Found a nice 93 model 2.5 TD, but seem to be worth a little more then the Petrol Models.
What would you opt for?? And why??
Pay a little more for the TD??
Any help would be great
Notice: We request that you don't just set up a new account at this time if you are a previous user.
If you used to be one of our moderators, please feel free to reach out to Chris via the facebook Outerlimits4x4 group and he will get you set back up with access should he need you.
If you used to be one of our moderators, please feel free to reach out to Chris via the facebook Outerlimits4x4 group and he will get you set back up with access should he need you.
Recovery:If you cannot access your old email address and don't remember your password, please click here to log a change of email address so you can do a password reset.
Petrol or Diesel Pajero??
Moderator: -Scott-
Petrol or Diesel Pajero??
I'm looking around for another family 4x4. ie: Head away on weekends ect, but also travel down to Canberra a couple of times a year.
Found a nice 93 model 2.5 TD, but seem to be worth a little more then the Petrol Models.
What would you opt for?? And why??
Pay a little more for the TD??
Any help would be great
Found a nice 93 model 2.5 TD, but seem to be worth a little more then the Petrol Models.
What would you opt for?? And why??
Pay a little more for the TD??
Any help would be great
Personally, I'd pay a little more again for a 2.8td.
Larger, more power and torque, larger/stronger drive train, body sits higher on the chassis ("factory body lift") and the later models have a revised front suspension geometry, so they sit a little higher.
Compared to other diesel engines they're neither particularly powerful, nor economical. But they're a proven design, and use essentially the same block as the 3.2 DiD - for when you need a new engine...
Larger, more power and torque, larger/stronger drive train, body sits higher on the chassis ("factory body lift") and the later models have a revised front suspension geometry, so they sit a little higher.
Compared to other diesel engines they're neither particularly powerful, nor economical. But they're a proven design, and use essentially the same block as the 3.2 DiD - for when you need a new engine...
Ahh ok, thanks for the info bud
Cant really afford to pay too much more. So the fuel con isnt to crash hot?? I've only ever owned a couple of GU 4.2 TD's over the years and one 2.4 TD Disco so can only try and compare the fuel con to a disco.
Here is a snippet from the add:
1993 mitsubishi pajero 2.5 intercooled turbo . immacullant car inside and out. done 270 000 klms. new reco motor with brand new head, pump and injectors reco ,new radiator, new rear shocks, brand new 31x10.5 mud terrain tyres, mags , spotlights, sterio , arb bullbar , turbo timmer, and more. great car to drive excellent on fuel, full service just done with all engine , gearbox n diff oils changed 11 months rego n rwc.
Cant really afford to pay too much more. So the fuel con isnt to crash hot?? I've only ever owned a couple of GU 4.2 TD's over the years and one 2.4 TD Disco so can only try and compare the fuel con to a disco.
Here is a snippet from the add:
1993 mitsubishi pajero 2.5 intercooled turbo . immacullant car inside and out. done 270 000 klms. new reco motor with brand new head, pump and injectors reco ,new radiator, new rear shocks, brand new 31x10.5 mud terrain tyres, mags , spotlights, sterio , arb bullbar , turbo timmer, and more. great car to drive excellent on fuel, full service just done with all engine , gearbox n diff oils changed 11 months rego n rwc.
id be doing the same...-Scott- wrote:Personally, I'd pay a little more again for a 2.8td.
Larger, more power and torque, larger/stronger drive train, body sits higher on the chassis ("factory body lift") and the later models have a revised front suspension geometry, so they sit a little higher.
Compared to other diesel engines they're neither particularly powerful, nor economical. But they're a proven design, and use essentially the same block as the 3.2 DiD - for when you need a new engine...
although the 2.5 isnt that bad either.
my GUBanzy wrote:Dial up internet.........you'd post something and come back 2 beers later to see if it loaded.
My 1990 NG 4D56 intercooled turbo returned some pretty good figures on my recent trip to Birdsville and back. 10.5 L/100km over the rough stuff (in 2WD, not H4), 10.5 towing a trailer on the highway, the highest I got was 11.8 and the lowest was 8.9
1990 NG Paj TDI: 2.5 exhaust, 146l Longranger tank, snorkel, 2" suspension lift, 31" Bighorns.
1985 Holden Drover: 2" OME suspension & shocks, extractors, 2" exhaust, 235/75 MTR's
1985 Holden Drover: 2" OME suspension & shocks, extractors, 2" exhaust, 235/75 MTR's
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests