Outer Limits 4x4 Board

G'day All.
I am in the process of upgrading from a Diahatsu Rocky to a Patrol.
There seems to be a shortage of 4.2 L diesel wagons but plenty of the turbo 2.8's. My question, What goes wrong with the 2.8s compared to the 4.2 L diesel and what are the pitfalls of owning a Patrol with the smaller engine?

Thanks in advance.

I drove a 2.8 Turbo diesel with 32inch muddies around Aust for 4 months in '99 and had no problems to speak of. The only problem is the lack of power compared to the 4.2 but if you've never had a 4.2 you'll never know the difference.

Go larger tyres, car becomes a huge slug. Goin diff ratio changes does improve it but you are limited to 4.8s as a maxiumum option meanin 35's are out of range. 33's may be the only tyre you'd be able to run with 4.8s and still have the MUCH needed torque to overcome SOME obstacles.


Low down torque sucks enormously. Only way to overcome that would be crawler gears, but it doesnt help the situation much.


Blow a clutch, you're lookin at 2 grand for a flywheel (they are non machinable) from nissan, PLUS the added cost of a clutch and pressure plate.

Cylinder head can warp if it goes to extreme temperatures and can resulit in blown head gaskets.

I guess it sums everything up.

Go a 4.2 if you can.

Im already doin that. My 2.8 is on its way to be a boat anchor pretty soon as i have a set of 36's and i have no idea how to use them with a 2.8 and whats worse... my clutch burnt out.. so Pretty much left with no option but to rebuild a 4.2 i had sittin in my garage.

Regards
TOM

GQ wrote:Go larger tyres, car becomes a huge slug. Goin diff ratio changes does improve it but you are limited to 4.8s

you can go 5.12's and I think even 5.23's if you want.

GQ wrote:Go a 4.2 if you can.

yup.

alright, my old man has a GU 2.8L Turbo, and at the moment, it has stock diff gears, but has a rockhopper, last week we added a set of 35" MTR's which we borrowed off a mate to trial, we have found it to be better onroad, especially the takeoffs, the only difference we see at this time is the fact that it is a little slower on the hills, it is still quicker then my NA TD42 with 33's

as for low range it is great with 35"s and the rockhopper, it made for verry slow crawling, compared to my GQ with 33's and stock gearing,

Also, we have had the clutch done in it, Flywheel was $1700, but, i have spoken to other clutch places and they inform me that you can use a flywheel off a TD42, the only downside is that 1 in evro so many have small vibration issues, as the Duel Mass flywheel that they have acts as the harmonic balancer.

Shawn,

Mate had alll sorts of dramas with his injector pump. Ended up costing about $1500 to fix.

bogged wrote:

GQ wrote:Go larger tyres, car becomes a huge slug. Goin diff ratio changes does improve it but you are limited to 4.8s

you can go 5.12's and I think even 5.23's if you want.
.

Hello, or find one this type of reduction? Because I found for the moment only of the 4.88 maximum...

I had a 1998 2.8 which I sold in 2004 with 311,000 kms on it when I replaced it with a new 3.0. Ran 33's and a 2" lift and never had a problem with it apart form replacing the clutch once. Had a 4.2 n/a prior to the 2.8 and the 2.8 would eat the n/a 4.2. Used the 2.8 for a lot of towing and sand work.

P de hamer wrote:G'day All.
I am in the process of upgrading from a Diahatsu Rocky to a Patrol.
There seems to be a shortage of 4.2 L diesel wagons but plenty of the turbo 2.8's. My question, What goes wrong with the 2.8s compared to the 4.2 L diesel and what are the pitfalls of owning a Patrol with the smaller engine?

Thanks in advance.

are you talknig GQ or GU?
2.8s are plentiful since they are dogs. Tom in our club sold his as it sucked arse trying to tow his Kimberley Camper just round Vic. He had the Motsons kit done on it, but still was no happier (him not the truck)..
He updated to a 4.2 NA and put a DTS kit with IC on it

MYTTUF wrote:I drove a 2.8 Turbo diesel with 32inch muddies around Aust for 4 months in '99 and had no problems to speak of. The only problem is the lack of power compared to the 4.2 but if you've never had a 4.2 you'll never know the difference.

gees i have a 4.2 and it is great and reliable but is slooooooow ,i would hate to know how slow the 2.8 is then .

If you do the right things to the 2.8, it can be quite the weapon. My brother ran 36" simex all the time. You have to get them to breath. If you look at the back of the turbo, there is a restricter plate in the dump pipe. To my knowledge, the turbo has a 3" exhaust outlet, but the restricter hole is only 1.75". Replacing this with a straight through 3" pipe makes the car have boost on tap......
The diff ratio in it is 4.6, these come std, & have not been changed....

T.B wrote:If you look at the back of the turbo, there is a restricter plate in the dump pipe. To my knowledge, the turbo has a 3" exhaust outlet, but the restricter hole is only 1.75". Replacing this with a straight through 3" pipe makes the car have boost on tap......
The diff ratio in it is 4.6, these come std, & have not been changed....

Hmm.. that is worth having a look see

barnsey wrote:Any more suggestions to improve the 2.8 would be appreciated.

cut 1/2 the body off it to reduce weight

The 2.8t is quicker than a{ standard} 4.2d by a LONG SHOT.

I overtake 4.2 diesels all the time and Dont they hate it

stool wrote:The 2.8t is quicker than a{ standard} 4.2d by a LONG SHOT.

I overtake 4.2 diesels all the time and Dont they hate it

What you say, a Turbo engine over taking a N/A one

Yep and sweet fa difference with the turbo 4.2d as well

Ok I egree 2.8 has less power off boost which can pe a problem off road
Easy fixed by gears.

The Rd2.8t has been a very reliable engine for me.

So tell me { KNOW IT ALL BOGGED} in which way the RD2.8T is unreliable against 4.2.
With solid proof not this someone told me this and that crap.

its prolly best put like this........

Say I had two cherrys and placed em in a chaff bag.......

or

I have two bowling balls and place both of them in a single leg of a pair of pantihose..........

Now both could best discribed as testicles .........
but one would be far better discribed as BALLS

Sure as hell makes the "swinging" choice a lot easier


Kingy

The 2.8 engine isnt so gutless as people say ...
A friend of mines GU got dynoed today roughly 500 NM at 2100 rpm. And a max of 205 Hp at the wheels running 31" tires.
Dynosheet coming.
Specs.
Ball bearing turbo, bigger intercooler and an adjustable piggyback computer ...
I know that the 4.2 is capable of same and better figures, but with 1.4 liter less than the 4.2, i think the 2.8 does it's job pretty damn good.
Granted the 2.8 isnt the best engine for a 2 ton + rig ....

Hobbz wrote:The 2.8 engine isnt so gutless as people say ...
A friend of mines GU got dynoed today roughly 500 NM at 2100 rpm. And a max of 205 Hp at the wheels running 31" tires.
Dynosheet coming.
Specs.
Ball bearing turbo, bigger intercooler and an adjustable piggyback computer ...
I know that the 4.2 is capable of same and better figures, but with 1.4 liter less than the 4.2, i think the 2.8 does it's job pretty damn good.
Granted the 2.8 isnt the best engine for a 2 ton + rig ....

The 2.8L with 205HP & 500NM

Can you give more info please

Hobbz wrote:Specs.
Ball bearing turbo, bigger intercooler and an adjustable piggyback computer ...

Turbo specs. and dyno sheet will be posted when i get around to get it scaned, and get under the car to confirm turbo model and A/R Trim.