Range Rover L405 4.4 SDV8 or 3.0TDV6 - Quietest?
Discussion
I'm just looking to buy a newer Range Rover. A low milage L405 around 15, 16 or 17 plate.
Please can you share your opinions with me as to which is preferable, advantages / disadvantages of both?
To me the most important factor for me, is a smooth and quiet cabin - Should I go 4.4 SDV8 or 3.0TDV6
Or as another option, does anyone know anything about the new 3.0 Petrol engine?
Many thanks
Please can you share your opinions with me as to which is preferable, advantages / disadvantages of both?
To me the most important factor for me, is a smooth and quiet cabin - Should I go 4.4 SDV8 or 3.0TDV6
Or as another option, does anyone know anything about the new 3.0 Petrol engine?
Many thanks
Edited by Mulsanne-Speed on Tuesday 5th September 23:05
I until recently had a MY17 FFRR Autobiography & chose the TDV6 engine.
Bottom line was i'd heard the V8 was a little less refined & obviously heavier so unless planning on heavy towing or the like, the engine was somewhat wasted for pure road use. The difference in performance was negligible (think it's .7 secs to 62) but the V6 is far less thirsty so all told i felt the better engine for it's purpose.
The new V6 S/C seems a totally pointless engine as is slower than the TD, drinks an insane amount of fuel & given the cars epic soundproofing won't sound any different from inside the car.
I believe new engines will be hitting the FFRR next year when the MY18 updates come, but as yet no firm details.
Bottom line was i'd heard the V8 was a little less refined & obviously heavier so unless planning on heavy towing or the like, the engine was somewhat wasted for pure road use. The difference in performance was negligible (think it's .7 secs to 62) but the V6 is far less thirsty so all told i felt the better engine for it's purpose.
The new V6 S/C seems a totally pointless engine as is slower than the TD, drinks an insane amount of fuel & given the cars epic soundproofing won't sound any different from inside the car.
I believe new engines will be hitting the FFRR next year when the MY18 updates come, but as yet no firm details.
w8pmc said:
I until recently had a MY17 FFRR Autobiography & chose the TDV6 engine.
Bottom line was i'd heard the V8 was a little less refined & obviously heavier so unless planning on heavy towing or the like, the engine was somewhat wasted for pure road use. The difference in performance was negligible (think it's .7 secs to 62) but the V6 is far less thirsty so all told i felt the better engine for it's purpose.
The new V6 S/C seems a totally pointless engine as is slower than the TD, drinks an insane amount of fuel & given the cars epic soundproofing won't sound any different from inside the car.
I believe new engines will be hitting the FFRR next year when the MY18 updates come, but as yet no firm details.
Thanks for sharing your opinion w8pmc, that's really useful and similar to what the salesman told me (but of course, I wasn't going to take his word for it).Bottom line was i'd heard the V8 was a little less refined & obviously heavier so unless planning on heavy towing or the like, the engine was somewhat wasted for pure road use. The difference in performance was negligible (think it's .7 secs to 62) but the V6 is far less thirsty so all told i felt the better engine for it's purpose.
The new V6 S/C seems a totally pointless engine as is slower than the TD, drinks an insane amount of fuel & given the cars epic soundproofing won't sound any different from inside the car.
I believe new engines will be hitting the FFRR next year when the MY18 updates come, but as yet no firm details.
I know there's a MY2018 due around Spring next year but didn't know there was going to be an engine change - I thought it was just onboard technology and a subtle facelift. I'm still considering one but I'm not sure as we have two 70kg Pyrenean Mountain Dogs that ruin everything and will be scratching the interior panels in the back! It's depressing in any car, more so in a brand new one.
I'm thinking similar to you, Vogue SE or Autobiography, slightly earlier though, 2015 / 2016. What was the biggest step up in spec that made you choose the Autobiography over the Vogue SE?
I take it the car's now gone, would you have chosen the same again?
Or are you perhaps in line for a MY2018?
