2.25 lire - 2.8
Discussion
Despite being out of the ladrover game for some time now i always keep my eye on whats going on. If the truth be told there is no other car i would rather have than my own specced defender.
So i bought this months copy of Lro ( the best landy mag imo ) as well as monthly and enthusiast ( couldn't help it :D)
There is a new sponsored guide section at the back it seems. By Britpart. A general how to and what if guide.
Anyway, the guys at Lro took one of their series 3's along and got it tuned, bored and stroked to 2.8.
Anyone who has ever driven a 2.25 litre 90 or 110 will know how abismal and depressingly slow the engine is. Not to mention fuel economy. I believe the deristricted V8 uses less fuel!
While there is a vague reference to fuel consumption being better with the 2.8 due to less time with the throttle open they rave about the performance.
Apparently you will now be up from the 60 something bhp of the 2.25 to 117bhp and 177ib-ft torque at 2300rpm with the 2.8. In their own words "thats more than the rover 3.5 fitted to the first series II V8s. And on a par with the V8 that was fitted to the range rover classics "
There is no pricing solution attached to the article or indeed on Britpart's website.
Just thought this might be of interest to some of you who like the old series models but want more poke. I love so many things about the III but ultimately i would have to have a deisel i think.
So i bought this months copy of Lro ( the best landy mag imo ) as well as monthly and enthusiast ( couldn't help it :D)
There is a new sponsored guide section at the back it seems. By Britpart. A general how to and what if guide.
Anyway, the guys at Lro took one of their series 3's along and got it tuned, bored and stroked to 2.8.
Anyone who has ever driven a 2.25 litre 90 or 110 will know how abismal and depressingly slow the engine is. Not to mention fuel economy. I believe the deristricted V8 uses less fuel!
While there is a vague reference to fuel consumption being better with the 2.8 due to less time with the throttle open they rave about the performance.
Apparently you will now be up from the 60 something bhp of the 2.25 to 117bhp and 177ib-ft torque at 2300rpm with the 2.8. In their own words "thats more than the rover 3.5 fitted to the first series II V8s. And on a par with the V8 that was fitted to the range rover classics "
There is no pricing solution attached to the article or indeed on Britpart's website.
Just thought this might be of interest to some of you who like the old series models but want more poke. I love so many things about the III but ultimately i would have to have a deisel i think.
The company that does the work on the 2.25 engine is very thorough; it is an engineered, tested and proven solution. Folk have dabbled at increasing the output from the 2286 petrol before; 72 bhp is not much from that kind of displacement! The point may have been missed though; it will still run in tandard tune after countless miles of driving on very poor quality fuel. That is not to say that the engine shouldn't be developed. However, the availability of Rover V8's sort of killed the "tuned" 2286 path in the late 1980's. Just think, if as much effort was spent on improving a stock 3528cc V8 how much power would you have? I would suggest that a complete V8 is about the same mass as a 2286 short block - and which makes the better noise :-)
The tuned 2286 makes sense for competition LR's as they can run in a different class for comp-safaris etc.
Matt
The tuned 2286 makes sense for competition LR's as they can run in a different class for comp-safaris etc.
Matt
Gassing Station | Land Rover | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff