025. So in terms of incremental improvement the dpf has a huge impact on this issue. I for one think the issue is not an imaginary one, so well worth addressing.

I do not known whether the legislation forces an inactive dpf to shut down a vehicle but you seem to be implying it does - where is your evidence for this?

RockJaw wrote:
The Defender was designed primarily to achieve the singular objective of SAFELY transporting personnel into and out of remote areas.


I would not say that this was the primary design objective - it was designed for farmers...and I wouldn't describe the field at the end of lane as a remote area Laughing

RockJaw wrote:
Most Development and Research costs spent over the life of the Defender has been spent engineering a vehicle which is capable of 1- extended and reliable extreme off road travel and 2- simplicity of design and 3- ease of serviceability in remote areas.


Are you talking about the same vehicle as me - especially item 3?

RockJaw wrote:
Also, how is a Defender, which has been immobilised by frustrated bureaucrat in Brussels going to save one single life?


As above please tell me where the legislation states it must do this. I rather suspect this is a design compromise by Land Rover to prevent consequential damage; it would clearly be possible to design a bypass system when the dpf fails or does not operate as intended.
Post #276618 25th Oct 2013 3:30pm
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
RockJaw



Member Since: 15 Oct 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 317

United States 2013 Defender 110 Puma 2.2 SW Santorini Black
Supacat, don't tell me to argue your points, first, why don't you try to make a point.

Is it for example your point that

1- deliberately immobilising a perfectly functional vehicle is a GOOD thing?
2- farmers should have vehicles which require long drives along the highway to keep them from from becoming clogged up and immobilised? How many farms have you dodged whilst traveling along the motorway lately?


You still have not explained how immobilising a vehicle will help reduce particulates in the environment.

There is no legislation which requires the vehicle to become immobilised, that is the whole point of the argument, which is "why introduce this dummass technology onto the vehicle in the first place?" ****CENSORED****
Post #276634 25th Oct 2013 4:08pm
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
diesel_jim



Member Since: 13 Oct 2008
Location: hiding
Posts: 6093

United Kingdom 2006 Defender 110 Td5 SW Epsom Green
I bet if any particular vehicle had something that failed on it (ooh, i don't know, say a cooling system for example) and the driver kept driving on and on and on and eventually the engine siezed, resulting in a new on being needed at vast expense, then I wonder how long it would be for someone to say "hmmm... a safety feature that prevented this from happening could be good"

be it a temperature guage, or in the case of the DPF, stops the engine to prevent damage.
Post #276636 25th Oct 2013 4:18pm
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
RockJaw



Member Since: 15 Oct 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 317

United States 2013 Defender 110 Puma 2.2 SW Santorini Black
But diesel_jim,

1- the vehicle will run perfectly without a dpf, even better in fact, and
2- a broken dpf will never cause any damage to the vehicle

so your argument that a vehicle NEEEDS to be immobilised when the dpf becomes faulty as safety measure is ridiculous.

How will a faulty dpf cause "seizure"

Sure, if the radiator blew, or an oil pump, water pump etc, sure, your argument holds some weight, but a DPF?

I mean seriously, who would say "hmmm.... a safety feature that prevented this from happening could be good" if the dpf is as about as essential to the vehicle as a bull bar ****CENSORED****
Post #276640 25th Oct 2013 4:28pm
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
diesel_jim



Member Since: 13 Oct 2008
Location: hiding
Posts: 6093

United Kingdom 2006 Defender 110 Td5 SW Epsom Green
I don't know, (and i'm not arguing so stop saying that), maybe you should take it up with LR, seeing as they designed the vehicle with this in built feature.

I certainly didn't say it NEEDED it, but someone at LR ovbiously knows more than we all do.
Post #276666 25th Oct 2013 5:17pm
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
LandRoverAnorak



Member Since: 17 Jul 2011
Location: Surrey
Posts: 11324

United Kingdom 
Isn't the issue here that the vehicle was never intended for that use in that environment? Proper ROW vehicles aren't fitted with a DPF as they are neither required nor appropriate. The fault is with whoever allowed it to be used rather than LR, who are required to comply with the relevant laws of the places that their vehicles are sold into. 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
Post #276674 25th Oct 2013 5:40pm
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
RockJaw



Member Since: 15 Oct 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 317

United States 2013 Defender 110 Puma 2.2 SW Santorini Black
"...are required to comply with the relevant laws of the places that their vehicles are sold into..."

You're right actually, and that is part of the problem.

Not too long ago one European country passed laws requiring certain people to wear little yellow stars on their lapels too.

I wonder how many Defender owners would pin little yellow stars to their lapels if Brussels passed a law requiring all Defender owners to do so?