Many thanks
w8pmc said:
The new V6 S/C seems a totally pointless engine as is slower than the TD, drinks an insane amount of fuel & given the cars epic soundproofing won't sound any different from inside the car..
I'm not sure it will be pointless? As I said on the fullfatrr.com forum the other day.
The Supercharged 3.0 is 340hp and the 4.4 SDV8 is 339hp.
Of course the SDV8 should be a bit quicker to 60mph, but that supercharged 3.0 is a peach and will hold its own when on the move, well it is in the Jag anyway.
Now, both are £84k, with a few options you are close to £90k, let's call it £80k with discount?
That car is going to lose around 50% of list over 3 years for someone only doing 15k a year, so let's say £40K or £1100 a month.
The guys at Land Rover said the 3.0 supercharged is showing 24mpg compared to 28mpg on their TDV8.
Which seems to back up what the US guys are saying too, most are seeing 20-21mpg (us, so 24-26mph UK).
Some of the reviews (RRS) like the TopGear one of the supercharged 3.0 petrol say they averaged over 25mpg from their tests.
If you are doing 15k miles a year at 24mpg that is £270 a month in fuel compared with £240 a month on the diesel.
30k miles a year and it is £520 a month compared with £480 for the diesel.
So when you add up depreciation (1100), insurance (50), servicing etc. (100) and then fuel at either £520 and £480 you are left with £1520 vs £1490.
So just under 2% difference.
Doing 3000 a month it is what? £1730 vs £1770.
So 2.5% difference.
I don't get people who buy a new car that loses the best part of £55,000 over 3 years and say they would love a petrol but bought the diesel to save money. I don't think they have done the maths properly.
I think the problem is many compare old petrols with modern diesels, both in economy terms and performance.
NA petrols can be lethargic and the old V8s incredibly thirsty, but some of the modern petrols I have owned have blown me away. The 3.0 supercharged Jag unit is a stunner.
Sure, buy the diesel if you honestly prefer it, but not to save any money.
Now of course, if you are buying a 4 year old car for £40k all that changes somewhat.
gizlaroc said:
I'm not sure it will be pointless?
As I said on the fullfatrr.com forum the other day.
The Supercharged 3.0 is 340hp and the 4.4 SDV8 is 339hp.
Of course the SDV8 should be a bit quicker to 60mph, but that supercharged 3.0 is a peach and will hold its own when on the move, well it is in the Jag anyway.
Now, both are £84k, with a few options you are close to £90k, let's call it £80k with discount?
That car is going to lose around 50% of list over 3 years for someone only doing 15k a year, so let's say £40K or £1100 a month.
The guys at Land Rover said the 3.0 supercharged is showing 24mpg compared to 28mpg on their TDV8.
Which seems to back up what the US guys are saying too, most are seeing 20-21mpg (us, so 24-26mph UK).
Some of the reviews (RRS) like the TopGear one of the supercharged 3.0 petrol say they averaged over 25mpg from their tests.
If you are doing 15k miles a year at 24mpg that is £270 a month in fuel compared with £240 a month on the diesel.
30k miles a year and it is £520 a month compared with £480 for the diesel.
So when you add up depreciation (1100), insurance (50), servicing etc. (100) and then fuel at either £520 and £480 you are left with £1520 vs £1490.
So just under 2% difference.
Doing 3000 a month it is what? £1730 vs £1770.
So 2.5% difference.
I don't get people who buy a new car that loses the best part of £55,000 over 3 years and say they would love a petrol but bought the diesel to save money. I don't think they have done the maths properly.
I think the problem is many compare old petrols with modern diesels, both in economy terms and performance.
NA petrols can be lethargic and the old V8s incredibly thirsty, but some of the modern petrols I have owned have blown me away. The 3.0 supercharged Jag unit is a stunner.
Sure, buy the diesel if you honestly prefer it, but not to save any money.
Now of course, if you are buying a 4 year old car for £40k all that changes somewhat.
Very interested in your comments gizlaroc - Do you know much about the 3.0 Petrol Supercharged Range Rover? - Have you driven one or know someone who has?As I said on the fullfatrr.com forum the other day.
The Supercharged 3.0 is 340hp and the 4.4 SDV8 is 339hp.
Of course the SDV8 should be a bit quicker to 60mph, but that supercharged 3.0 is a peach and will hold its own when on the move, well it is in the Jag anyway.
Now, both are £84k, with a few options you are close to £90k, let's call it £80k with discount?
That car is going to lose around 50% of list over 3 years for someone only doing 15k a year, so let's say £40K or £1100 a month.
The guys at Land Rover said the 3.0 supercharged is showing 24mpg compared to 28mpg on their TDV8.
Which seems to back up what the US guys are saying too, most are seeing 20-21mpg (us, so 24-26mph UK).
Some of the reviews (RRS) like the TopGear one of the supercharged 3.0 petrol say they averaged over 25mpg from their tests.
If you are doing 15k miles a year at 24mpg that is £270 a month in fuel compared with £240 a month on the diesel.
30k miles a year and it is £520 a month compared with £480 for the diesel.
So when you add up depreciation (1100), insurance (50), servicing etc. (100) and then fuel at either £520 and £480 you are left with £1520 vs £1490.
So just under 2% difference.
Doing 3000 a month it is what? £1730 vs £1770.
So 2.5% difference.
I don't get people who buy a new car that loses the best part of £55,000 over 3 years and say they would love a petrol but bought the diesel to save money. I don't think they have done the maths properly.
I think the problem is many compare old petrols with modern diesels, both in economy terms and performance.
NA petrols can be lethargic and the old V8s incredibly thirsty, but some of the modern petrols I have owned have blown me away. The 3.0 supercharged Jag unit is a stunner.
Sure, buy the diesel if you honestly prefer it, but not to save any money.
Now of course, if you are buying a 4 year old car for £40k all that changes somewhat.
I ask this as it's a model I would certainly consider. You're right about fuel consumption also - If you're not doing loads of miles, the saving with a diesel is likely to be negligible.
I currently run a 6.75 litre 2016 Mulsanne Speed, returning 10-12mpg around town (approx 22mpg on a steady motorway run) and the other perfect car in my life is my 2007MY Range Rover Vogue 4.4 Petrol (naturally aspirated) - A very rare car indeed! ( A photo of both can be seen below). In 2007 everyone went over to the diesel TDV8 or 4.2 Supercharged petrol, so this is a rare bird, almost silent to drive and a step up in handling from the earlier L322's. I'm still yet to find anyone else at all who has one, apparently most went to the U.S. market.
So as you can imagine, I'm not too bothered about fuel economy but I do like my cars to be quiet. I did read somewhere that the new Landrover 3.0 Petrol Supercharged engine made a dull noise which resonated through the car - Have you heard or experienced anything along these lines?
I have not driven it in the RR, I have in the Jag XJ and in F-Type, which I completely get are much lighter cars.
I did however think it was an absolute peach of an engine, really nice and refined and quiet low down and then comes alive nicely as you work it, but in normal cruising around it was just nice and quiet.
Now, it may be that in the much heavier Range Rover, it strains to cope, although not sure how much heavier it is than the XJ?
Seems to say that the L405 is 2160kg kerb weight and the XJ 1755kg.
I have a customer who works for Land Rover, parts buyer, and he was saying they really, really like the Supercharge 3.0. He said theirs are all showing around 24mpg, which is 2mpg behind the official figures, where as the TDV8s are showing mid to low 20s which is way behind the official figures.
I am in a 3.6 TDV8 the same as yours, one of the first facelift L322s, and it is fine, but it is no petrol. Sure it suits the RR in terms of power delivery etc. and for a diesel it is incredibly refined, but compared to a petrol it isn't.
I am showing an average of 22mpg in in, which is probably 3-4mpg behind what I would be getting in a 4.4 petrol.
Now, if I am honest, I wouldn't want it to be any lower than that, so as much as I hate diesels I am in one in the RR for financial reasons. I do 20,000 miles a year, and 22mpg is low enough for me.
