Welcome to the Nissan Patrol forum. To post a question and to see less adds on the forum then you will have to register
first. We are an easy going friendly forum so join in the conversations and feel free to ask any questions.
Become a forum sponsor for only $20 and see no adds with faster page loading times and many extras benefits.
yeah prolly not the best exlainin'. Just got lazy. lol. The TD has more torque for sure but I recently drove a stock TD and a stock RD. There was SFA between the two when driving them. The TD had more in it but not a great deal more.
Ok never driven a 2.8, but they dont have low torque like the 4.2. Technical tracks I've walked through in TD42 at idle very simply the smaller volumes have had to do at revs very difficult and messy, even dangerous sometimes. The 4.2 pulls like a teenager at 700rpm so in the context of OP all depends on end use. Bush, towing, highway performance, etc. I do get left behind on streets and easy tracks though! Horses for courses.
What is the charge? Eating a meal? A succulent Chinese meal??
Ok never driven a 2.8, but they dont have low torque like the 4.2. Technical tracks I've walked through in TD42 at idle very simply the smaller volumes have had to do at revs very difficult and messy, even dangerous sometimes. The 4.2 pulls like a teenager at 700rpm so in the context of OP all depends on end use. Bush, towing, highway performance, etc. I do get left behind on streets and easy tracks though! Horses for courses.
Agree Plassy, my 2.8TD was torque-less in all regards until about 3000rpm when the turbo came into effect. It was a good highway tourer, but a pain in the bush, even in low range - had to hit things too hard. I ended up fitting a Marks 85% reduction set to the transfer case - totally transformed it in the Vic high country, but ended up with a vehicle having a gear train too widely spaced - 4wd Hi range was essentially useless, and Lo was now very short - would have been a dud in sand for example.
I retained the same transfer case for the 6.5 conversion and its a really nice fit to be honest, crawls up/down anything at idle and high range has plenty of torque.
Ok never driven a 2.8, but they dont have low torque like the 4.2. Technical tracks I've walked through in TD42 at idle very simply the smaller volumes have had to do at revs very difficult and messy, even dangerous sometimes. The 4.2 pulls like a teenager at 700rpm so in the context of OP all depends on end use. Bush, towing, highway performance, etc. I do get left behind on streets and easy tracks though! Horses for courses.
Yeah I've only driven two TD's. Mine, which can have you grabbing for the jesus bar if I hit the go pedal too much, lol, or the stocky TD I drove. Which was as stock as they came. I was quite underwhelmed to be honest. Then I got in the RD, was slower than the TD for sure on the black top, but not by what I thought it would, or should have been. Maybe the TD I drove was tired? Dunno.
On the tracks though yeah I've seen an RD go at it, they do struggle there a bit hey.
Swapped the fuel tank change over valve to a transfer pump so pump fuel from aux to main then draw from main to engine. New motor didnt like drawing from the aux. - unsure why but it appeared to starve. Dirty annoying little job, covered in diesel.
Swapped the fuel tank change over valve to a transfer pump so pump fuel from aux to main then draw from main to engine. New motor didnt like drawing from the aux. - unsure why but it appeared to starve. Dirty annoying little job, covered in diesel.
What did you used to have Phil? I had pollack switch and found it unreliable, went to the transfer pump setup and is much better. Liked the idea of switching but seemed to loose prime which was a PITA. . .
What did you used to have Phil? I had pollack switch and found it unreliable, went to the transfer pump setup and is much better. Liked the idea of switching but seemed to loose prime which was a PITA. . .
Sent from my GT-I9506 using Tapatalk
I had one of those 12V 3 port valves - should really have been a 6 port but I was happy sending the return from the second tank back to the main and it seemed to work, but I think the discharge pipe from the aux. tank might be 1/4" whereas the rest of the system is 5/16". I never had a problem pulling out of the aux. with the old 2.8TD, but this guzzler lumbers a bit, so after cleaning out the lines a while ago and finding a partial blockage, thought I was home free - no, of course not. Engine still struggles pulling out of that tank, or more correctly the booster pump struggles supplying fuel at the right rate and pressure to the injector pump. Anyway, 3LPM transfer pump back to the rear tank, and all sweet, so now just waiting for the arrival of the fuel flowmeter system and whether I need to buy an oil well or not to keep this thing on the road! Indications initially re fuel consumption have been good, but very inaccurate.
Originally Posted by mudski
Reply With Quote