The traffic of escapees from socialism used to flow from East to West and it seems quite noteworthy that the flow of traffic has reversed of late.

I wonder whether Brussels is not one of the reasons for this change of traffic flow? - Rolling with laughter

What has happened to you guys down there in Europe lately? Standards really do seem to have slipped a lot. ****CENSORED****
Post #276679 25th Oct 2013 6:07pm
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
Supacat



Member Since: 16 Oct 2012
Location: West Yorkshire
Posts: 11018

United Kingdom 2013 Defender 110 Puma 2.2 XS DCPU Keswick Green
Invoking Godwin's Law - I'm now convinced you are a troll Rolling Eyes
Post #276818 26th Oct 2013 8:05am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
diesel_jim



Member Since: 13 Oct 2008
Location: hiding
Posts: 6093

United Kingdom 2006 Defender 110 Td5 SW Epsom Green
Rolling with laughter Rolling with laughter
Post #276829 26th Oct 2013 8:58am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
RockJaw



Member Since: 15 Oct 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 317

United States 2013 Defender 110 Puma 2.2 SW Santorini Black
Supacat wrote:
Invoking Godwin's Law - I'm now convinced you are a troll Rolling Eyes



Foiled!!!

Big Cry ****CENSORED****
Post #276856 26th Oct 2013 10:21am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
def_fid



Member Since: 07 Mar 2011
Location: worcestershire
Posts: 17

United Kingdom 2012 Defender 110 Puma 2.2 USW Stornoway Grey
Carbon particles, air quality and DPF's
Unfortunately, after 30 years direct involvement with air quality, I can assure everyone that inhaling carbon particles is not good for you. In the USA it has been found that anyone living within 200 yards of a freeway is at massively increased risk of cardio-pulmonary disease in their later years, and anyone with cardio-pulmonary diseases is at increased risk of premature death.
HOWEVER!!
By far the greatest contributor of carbon particles is rubber based tyres.1000'sTons of carbon black are added to tyres for purely cosmetic purposes, it is debatable whether pm2.5 carbon from small diesels contribute as much to the general open air pollution as is claimed by pressure groups. DPF's are no substitute for technical advances in fuel economy, traffic congestion relief and efficient energy storage.
Oil Central heating systems are orders of magnitude worse than small diesels, and in the home, carbon from frying, fires, barbecues and candles contribute greater risk because exposure time is longer.
DPF's are a political stop-gap and are used because it is easier to legislate than more effective alternatives.

BTW I think 2.2 defenders have a regeneration programme built into the ECU therefore are not as susceptible to low mileage use. I love my 2.2, but I'll never sell my 300tdi! Shocked
Post #277716 29th Oct 2013 9:51am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
blackwolf



Member Since: 03 Nov 2009
Location: South West England
Posts: 17419

United Kingdom 2007 Defender 110 Puma 2.4 DCPU Stornoway Grey
Not related to the 2.2 Defender, but apropos the creeping trend of unnecessary technology into vehicles, it is interesting to note the growing problems that emergency and recovery services are having with vehicles such as the RR with electronic handbrakes. When the vehicle fails with the handbrake applied, it seems that it is not easy to release it to move the vehicle. Only last week there was one completely blocking the entrance to a local school, with the AA man in attendance clearly unable to do anything to move the vehicle. Chaos!

I don't have such a vehicle, and I don't know what is involved in releasing the handbrake on a disabled one, but it seems very hard to think of any convincing reason to fit one in the first place.

Our European masters, it seems to me, are becoming increasingly detached from reality and legislating simply because they can. It is all rather depressing really.
Post #277722 29th Oct 2013 10:15am
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Reply with quote
familymad



Member Since: 13 Dec 2011
Location: Bucks
Posts: 3481

 2016 Defender 130 Puma 2.2 HCPU Santorini Black
Agree wholeheartedly,

My father owned an S type jag from new. Electronic handbrake. One fine day last year while at 60mph, the battery was sensed to be 'low'. The car applied its fail safe in case of low battery and parked on a hill. HANDBRAKE APPLIED.

That ended with them not knowing why they were facing the wrong way on an A road after a large bang and screeching noise was heard. Could have been killed.

Needless to say they bought a Fiat Panda as they still fit handbrakes. 1951 80" S1 2.0
1995 110 300TDI
1995 90 300TDI
Post #277748 29th Oct 2013 12:31pm
View user's profile Send private message View poster's gallery Post Reply
Post Reply  Back to top
Page 6 of 6 <123456
All times are GMT

Jump to  
Previous Topic | Next Topic >
Posting Rules
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum



Site Copyright © 2006-2024 Futuranet Ltd & Martin Lewis
DEFENDER2.NET RSS Feed - All Forums