If I could be in a 3.0 Supercharged that could return as good or even slightly better I would jump at it.
It is pretty irrelevant to me anyway, my wife has pointed out that I only have 20 years left to retire, 10 years left on the mortgages and a hell of a lot left to pay, so I am in the process of selling her 3.5 V6 E350 estate and buying another cheap car as a second car so no monthly outgoings, so new cars are off the radar for quite a while it would seem! Haha
To be fair she has a point, I'm happy with my business, I enjoy it and realise it is probably never going to make me millions, so I need to start thinking about the future. But, it is the model that interests me most as in 3 or 4 years time when they are half list it would be a car I would like to swap the L322 for.
I did however think it was an absolute peach of an engine, really nice and refined and quiet low down and then comes alive nicely as you work it, but in normal cruising around it was just nice and quiet.
Now, it may be that in the much heavier Range Rover, it strains to cope, although not sure how much heavier it is than the XJ?
Seems to say that the L405 is 2160kg kerb weight and the XJ 1755kg.
I have a customer who works for Land Rover, parts buyer, and he was saying they really, really like the Supercharge 3.0. He said theirs are all showing around 24mpg, which is 2mpg behind the official figures, where as the TDV8s are showing mid to low 20s which is way behind the official figures.
I am in a 3.6 TDV8 the same as yours, one of the first facelift L322s, and it is fine, but it is no petrol. Sure it suits the RR in terms of power delivery etc. and for a diesel it is incredibly refined, but compared to a petrol it isn't.
I am showing an average of 22mpg in in, which is probably 3-4mpg behind what I would be getting in a 4.4 petrol.
Now, if I am honest, I wouldn't want it to be any lower than that, so as much as I hate diesels I am in one in the RR for financial reasons. I do 20,000 miles a year, and 22mpg is low enough for me.
If I could be in a 3.0 Supercharged that could return as good or even slightly better I would jump at it.
It is pretty irrelevant to me anyway, my wife has pointed out that I only have 20 years left to retire, 10 years left on the mortgages and a hell of a lot left to pay, so I am in the process of selling her 3.5 V6 E350 estate and buying another cheap car as a second car so no monthly outgoings, so new cars are off the radar for quite a while it would seem! Haha
To be fair she has a point, I'm happy with my business, I enjoy it and realise it is probably never going to make me millions, so I need to start thinking about the future. But, it is the model that interests me most as in 3 or 4 years time when they are half list it would be a car I would like to swap the L322 for.
gizlaroc said:
I'm not sure it will be pointless?
As I said on the fullfatrr.com forum the other day.
The Supercharged 3.0 is 340hp and the 4.4 SDV8 is 339hp.
Of course the SDV8 should be a bit quicker to 60mph, but that supercharged 3.0 is a peach and will hold its own when on the move, well it is in the Jag anyway.
Now, both are £84k, with a few options you are close to £90k, let's call it £80k with discount?
That car is going to lose around 50% of list over 3 years for someone only doing 15k a year, so let's say £40K or £1100 a month.
The guys at Land Rover said the 3.0 supercharged is showing 24mpg compared to 28mpg on their TDV8.
Which seems to back up what the US guys are saying too, most are seeing 20-21mpg (us, so 24-26mph UK).
Some of the reviews (RRS) like the TopGear one of the supercharged 3.0 petrol say they averaged over 25mpg from their tests.
If you are doing 15k miles a year at 24mpg that is £270 a month in fuel compared with £240 a month on the diesel.
30k miles a year and it is £520 a month compared with £480 for the diesel.
So when you add up depreciation (1100), insurance (50), servicing etc. (100) and then fuel at either £520 and £480 you are left with £1520 vs £1490.
So just under 2% difference.
Doing 3000 a month it is what? £1730 vs £1770.
So 2.5% difference.
I don't get people who buy a new car that loses the best part of £55,000 over 3 years and say they would love a petrol but bought the diesel to save money. I don't think they have done the maths properly.
I think the problem is many compare old petrols with modern diesels, both in economy terms and performance.
NA petrols can be lethargic and the old V8s incredibly thirsty, but some of the modern petrols I have owned have blown me away. The 3.0 supercharged Jag unit is a stunner.
Sure, buy the diesel if you honestly prefer it, but not to save any money.
Now of course, if you are buying a 4 year old car for £40k all that changes somewhat.
I must have misread the stats on the 3.0S/C then as it certainly came across as totally pointless in the FFRR.As I said on the fullfatrr.com forum the other day.
The Supercharged 3.0 is 340hp and the 4.4 SDV8 is 339hp.
Of course the SDV8 should be a bit quicker to 60mph, but that supercharged 3.0 is a peach and will hold its own when on the move, well it is in the Jag anyway.
Now, both are £84k, with a few options you are close to £90k, let's call it £80k with discount?
That car is going to lose around 50% of list over 3 years for someone only doing 15k a year, so let's say £40K or £1100 a month.
The guys at Land Rover said the 3.0 supercharged is showing 24mpg compared to 28mpg on their TDV8.
Which seems to back up what the US guys are saying too, most are seeing 20-21mpg (us, so 24-26mph UK).
Some of the reviews (RRS) like the TopGear one of the supercharged 3.0 petrol say they averaged over 25mpg from their tests.
If you are doing 15k miles a year at 24mpg that is £270 a month in fuel compared with £240 a month on the diesel.
30k miles a year and it is £520 a month compared with £480 for the diesel.
So when you add up depreciation (1100), insurance (50), servicing etc. (100) and then fuel at either £520 and £480 you are left with £1520 vs £1490.
So just under 2% difference.
Doing 3000 a month it is what? £1730 vs £1770.
So 2.5% difference.
I don't get people who buy a new car that loses the best part of £55,000 over 3 years and say they would love a petrol but bought the diesel to save money. I don't think they have done the maths properly.
I think the problem is many compare old petrols with modern diesels, both in economy terms and performance.
NA petrols can be lethargic and the old V8s incredibly thirsty, but some of the modern petrols I have owned have blown me away. The 3.0 supercharged Jag unit is a stunner.
Sure, buy the diesel if you honestly prefer it, but not to save any money.
Now of course, if you are buying a 4 year old car for £40k all that changes somewhat.
IIRC it was with a couple of tenths to 62 of the 3.0TDi, had terrible MPG & the torque (which the FFRR thrives on) was also poor. Could see it being popular in the US where Diesel really isn't favoured, but not in the UK. A bit like putting a 2.0 diesel in a RRS (oh wait, they've done that
)Even just basing the difference on running costs, the MPG difference was big enough that even a driver doing 15k miles pa would soon be well out of pocket comparatively.
Maybe i'm missing the point & after my experience with my FFRR i wouldn't touch the JLR brand for many years to come anyway so i guess kind of irrelevant. Also IIRC it's only available on one model, that being the Vogue SE, so no A/B or Vogue option.
Edited as just checked the specs:
3.0 Litre LR-TDV6 Diesel (258HP)
0-60mph in 7.4 seconds
Top Speed: 130mph
CO₂: 182g/km
Urban Fuel Economy: 36.2mpg
Extra Urban Fuel Economy: 44.1mpg
Combined Fuel Economy: 40.9mpg
The above figures are manufacturers’ estimates
3.0 Litre LR-V6 Supercharged Petrol (340HP)
0-60mph in 7.1 seconds
Top Speed: 130mph
CO₂: 248g/km
Urban Fuel Economy: 20.8mpg
Extra Urban Fuel Economy: 33.2mpg
Combined Fuel Economy: 26.4mpg
The above figures are manufacturers’ estimates
So no cheaper to buy, in fact slightly more expensive, limited to just one model in the range, only .2secs quicker to 62 which in the real world with the TDV6's torque i'd guess is really no different & in gear acceleration i'd assume will be better in the TDV6, almost 15mpg less on combined & a massive margin higher CO2 which i'd again assume will have a significant impact on the 1st Yrs RFL.
