110CSW wrote:

That is true as the bigger engine will have a much broader spread of power and a more appealing low end torque curve. That's half the reason I don't want the 4 but I would still prefer a larger performance differential and doing something silly like putting the 180PS version of the 4 pot would not work. The current 6 is clearly a stop gap for a period of time.

The 4pot is 240PS in D5, not 180PS.

The broader curve is more useful when towing big stuff but most of the time the 240PS/500Nm 2.0 is going to be more than adequate. The beauty of turbo engines is, of course, the ability to pull more performance relatively easily. I bet the 2.0 could give nearer 280+PS quite easily.

Horses for courses, of course, which is I went for the TDV8 in my RRS and not the pointless 2.7TDV6.

RRSTDV8 wrote:

110CSW wrote:

That is true as the bigger engine will have a much broader spread of power and a more appealing low end torque curve. That's half the reason I don't want the 4 but I would still prefer a larger performance differential and doing something silly like putting the 180PS version of the 4 pot would not work. The current 6 is clearly a stop gap for a period of time.

The 4pot is 240PS in D5, not 180PS.

The broader curve is more useful when towing big stuff but most of the time the 240PS/500Nm 2.0 is going to be more than adequate. The beauty of turbo engines is, of course, the ability to pull more performance relatively easily. I bet the 2.0 could give nearer 280+PS quite easily.

Horses for courses, of course, which is I went for the TDV8 in my RRS and not the pointless 2.7TDV6.

Its not about how many but how they are achieved , if the D5 has lost .5 of a ton that leaves 3 add 5 people plus luggage plus trailer or caravan and all thr 240ps wont mean nothing because its going to need a full fuel tank to spool them turbos and thats more weight

Seriously its great there is a defined vehicle for chelsea now and another for people who go beyond , this will finally make the tree huggers think about why they are scratching a 4x4 if its only got a small engine and for the rest who do off road we all know tree huggers dont like it outside the city in the cold so our cars are safe

Sorted.

Red Merle wrote:

RRSTDV8 wrote:

Red Merle wrote:

I think most people will buy the 4 pot. Many will live to regret it.

I wonder. Most Discos don't tow, I'd say. Most are just 4 wheel drive MPVs and used as such the 2.0 will make a lot of sense. When sat on the motorway they'll get decent mpg and on an interesting road, the lighter front end should make for a more enjoyable drive. For general pottering about dropping little Jocasta at ballet lessons, the 2.0 will be an excellent choice.

I was forgetting that the buyer for this new car is likely to be very different to the customer base that the Disco 4 sells into.

RRSTDV8 wrote:

If 240PS/500Nm in the "light" D5 is inadequate, how did D3 drivers get by with the puny 190PS/440Nm 2.7TDV6 hauling their heavy vehicles about? Is the D3 incapable of towing a tin tent all of a sudden?

Sure, headline figures aren't the be-all, but the 2.0 puts out it's maximum torque (500Nm) at 1500rpm. That means it's giving 140PS at 1500rpm. The power figure rises from there with revs, obviously. That's not far off what the 3.0 TDV6 does. Is the 3.0 only just marginal at towing tin tents?

Until people drive the 2.0 and see what it's actually like, it's all guesswork really. It sounds like some people just want to not like the 2.0 just because, well, it's a 2.0 4 cylinder diesel rather than a V6.

swansty wrote:

Red Merle wrote:

RRSTDV8 wrote:

Red Merle wrote:

I think most people will buy the 4 pot. Many will live to regret it.

I wonder. Most Discos don't tow, I'd say. Most are just 4 wheel drive MPVs and used as such the 2.0 will make a lot of sense. When sat on the motorway they'll get decent mpg and on an interesting road, the lighter front end should make for a more enjoyable drive. For general pottering about dropping little Jocasta at ballet lessons, the 2.0 will be an excellent choice.

I was forgetting that the buyer for this new car is likely to be very different to the customer base that the Disco 4 sells into.

Twaddle - I would suggest the D5 has been built to be more appealing and better suited to the existing D4 customer base. its called moving with the times. Yes, some wont like it and will change brands but I expect it to attract more new customers than lose old ones.