petrol or diesel ?

hi,reading around im getting the rough figures that a diesel is 10-20 % more effecient,does this still hold true for the age of lr that i can afford which will be 1980-1990ish ?
Also,i am interested in an 1985 d110 v8 csw,now this is petrol,why,surely the pulling power of diesel and the price diff between the fuels back then would of meant that such a vehicel would be diesel,i cant believe on such a vehicel that excelleration and engine noise would have been major concerns.....so why is it petrol ?
What do u prefer and why ?

thanks, tookey

Diesel; firstly, Diesel engines are much more reliable, and because of the nature of the diesel they do last longer.

There is less to go wrong.

I am not commited to using fully taxed fuel if I am going to be offroad for days at a time.

I go further for my money.

The V8's were fitted back in the 80's because they had loads of them kicking around, and the Diesel engines were gutless to say the least back then. Also the V8 is a very lightweight engine due to it's all aluminium construction.

thanks for advice and info,appreciated

tookey

The 2.25 and later 2.5 petrol engines and the 2.5 NA diesel had no go in them. So when you needed more pulling power the only solution was a 3.5 V8 as found in the Range Rover.

Simple answer. Using a v8 which was already in production. was a lot cheaper than developing from scratch a decent Diesel to a firm which was on the verge of bankrupcy and was loosing market share at an alarming rate. BB

The diesel engines are not reliable. Drive petrol on lpg.

thanks bonny,makes sense. landseer,i thought the arguement was ...'diesels are less likely to go wrong but harder to fix if they do, petrol are more likely to go wrong but easier to fix if they do'.........i find your comment strange cos at the moments i am weighing up the pros and cons of each,a diesel pro,is its reliability.

tookey

tookey said:

'diesels are less likely to go wrong but harder to fix if they do, petrol are more likely to go wrong but easier to fix if they do'

Click to expand...

Nicely put - deffo agree with that view.

Landseer said:

The diesel engines are not reliable. Drive petrol on lpg.

Click to expand...

what a load of old tosh, diesels are far more reliable than petrols AND lpg is a right pain as it is a retrofit therefore unless you take it to the bloke that fitted it you are in trouble as no one fits em the same. you can't take an lpg to any garage and you certainly cant mess with em yerself. that is the most unfound statement i have ever read

I seem to remember the 300tdi wasn't exactly reliable when it was first released.

very true treev, i think the 200 is still a more reliable engine than the 300. lets face it the 2.5na is very reliable, just very slow

and the 2.25 diesel is even more reliable still.

Engine strength and reliability has got nothing to do what fuel it burns, it's down to engineering design, materials and stress.

Take my 3.5 V8 it only makes about 110bhp but will give 300,000 on the clock before a rebuild is needed.

The 2.25 ex-MOD Series IIa i used to have had 300,000++++ on the clock (through the history and reciepts) these engines just don't fail.


The K series engine fantastic engineering but over stressed design and poor materials means you will be lucky to more than 30,000 out of it before a rebuild is needed.


And breathe......

very good point treev, you would think that with technology the way it is these days they would be able to combine the two but i think we are asking too much

I don't think manufacturers want their cars to last forever. They want them to last 1 day after the manufacturers warrenty runs out so they will brake down and the owner will trade in for a new one.

I hate garages and especially main "stealers". I will stick to my carbs. I think the newest engine i will own will probably a 300tdi, it's on the limit for home mechanics.

Oddly enough though i work in Automation as an engineer to the food industry and spend all day making everything more high tech. lol irony

After reading,research etc i have decided ( well nearly,i am new to this and things keep grabbing my attention ! ) that the 200tdi is the engine for me,judging by this thread and others on the site which i have read,i think a large % of lr owners would agree that it is fair choice for a landy virgin whos aim is to be able to understand and do some work on his vehcile,do u ?

tookey

I reckon the 2.5 turbo engine is the easiest. Mainly 'cos thats what I've got but it hasn't got any fancy electrics to go wrong.

good choice tookey

hi ya yellow.
yu not sounding off on one - are ya - tsk tsk - i thort that woz my job

Land Rover diesels driven and owned by myself 2 litre 2.25 litre. Very reliable but very underpowered and sore on fuel and if worked hard both tended to leak and burn engine oil. 2.5na Bit more powerful but still sore on fuel, 2.5turbo very unreliable.. trouble was the engine was never designed to take a turbo or the extra power and stresses involved. 200 tdi excellent all round engine powerful speedy and easy on diesel . 300tdi just as good but more electronics in later models. The 300tdi is the last engine that can be stripped and worked on by a competent amateur. Have never owned or driven a td5.