I'm not saying the 3.0S/C isn't possibly a viable option, but i still feel it's totally pointless in the FFRR as doesn't offer anything over the rest of the available engines, unless the buyer likes wasting money & HAS to have a petrol for some reason. The only petrol engine i feel worthy of the FFRR is the big V8.
Edited by w8pmc on Monday 11th September 10:35
But if you look at the SDV8 you have...
340hp
0-60 6.5 seconds
And nearly everyone says they are getting between 22 and 27 mpg so pretty much the same as the supercharged petrol.
For many the refinement of a petrol outweighs the outright torque of a diesel.
I get it will not be for everyone, but I don't think costs play a part in it.
340hp
0-60 6.5 seconds
And nearly everyone says they are getting between 22 and 27 mpg so pretty much the same as the supercharged petrol.
For many the refinement of a petrol outweighs the outright torque of a diesel.
I get it will not be for everyone, but I don't think costs play a part in it.
gizlaroc said:
But if you look at the SDV8 you have...
340hp
0-60 6.5 seconds
And nearly everyone says they are getting between 22 and 27 mpg so pretty much the same as the supercharged petrol.
For many the refinement of a petrol outweighs the outright torque of a diesel.
I get it will not be for everyone, but I don't think costs play a part in it.
But i'm not comparing it to the SDV8 as that's a good few ££'s more expensive, so yes playing the cost card against the SDV8, perhaps the S/C has a small niche to play in. However ignoring cost, the SDV8 performs far better on road, will be considerably better suited to off road & towing & still return a better real world MPG, albeit not by the vast difference you'll benefit from in the TDV6.340hp
0-60 6.5 seconds
And nearly everyone says they are getting between 22 and 27 mpg so pretty much the same as the supercharged petrol.
For many the refinement of a petrol outweighs the outright torque of a diesel.
I get it will not be for everyone, but I don't think costs play a part in it.
I never quite got the 41mpg RR quote for the TDV6, however my car was brand new & was rejected well before it likely loosened up, but i was easily averaging mid 30's for my mix of driving even with a tight engine.
Totally get some will prefer petrol over diesel, but in these particular cars i think you'd be a touch mad or just 'different' to take the 6 pot petrol over the 6 pot diesel or 8 pot diesel. As for refinement, that again doesn't really apply with these cars as they're so refined & whisper quiet, you can hardly hear any engine noise so could be anything under the bonnet & the regular man/woman in the street would struggle to have the slightest idea what power plant the car's got.
In a Jag i'd unlikely want a diesel & likely would take the 3.0S/C over the equivalent oil burner (although the V8 S/C would be the appealing motor, but in the FFRR i'd say the 3.0S/C is pointless. That said, right now i hate the entire brand so my opinion is purely that & possibly tarnished a little
I sort of agree, it would be the TDV6 for me, at an age where it has done 50% depreciation, and I would enjoy 35mpg.
But I don't agree about the refinement thing, the 6cyl and the 8cyl still have that diesel humm running through them, you can just feel it.
A few of my customers have gone from the L322 petrols into the L405 diesels and comment on it.
More seem to be commenting on the poor MPG on the SDV8 though, I think they were expecting much better.
if you averaged a genuine 35mpg then I'm impressed, with the car I mean, that is a worthwhile saving on fuel.
But I don't agree about the refinement thing, the 6cyl and the 8cyl still have that diesel humm running through them, you can just feel it.
A few of my customers have gone from the L322 petrols into the L405 diesels and comment on it.
More seem to be commenting on the poor MPG on the SDV8 though, I think they were expecting much better.
if you averaged a genuine 35mpg then I'm impressed, with the car I mean, that is a worthwhile saving on fuel.
w8pmc said:
But i'm not comparing it to the SDV8 as that's a good few ££'s more expensive
I know it is, my point was the 3.0 Supercharged and the 4.4 SDV8 are both their 340bhp cars.The diesel will do the spring to 60mph faster because of the torque and the gearing, however, in reality from 40-100mph there will be bugger all in it.
