 | Home > Technical (L322) > RR vs X5 - same engines, different maps? |
 
|
|
|
| Haylands Member Since: 04 Mar 2014 Location: East Yorkshire Posts: 8066   
|
At about the time the L322 came out there was a voluntary agreement between manufacturers that they wouldn't go above 300BHP, hence the FF is quoted at just below that, in truth all that were tested were around 320bhp...
|
||
28th May 2015 5:05pm |
|
| Zirconblue Member Since: 16 Apr 2015 Location: Kent Posts: 1277  
|
Land-Rover used to detune previous BMW engines, because they were indeed more geared up for pulling heavy loads and off roading. The X5 was never really intended for that, so it may well be true that X5's have more horse power, but less low down grunt. It's not really about them being nobbled, which is likely just bulls*** from someone who owns and X5 and want's to make out he has a better car, but more about being suited to their intended purpose. It's also unlikely BMW would want to place restrictions on someone buying their engines, after all they want to keep selling their engines, they make money on them the same as they do cars. In fact when they sold off the Rover group one of the parts they kept hold of for another 4 years was Powertrain Ltd, who built the K-series and L-Series engines. The only reason Land-Rover went to their own power units is it's cheaper to build them in house when they already have a perfectly suitable unit in production. The switched Diesel suppliers, because their then parent had an agreement with PSA to co-develop diesel technology. PSA are renown for their HDi technology, which next to VW's TDI are the best small diesel engines out there. |
||
|
28th May 2015 5:58pm |
|
| kingpleb Member Since: 07 Jun 2011 Location: Maybe here. Maybe there, I get everywhere! Posts: 8455 
|
Personally i would put a PSA HDi at the top of the table |
||
|
28th May 2015 7:02pm |
|
| DannyH Member Since: 30 Apr 2015 Location: Hull Posts: 221 
|
Pete can your mate tune it so we get 50 to a gallon please? Dan
|
||
|
28th May 2015 7:22pm |
|
| Haylands Member Since: 04 Mar 2014 Location: East Yorkshire Posts: 8066
|
I was hoping for 75.... |
||
|
28th May 2015 7:51pm |
|
| Philip Member Since: 05 Jan 2010 Location: UK Posts: 2544 
|
That was the so-called "gentleman's agreement" in Japan that led to nothing domestically-produced being advertised as having more than 276bhp (even if it did). |
||
|
28th May 2015 7:53pm |
|
| kingpleb Member Since: 07 Jun 2011 Location: Maybe here. Maybe there, I get everywhere! Posts: 8455
|
The only time an l322 will get 75mpg is when it's owner uses the heavily used yellow card on it 😄😄😄 FFRR MY06 facelift With TDV8 Alloys Zeros/ATR's
|
||
|
28th May 2015 8:13pm |
|
| kingpleb Member Since: 07 Jun 2011 Location: Maybe here. Maybe there, I get everywhere! Posts: 8455
|
That's not cheap, requires the fitment of an electric motor and a genset in the boot lol FFRR MY06 facelift With TDV8 Alloys Zeros/ATR's
|
||
|
28th May 2015 8:14pm |
|
| Zirconblue Member Since: 16 Apr 2015 Location: Kent Posts: 1277
|
Well i think the 2.7 V6 was largely PSA anyway, intended for their Citroen C6. I think the 3ltr upgrade was at the behest of JLR. Because the C6 is a rare beast indeed. The V8 was basically ford/JLR led. However PSA do seem to have a history of releasing some engines too early. The 2.2 DW12 wasn't that powerful or economical in it's first release, Which is why the X-Type got the Ford diesels. but it's second incarnation (Found in the XF, Newer Mondeo's, and the current Defender) it's a sorted lump giving astonishing power outputs an economy! The same goes for the TDV6, the 3ltr is much better than the 2.7. VW TDI's are good, but a little more noisy and they all seem to smoke when they get old, it's rare to see a Citroen/Peugeot chucking out black smoke. |
||
|
28th May 2015 8:16pm |
|
| Zirconblue Member Since: 16 Apr 2015 Location: Kent Posts: 1277
|
Actually, are you going about this the right way. I mean could you fit a winch and battery on the boat? 
|
||
|
28th May 2015 8:17pm |
|
| Zirconblue Member Since: 16 Apr 2015 Location: Kent Posts: 1277
|
You mean the AA have lorries that do 75mpg?! I'm going to look at getting one of those Renault/Volvo truck engines put in my car!
|
||
|
28th May 2015 8:31pm |
|
| Philip Member Since: 05 Jan 2010 Location: UK Posts: 2544
|
Same engine family (Duratorq Lion), developed and built (V6 in Dagenham, V8 now in Mexico) by Ford. |
||
|
29th May 2015 12:21am |
|
| Zirconblue Member Since: 16 Apr 2015 Location: Kent Posts: 1277
|
Agreed they're the same family, though as PSA were intending to use the V6 in their own products, it's reasonable to assume they had a little more say in how it would turn out, than the V8 which was only really intended for LR and some international Ford models. As it was all PSA technology i still think PSA would have taken the lead on that one. PSA/Ford engines are a joint venture, PSA will have people at Dagenham, just like Ford will have people at where ever PSA's engine development centre is in France. You can't really say "that one was ford and that one was PSA", because from about 2000 onwards they're all jointly developed, but there will always be a dominant party and for the V6 i think that would have been PSA. The last 'Ford' diesel i can think of is the ZSD Puma engine, used in the Transit, X-type, TX-2 and Ducato/Relay/Boxer.
|
||
|
29th May 2015 1:07am |
|
| kingpleb Member Since: 07 Jun 2011 Location: Maybe here. Maybe there, I get everywhere! Posts: 8455
|
Ford are the dominant party as PSA don't exactly use massive numbers of the engines like jlr and ford do.
|
||
|
29th May 2015 4:40am |
|
|
|
| All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
< Previous Topic | Next Topic > |
Posting Rules
|
Site Copyright © 2006-2024 Futuranet Ltd & Martin Lewis
