DEFENDER2.NET - View topic - LR Engine Choice Question: Duratorq 3.0TDCi

↓ Advertise on Defender2 ↓

Home · FAQ · New Posts · My Posts · PMs · Search · Members · Map · Calendar · Profile · Donate · Register · Log In

Home > Puma (Tdci) > LR Engine Choice Question: Duratorq 3.0TDCi

Page 1 of 1

Print this entire topic ·

draymond

Member Since: 07 Apr 2009
Location: Sydney
Posts: 49

2008 Defender 110 Puma 2.4 SVX Station Wagon Santorini Black

LR Engine Choice Question: Duratorq 3.0TDCi

I've had my pondering hat on for a while now.... and this question has been rattling about in my tiny excuse for a brain.

Does anyone know why the 2.4 TDCi was chosen for the Defender, from the Ford engine pool, as opposed to the Duratorq 3.0 TDCi from Mazda BT-50 or Ford Ranger?

Duratorq 3.0 TDCi
156 PS (115 kW; 154 hp)@3200rpm and 380 N·m (280 lb·ft)@1800rpm

I'd suspect that the longevity would be there? Perhaps there was a perception that a larger engine would increase emissions?

Maybe it was just down to physical size.

16th Nov 2009 6:27am

110SEB

Member Since: 29 Jan 2009
Location: Essex, England
Posts: 1444

2007 Defender 110 Puma 2.4 XS CSW Java Black

I bet it's an emissions issue. Euro emissions rules are getting tighter and tighter.

There is rumour that the next Defender engine will be a 2.2 in order to comply with Euro5 regs.

We're coming full circle and we'll all be clawing each other to get our hands on 1980s 2.5 litre n/a!

16th Nov 2009 1:37pm

sasha2001

Member Since: 02 Jan 2009
Location: New Zealand+ russia
Posts: 206

2008 Defender 110 Puma 2.4 CSW Tonga Green

Also doesn't the EU have taxes on engine capacity as well as emissions, better engine size , more tax?

16th Nov 2009 7:56pm

Page 1 of 1

All times are GMT + 1 Hour

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