Now, both same MPG, one with a nice soundtrack, extremely refined when cruising, 4500rpm vs 6500rpm when pressing on, the petrol doesn't start to look quite so bad, just here in the UK we don't even consider them, and I think that is a real shame.
gizlaroc said:
I sort of agree, it would be the TDV6 for me, at an age where it has done 50% depreciation, and I would enjoy 35mpg.
But I don't agree about the refinement thing, the 6cyl and the 8cyl still have that diesel humm running through them, you can just feel it.
A few of my customers have gone from the L322 petrols into the L405 diesels and comment on it.
More seem to be commenting on the poor MPG on the SDV8 though, I think they were expecting much better.
if you averaged a genuine 35mpg then I'm impressed, with the car I mean, that is a worthwhile saving on fuel.
This is all very interesting and the above is what worries me most - Going from my 2007MY 4.4 Vogue Petrol, which is worth about £8k and is completely silent in traffic (let's face it, sitting in slow traffic is where we all seem to spend most of our time), then moving to a new, or nearly new £60 - £100k L405 and than hearing even a slight humm, I think would really bother me - I think I'm going to have to go for a new 3.0 SC Petrol.But I don't agree about the refinement thing, the 6cyl and the 8cyl still have that diesel humm running through them, you can just feel it.
A few of my customers have gone from the L322 petrols into the L405 diesels and comment on it.
More seem to be commenting on the poor MPG on the SDV8 though, I think they were expecting much better.
if you averaged a genuine 35mpg then I'm impressed, with the car I mean, that is a worthwhile saving on fuel.
gizlaroc said:
I sort of agree, it would be the TDV6 for me, at an age where it has done 50% depreciation, and I would enjoy 35mpg.
But I don't agree about the refinement thing, the 6cyl and the 8cyl still have that diesel humm running through them, you can just feel it.
A few of my customers have gone from the L322 petrols into the L405 diesels and comment on it.
More seem to be commenting on the poor MPG on the SDV8 though, I think they were expecting much better.
if you averaged a genuine 35mpg then I'm impressed, with the car I mean, that is a worthwhile saving on fuel.
Certainly didn't notice that on mine, but then the 3.0S/C wasn't available when i ordered mine last year & wouldn't have got a look in even if it had. The TDV6 was & still appears to be the sweet spot engine in the range (depending on requirements) & the SDV8 buyers in my experience just wanted the bigger engine even knowing it's a little noisier/rougher than the TDV6, but has slightly better performance & more torque for towing etc.But I don't agree about the refinement thing, the 6cyl and the 8cyl still have that diesel humm running through them, you can just feel it.
A few of my customers have gone from the L322 petrols into the L405 diesels and comment on it.
More seem to be commenting on the poor MPG on the SDV8 though, I think they were expecting much better.
if you averaged a genuine 35mpg then I'm impressed, with the car I mean, that is a worthwhile saving on fuel.
I'm sure the 3.0S/C is a decent enough engine, but as said before i think the FFRR is the wrong application for it.
GiveItSomeWellie said:
Does anyone know if the TDV6 now get the hydraulic cornering enhancement that the SDV8 does?
It doesn't on the MY17. No idea if it will be available on the MY18 as that's not now expected until early 2018 rather than late 2017.That said, as the TDV6 power plant is quite a bit lighter than the SDV8, most who i spoke to when i bought mine said it wasn't really needed.
w8pmc said:
It doesn't on the MY17. No idea if it will be available on the MY18 as that's not now expected until early 2018 rather than late 2017.
That said, as the TDV6 power plant is quite a bit lighter than the SDV8, most who i spoke to when i bought mine said it wasn't really needed.
It does actually, not on hybrid or SD4 model or HSE but I have it on my autobiography dynamic as standard as a V6That said, as the TDV6 power plant is quite a bit lighter than the SDV8, most who i spoke to when i bought mine said it wasn't really needed.
Gassing Station | Land Rover | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff