4x4 pickup/van mpg's plus reliability

[Burgess]

Interesting. I did read on the transit forum that the 2.0 litre Euro 6 ford engine in the new transit is identical whether its the 105hp or the 170hp engine whereas the older engines had different injectors and turbos.

 

£300 sounds a good price too.

[LeeGray]

Range Rover 4.4 always towing, mostly fully loaded 12-15mpg, lovely.

citroen nemo stop/start 68mpg! Horrible.

 

30,000 in little van, 10,000 in the truck so average 54?

[Wendelspanswick]

11 plate Renault Trafic van - no motorway work - just A and minor roads - 1/3 loaded = 38mpg

Edited March 22, 2018 by Wendelspanswick

[Jonny69]

On 3/21/2018 at 19:13, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

That’s what the tune-up wizard said - it’s the same engine but ‘governed’ into different model spec’s to fit into tax brackets. He just unleashes that which has been previously suppressed. He Changes the engine performance (wether for economy or acceleration/ top end) but the vehicle retains original tax bracket.  £300 for a re-map. 

DPF removal, intercooler and custom map. Will see it over 200bhp and boat loads of torque. Depends what you are doing with it though. If not towing a lot then I wouldn't bother doing anything. Plus making more power and torque on those engines does the dual mass flywheel no favours at all

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

Just now, Jonny69 said:

DPF removal, intercooler and custom map. Will see it over 200bhp and boat loads of torque. Depends what you are doing with it though. If not towing a lot then I wouldn't bother doing anything. Plus making more power and torque on those engines does the dual mass flywheel no favours at all

My engineering knowledge is limited to checking the oil & water! Mate said the other day of the later Ford engines “they will throw a leg out of bed for a pass time” 

 

I had absolutely no idea what he was on about, but realised it didn’t sound good. 

 

I struggle to to understand why it’s necess to meddle in something that has come out of a factory after quadzillions of hours (and £s) of R&D, design and manufacture. 

 

Still pondering it as an option...

[Jonny69]

7 hours ago, kevinjohnsonmbe said:

My engineering knowledge is limited to checking the oil & water! Mate said the other day of the later Ford engines “they will throw a leg out of bed for a pass time” 

 

I had absolutely no idea what he was on about, but realised it didn’t sound good. 

 

I struggle to to understand why it’s necess to meddle in something that has come out of a factory after quadzillions of hours (and £s) of R&D, design and manufacture. 

 

Still pondering it as an option...

My defender is done. It makes loads of torque but it tows heavy every day so is worth doing. EDIT: It's a 2.2 transit engine. 

 

They design the engines for horrible humid environments and with porridge for fuel. We don't worry much about that here, so its pretty safe to make more use of our climate a bigger intercooler and some colder air. 

[tonytree]

My 62 plate ranger 2.2 gets about 27mpg

[PeteB]

My 63plate Ranger had engine swap at 100k, new DPF very soon after too. Gets between 17 and 32.

 

Shame the 3.2 isn't supposed to do over 60mph on the road, few other crewcabs are the same too!

[bigtreedon]

My 63plate Ranger had engine swap at 100k, new DPF very soon after too. Gets between 17 and 32.
 
Shame the 3.2 isn't supposed to do over 60mph on the road, few other crewcabs are the same too!

Why is that is it to do with the weight of them ?

[PeteB]

Correct. If a crewcabs weighs more than 2040kgs unladen, it is no longer classed as dual purpose and as such, is restricted to 60 as the national speed limit. Now that the automatic speed cameras are getting linked to the central computers through the ANPR system, you could be 'innocently' doing 70 on a dual carriageway or motorway and get an easy three points and fine!

 

The 2.2 Unlimited or XLT come under the weight so are okay. Apart from they need a few more ponies!