TDV8 or TDV6 ?
Author
Discussion

B16JUS

Original Poster:

2,386 posts

261 months

Tuesday 31st May 2011
quotequote all
My dad is thinking of a range rover sport and any advise on which engine would be helpfull to him.

Thanks

Triple7

4,015 posts

261 months

Tuesday 31st May 2011
quotequote all
3.0 TDV6 or 3.6 TDV8, equally nice. Forget the 2.7TDV6......

B16JUS

Original Poster:

2,386 posts

261 months

Tuesday 31st May 2011
quotequote all
didnt know there was different versions of the tdv6

any reason why the 2.7 is bad ?

RedLeicester

6,869 posts

269 months

Tuesday 31st May 2011
quotequote all
B16JUS said:
any reason why the 2.7 is bad ?
Dog slow and uneconomical.

B16JUS

Original Poster:

2,386 posts

261 months

Tuesday 31st May 2011
quotequote all
he is old so speed should be fine and as long as its 25 - 30 mpg he will be happy.

is the 2.7 problematic or is it just as you said not as quick and mpg as the 3.0

LFB531

1,269 posts

182 months

Tuesday 31st May 2011
quotequote all
Triple7 said:
3.0 TDV6 or 3.6 TDV8, equally nice. Forget the 2.7TDV6......
Would agree if budget allows but if not 2.7 does the job (in my case) just fine. 25mpg+ easily done and whilst no dragster, I wasn't really expecting it to be. Mind you, it's a hell of a step up from a TD5!

Triple7

4,015 posts

261 months

Tuesday 31st May 2011
quotequote all
The 3.0 TDV6 new from Sept 2009. 2.7 withdrawn.

It's a heavy car, no issue with any of the engines....

Gazzab

21,578 posts

306 months

Wednesday 1st June 2011
quotequote all
2.7 is fine. Not exactly sporty but the auto gearbox is very smooth. A remap releases a bit more go.
The TDV8 is more performant but thirstier.
The 3.0 Ltr will be much more expensive to buy as it is only the latest shape that have this engine.

Davel

8,982 posts

282 months

Wednesday 1st June 2011
quotequote all
I've had two of the 2.7 versions.

Not bad engines at all but they do suffer from turbo lag, usually just when you don't need it.

Gazzab

21,578 posts

306 months

Wednesday 1st June 2011
quotequote all
Davel said:
I've had two of the 2.7 versions.

Not bad engines at all but they do suffer from turbo lag, usually just when you don't need it.
I havent noticed the turbo lag but I have always hated the throttle lag from standstill - right old pain in the butt. I have had mine remapped and it is much better now.

Davel

8,982 posts

282 months

Wednesday 1st June 2011
quotequote all
You may be right and I may be confusing turbo lag with throttle lag.

Either way, it always lagged just when you didn't want it to - at road junctions or on overtakes.

Gazzab

21,578 posts

306 months

Wednesday 1st June 2011
quotequote all
And you may be right and I am more confused than you :-)

LFB531

1,269 posts

182 months

Wednesday 1st June 2011
quotequote all
Davel said:
You may be right and I may be confusing turbo lag with throttle lag.

Either way, it always lagged just when you didn't want it to - at road junctions or on overtakes.
Makes it even more interesting when you lose an EGR valve, T junctions are, er...interesting yikes

RRS_Staffs

648 posts

203 months

Wednesday 1st June 2011
quotequote all

Forget the 2.7 - its awful

The TDV8 suits the car much better

Ive driven the new V6 diesel and found it a big too highly strung TBH

Sadly the V8 has been canned and the new one from the FF isnt fitted to the RRS

Sorry - no help

smile