We recently came across a 2.5 n/a diesel with looooo miles on it and I am curious how it might perform in a Rangie Classic. I know it won't be a performance beast but will it at least get out of it's own way with the help of gearing possibly?

The reason I ask is with fuel prices going up and the little misses Rangies' 3.9 dieing a slow death I am considering the benefits of switching it over to Vegi-diesel. She is running a tired old 3.9, 285's, stock gears and the BW t-case and if the on-road driving was at least 75% of that I think that combined with the $avings of Vegi-diesel it might be something to look into.

She currently drives around 24miles a day to work and doesn't use the highway, hell she doesn't get above 55 normally. We don't do any towing with her truck and it barely gets off the pavement. Not to mention that the low mileage 4.0 I had slated to go in her rig could be sold for some extra cash...

So, has anyone out there put a 2.5 in a Classic? If not, could anyone tell me how the engine acts in a 110 or 109 and what their thoughts would be of putting on in a Classic? Also, has anyone turbo charged a N/A diesel engine with any sort of aftermarket parts?

Or would I just be a fool for trying?

Thanks,

Jason

No...don't even think about it. Your girl will hate you and it will be a nightmare.
Not worth it....not even if you like the smell of McDonalds.

I suspect you'd find school buses to have better performance...

(again, can't find anything to fawk with you on this one :flipoff2: Keep trying)

Re-powering a la Flinstone would give you better performance and you would probably get more miles to the gallon of chip fat...... :D

So, has anyone out there put a 2.5 in a Classic? If not, could anyone tell me how the engine acts in a 110 or 109 and what their thoughts would be of putting on in a Classic? Also, has anyone turbo charged a N/A diesel engine with any sort of aftermarket parts?


I know the 2.5 NA would be good in an 88...softtop. Couple friends have them and they will do 65 on the freeway, cruise right along, great off road torque. Not much noisier then the 2.25, better mileage.

I know someone with a 2.5 TD, factory turbo, in an 88, again a great setup.
Not sure about after market parts, but you should be able to source original parts for the turbo system. The injector pump is different, don't know about any of the internal engine bits.

All three of the people I know rebuilt the engines to spec with Rover parts.

I think the 2.5 NA would be very marginal in a 109. The TD might be do-able.

Pete

You can not turbo an N.A. 2.5 boom.

2.5 NA all had short bellhousing transmissions. It would not be a very straightforward conversion. In fact it would be a pain in the ass. And the results would be minimul. Just spend some money and get a better motor. Quit looking for a deal-make some money somehow and build something worth using.

JP

You can not turbo an N.A. 2.5 boom.

How long it lasts depends on how much boost you run. I wouldn't go past 5psi on a formerly NA engine and I wouldn't turn the fuel up much either.

Turbocharged engines run lower compression, many of them also have stronger heads, rods, oil coolers, oil cooled pistons and run anywhere up to 45psi boost (bmw 3.0).

You can not turbo an N.A. 2.5 boom.

Richard Turner (Turner engines in the UK) built a hybrid engine from a 2.25D and 2.5D (na) - and turbcharged it. I think he got reasonable longevity from it (but I think he only built it because he could, and didn't have too many expectations on longevity).

Boom boom

I've driven 109 STWs with 2.25 and 110 STWs with 2.5
The 2.5 is noticeably quicker than the 2.25.

That is far from quick, however.

Forget 55 if you have anything but downslopes and the wind from the rear.
I'd say 45 50 as an average, sure you can get it above 60-65 occasionally, but then comes the uphill...

No revver, noisy.

Find a Nissan straight six, BMW, Merc or some other reasonable diesel if you must convert it.
I think you are really whining about fuel prices, can you say $6/gallon?

Tobias

i just put the diahatsu 2.8td in my gf`s RRC, goes great, gets plenty to the gallon and is very reliable..not sure how common the diahatsu fourtrak is in the USA though...

I think you are really whining about fuel prices, can you say $6/gallon?

Tobias

how about $8.50 a gallon (UK)

how about $8.50 a gallon (UK)

About $5.50 a gallon here.

UK Tinker, please tell me that's UK gallons too, not us ones.

It's only $4.47 per US gallon in ireland, and I'm going to wales on thursady, better fuel up before I go

UK Tinker, please tell me that's UK gallons too, not us ones.

It's only $4.47 per US gallon in ireland, and I'm going to wales on thursady, better fuel up before I go

yep UK gallon...got some at 89pence per litre today, but had to pay 98pence per litre on sunday, wtf is going on...this b8stard government... :mad3: :mad3:

soz thread now hyjacked.

I've driven 109 STWs with 2.25 and 110 STWs with 2.5
The 2.5 is noticeably quicker than the 2.25.

That is far from quick, however.

Forget 55 if you have anything but downslopes and the wind from the rear.
I'd say 45 50 as an average, sure you can get it above 60-65 occasionally, but then comes the uphill...

To return thread to topic I have a 109" Series IIA ute-cab (pickup) on 33's with a 2.25D. The 2.25D is a recent rebuild with 40thou OS pistons, extractors and a few injector pump tweaks. It will happily hold 65 or higher on the highway on anything up to about a 2% slope, the acceleration is similar to a good 2.25P, but it is a bit slower driving up the hills.

However I would never advist fitting a 2.25D or 2.5D in place of a 3.9V8. For a while I owned 2 Land Rover 110's - one with a carb 3.5V8 and one with an ISUZU 3.9L NA diesel - 99Bhp - (which I still own). The V8 was in good condition but needed a tune, and even then it had noticeably quicker acceleration the the diesel and pulled much better up hills. I would definitely not fit an engine under 100Bhp minimum into a rangie.

You can not turbo an N.A. 2.5 boom.


Go here on LROI (http://threads.lro.com/cgi-bin/wwwthreads/showflat.pl?Cat=&Board=defender&Number=621914&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&part=all) and read the 4th posting down... it explains from which engine number the conversion can be safely done.

Jamie

Not that I don't believe you, but I am going to stick with what I know. Boom Boom Boom.

It's only $4.47 per US gallon in ireland, and I'm going to wales on thursady, better fuel up before I go

Sweet! I'll be there tomorrow! I'll have to make sure I run as much gas through my crappy rental car as I can.

$4.47 per gallon! Pa-shawwww! It's about $20.00 a gallon in Death Valley.

:flipoff2:

Not that I don't believe you, but I am going to stick with what I know. Boom Boom Boom.

Does this mean you have actually attempted to place a turbo on a 2.5na?

Pete

I appreciate all the feedback you guys. At this point I am not going to ATTEMPT to install the 2.5 in the Rangie but I am going to mess around with turbo'ing it. As I said I have a friend that runs a little speed shop her in town that builds 9 and 10 second rice rockets and he would like to give it a whirl so I will let everyone know if/when anything happens.

Hopefully BuckOn is wrong and it won't all go BOOM BOOM. :) And yes, did you actually Turbo a 2.5 BuckOn?

Thanks for the Thread link DieselJim, interesting info.

, Jason

Finally found my parts list. God I need to hire someone to come unpack all of my books.

Anywho the N/A and turbo 2.5 use the same cam, crank, conrods, intake valve, injector, bottom gasket set, followers and tappets.

Different head, exhaust valve, upper gasket set, crank gear and piston.

So wonder what the difference is in exhaust valve, can the N/A head be modded to work with the turbo valve?

I can't find a part# on the IP but I am pretty sure that from my fiends with the two different engines there was a difference. They both got their pumps rebuilt and the turbo IP was more difficult.

Pete

Wasn't there a company that was building Rover 4cyl Petrol and Diesel engines with some serious output NOT by way of forced induction?

Something like Safari 4??? Can't remember.

, Jason

Here it is:

http://www.land-roverco.com/engine.htm

Spoke with them today and they claim that the engines produce 120 - 130HP and rev over 5,000k. In 109's and 110's they claim 85MPH on flats. Any opinions?

Here it is:

http://www.land-roverco.com/engine.htm

Spoke with them today and they claim that the engines produce 120 - 130HP and rev over 5,000k. In 109's and 110's they claim 85MPH on flats. Any opinions?

That is only petrols, not diesels. However if you get a 2.5 Petrol head, cam, manifolds and carbs, pistons and bearings, you can make your diesel into a petrol with a very strong bottom end that coule easily handle quite a bit of boost, and if balanced, could rev to 5000rpm. However it would have less torque than a V8 but drink almost as much juice.

That is only petrols, not diesels. However if you get a 2.5 Petrol head, cam, manifolds and carbs, pistons and bearings,

It is kind of funny, but the part numbers for the 2.5 diesel and petrol cams is the same. Crank and block are also the same.

Does this mean you have actually attempted to place a turbo on a 2.5na?

Pete

Yes,

Sort of. I had the 2.5 NA for a few years in my 90. I wanted to kill myself. At the time I did not think I could afford the 300 so I attempted to turbo it. I took it to a very good Diesel Performance shop that a buddy of mine recommended. We pulled the engine apart to check beef. There is none. The shop refused to even think about it. He said maybe 3 pounds of boost is all it could handle. I didn't believe him so I did a TON of research. BOOM! Don't try, it's stupid, very stupid. The turbo and piping alone will cost more than the engine even costs. I sold that whole drivetrain for $2000 and I feel like I got a smoking deal. Get it? Smoking?

Yes,
I didn't believe him so I did a TON of research. BOOM! Don't try, it's stupid, very stupid.

Did you swap heads and pistons for the turbo versions?

What exactly broke?

As I mentioned I do know someone with a 2.5 turbo (stock) and its a sweet engine in a coiled 88.

Pete

It is kind of funny, but the part numbers for the 2.5 diesel and petrol cams is the same. Crank and block are also the same.

Not sure on the 2.5 - but for the 2.25, the diesel has a forged crank, the petrol doesn't, the diesel also has a 5kg (10lb) or so heavier flywheel, and the diesel has a different cam (though I have heard that a 2.25P will work with a diesel cam, just that it will have a more torquey bottom end but not as much top end).