Is there anything actually good about the Tdci engines.?

This site contains affiliate links for which LandyZone may be compensated if you make a purchase.
As per title, there seems to be little love for them, but, is there actually anything really wrong with them?

seem to recall such anti'ism with the Td5, hatred for the constant cooking of the 300Tdi, the only universally sound engine to have is a 200Tdi :rolleyes:

open to education, so, come on, whats wrong with them exactly?

I don't think there is anything really wrong with them as such, and for many the advances in technology make the a tdci powered defender a nicer place to be...

But personally, if I was given a choice of a brand spanking new defender with either a 300tdi or tdci unit, I'd pay a little more not to have the latter fitted - I hate the sound of them, and, for what I own a defender for (as a toy) the electrickery somewhat defeats the object. Each to their own.

How do you do a poll?

Would be good to see what people would choose a 300tdi or tdci if there was a choice as a brand new vehicle..

Tom
 
..Would be good to see what people would choose a 300tdi or tdci if there was a choice as a brand new vehicle..

V8 :lol:

Why? Power. Smoothness. Sound. Legendary reliability. Oh and the fact that our government is about to absolutely fecking rape diesel owners on tax due to incoming emissions laws...
 
... huge mileages between services...

A little off original topic...

But I would NOT necessarily follow that suggested service period, in respect to oil changes anyway. What follows is not LR specific.

The oil companies, through clever(?) chemistry, reckon they can get oil to stay in grade and stable for much longer than they used to be able to. They sort of have to assume that a handful of variables will be the same for ALL drivers.

They don't include people who only do short journeys and therefore have an increased quantity of moisture & fuel in the engine. Nor do they include people who tow or work hard their engines frequently, people who take their cars to track days, people who drive in extreme cold or hot etc.

Generally we live in a throw away society. If back in the 80's we'd had these new oils and people had treated their 2.5NA's to a 10,000 or longer oil change interval there would not have been many of them still on the road in the late 90's and none in the 00's. That doesn't matter now, you have a fairly cheap engine that will do a job and get scrapped when it fails.

New engines are fairly common now as "replacement parts" it's now not financially viable to repair them even for fairly simple things that in the past would have been a common fix. That also shows a problem with our society, labour has become so expensive at dealers that it's now cheaper to put in a new engine at great environmental waste.

So they now give these service intervals of huge mileages, not because the engines can stay in good health all there life life this, but because they know they can lure people in with these figures but also because if the engine isn't as healthy as it ought to be at 100k then who cares, the original owner is probably long gone. The vehicle can be scrapped or a new engine can be put in and the manufacturer hopefully sells another car or engine.

Also, notice the oil filler cap usually says Castrol, or some oil companies name? Castrol or the oil company in question and the vehicle manufacturer have sat down and thrashed out a deal. Along the lines of we will sell this special oil - last years oil with a new chemical worth 20p in it - which we will claim to be "the oil" for this engine, they sell it to them/us for £16 a litre and tell the owners it's special oil this vehicle MUST have to work on these long service intervals. That is why Castrol oil is the worst muck you can buy, mainly because they spend all their money on having their name stamped into oil filler caps and other expensive marketing not R&D. For that sort of money you could change your oil twice or thrice with a good fully synthetic oil not bearing the Castrol name and still come out better off.

Also, remember that for every mile you drive on oil, that's more deposits circulating round the engine in the oil, I don't know if I want filth that could be 10,000 miles old circulating my engine.

Also, a funny thing is that often they state a high mileage but put, or 1 year, knowing that most vehicles will be back in getting it's oil changed sooner anyway - because they do really need it. Would also probably sort the timing chain wear issues for starters - oh and using a decent oil.

I'll stick to sensible, not wasteful though (the US seem to think 3000 mile oil changes are acceptable) oil change intervals with sensible oil.
 
Hell of a lot of truth in that post!!!!

I'm a frequent oil changer, one year min regardless of kilometers, which is 5,000! Good quality mineral oils in the 200Tdi and transmission and drive train iss every 10,000 or 2yrs.
 
I'll stick to sensible, not wasteful though (the US seem to think 3000 mile oil changes are acceptable) oil change intervals with sensible oil.[/QUOTE]

I think we are singing from the same hymn sheet. I got my 2012 2.2 TDci at 1 year old, with 4.5k on the clock and with its first service oil change done. Now 2.5 years old and 26k on the clock, oil changed again at 11k, 17k and 21k and about to get another. Thats 4 oil changes so far will soon be 5, when it has only required 2 at the manufacturers recommended intervals. I use Fully synthectic ford spec (not castrol) oil, but I don't have any issues with castrol and would use it if there was no other equal / better oils available at a better price. In fact castrol just happens to be my preferred brand for other vehicles (bike) and I do use it. That said I nearly always use halfords own brand oils in the family cars and the landy, they sometimes have offers at silly prices and I stock up on it. Couple of months ago they were selling 4 litres for £12, fully synthetic. Encourages me to change more often as its good for the engine and doesn't hurt the wallet. I get my filters from a motor factor, top brands at trade prices. So, going back to the OP, another good point is if you can do your own servicing, it can still be done at a fraction of the cost of a dealer / garage service.
 
Just back from test drives, one a 2009 2.4 with only 45,000kms on the clock, the other a 2012 2.2 with 39,000kms on the clock.

Both were very smooth, the 2.4 seemed less torquey through the box and both really nailed it when the faster pedal was stabbed!

6 speed gearbox was, if anything, the single biggest improvement over the TD5 I drove 3 weeks back.

Cab is just superficial plastic crap that held no interest or appeal, just the drive train was my area of interest.

so far very impressed by both TDCI engined vehicles!
 
I do like the feeling of the MT82, though i would be budgeting for Ashcrofts modified output shaft. As it WILL go.

I just dont like the engines it is attached to.

Now if only i could fit the MT82 to my 4.6 RV8.
 
I had a Transit Connect tdci 1.8 and the engine was the weak part of the van.

It was the 110ps version and it always seemed like the electronics were working against you, to the benefit of emissions.

Also Ford engines seem to be OK for around 100,000 miles then become ripe for a wallet raping, with failing injectors, fuel pumps, turbos etc.
Economy was never great, my VW Caddy did 10mpg more.

I drove a Defender tdci 2.4 recently and a/when you took your foot of the gas it took a second to stop accelerating b/ when you floored it from a trailing throttle it took a full two seconds to respond, before surging forward with a jolt.

The dealer did say that a remap cures both these issues.

Can't decide on the TDCi Defender. I wouldn't say no to one, even though l don't like Ford diesel engines.
 
Last edited:
My new defender has been back to the dealer 3 times for lack of power and delayed throttle response amongst other things and they can not sort it so I'm not loving the new 2.2 tdci !
I also have a 200tdi discovery, a300tdi defender and a tdv6 discovery 3 all of which have served me well ! I think they have made them worse by trying to make them better !
 
I think it was a case of "keeping the Defender going" rather than "making it better"

What if they'd fitted the Discovery 2.7 V6 diesel, now THAT might have been something worth buying.
 
You have to view the fitting of the ford engine as being driven by availability of sufficient supply, cost per unit . I doubt it was their first choice , for the application . The same reasoning was why they didnt fit a BMW 3 litre TD , which I have done with ease ,using 99.9% standard Land rover & BMW parts, and I would consider out performs the tdci in all areas . JMHO;)
 
Back
Top