2.25 vs 2.6

This site contains affiliate links for which LandyZone may be compensated if you make a purchase.
R

Reevo83

Member
Posts
11
Location
Kent
Morning all,

I’m searching for a series and there’s a lovely Norwegian ex army 2.25 109 I’m going to look at and a 2.6 109 popped up locally!

I don’t know very much about the 2.6 engines, but after some Googling I only seem to read horror stories about the 2.6 - over heating, cracked heads etc and poor mpg...

Surely over 40 years old it must be pretty solid? Mpg isn’t too much of an issue as it’ll be a weekend toy...

But parts supply worries me and it seems any worst case scenario engine replacements will be tricky also...

Does anyone have any experience with the 2.6 or should I go straight to the old trusty 2.25?
Thanks
 
The 2.6 is a nice engine, I once ran a six pot Land Rover but moved it on due to fuel consumption. I also had two Rover cars a 90 and a 95 (P4) with essentially the same engine. Inlet over exhaust valve arrangement goes back in time design wise but gives good torque. Bear in mind that all these engines are now over 50 years old and may have been neglected and you are open to reliability issues. The six pot chassis and bulkhead differ so not a simple case of dropping a four pot in as a replacement but can be done.
 
Reevo83 said:
Morning all,

I’m searching for a series and there’s a lovely Norwegian ex army 2.25 109 I’m going to look at and a 2.6 109 popped up locally!

I don’t know very much about the 2.6 engines, but after some Googling I only seem to read horror stories about the 2.6 - over heating, cracked heads etc and poor mpg...

Surely over 40 years old it must be pretty solid? Mpg isn’t too much of an issue as it’ll be a weekend toy...

But parts supply worries me and it seems any worst case scenario engine replacements will be tricky also...

Does anyone have any experience with the 2.6 or should I go straight to the old trusty 2.25?
Thanks
Click to expand...
2.6 is a lovely drive, fuel consumption is similar to a four cylinder, gentle driving is the key, but most of them don't do many miles now, setting the tappets is quite difficult, but gets easier with practice.

I doubt it will overheat if you keep the cooling system in good condition, you need a 6 cylinder radiator, much larger than 4 cylinder.

Problem now is finding a good one, or finding one at all. Most will require work after purchase, but it is worth doing, they are a nice vehicle, and prices are high now due to rarity and classic status.
 
Thanks chaps,

this is a bargain price with new clean MOT
£4500!

I’m tempted to buy it as it’s local and “cheap” (compared to others I’ve seen) but the engine worries me...

maybe as a stepping stone to a 2.25....
 
Last edited:
divie said:
The 2.6 is a nice engine, I once ran a six pot Land Rover but moved it on due to fuel consumption. I also had two Rover cars a 90 and a 95 (P4) with essentially the same engine. Inlet over exhaust valve arrangement goes back in time design wise but gives good torque. Bear in mind that all these engines are now over 50 years old and may have been neglected and you are open to reliability issues. The six pot chassis and bulkhead differ so not a simple case of dropping a four pot in as a replacement but can be done.
Click to expand...
Thanks, potential future replacements is what I wonder... let alone part supply (if worst case scenario)



But it’s well priced and I’ve seen in effect scrap series go for more
 
When I bought my 109 station wagon it had a new mot but it was barely drivable. The brakes pulled sharply to the left and you needed to pump the pedal for them to do anything. The steering was unbelievable, it had half a turn of the steering wheel in free play and it would not hold a straight line. A UJ broke on the way home and it leaked oil like the Torrie Canyon. The ignition switch would only work one try out of every ten, exhaust gas was leaking into the cab due to a cracked manifold and the springs for the reverse gate had disappeared so everytime I selected first hear I nearly always got reverse. All of the tyres had very visible cracks in the side walls and the indicators only worked on the off side. It was very exciting to drive though.

Col
 
Haha sounds like my old 88!

first drive home and the truck jumped a foot to the left - front kin pin was shot and the thing had a mind of its own!

My expectations are thankfully very low.

I can’t mentally justify £8k on an S3 that will probably need £1k work - most likely have solid springs to start with

but £4-5k I can and make it a rolling project

just wish this one was 2.25 for peace of mind but if she drives well then nothing some patience can’t work with
 
Turboman said:
Is this a Series 2a or a 3? And if you post some pics, we will be able to assess the vehicle more easily/
Click to expand...
Chassis and bulkhead were great. Even ran my car phone holder (magnet) over the bulkhead and pillars to make sure no filler etc

On patch or crusty I could see was just behind the drivers front wheel arch liner but more from a gap in the liner and stone chips - didn’t affect foot well
 

Attachments

  • 66751579-F87D-4FB2-A53C-0CF54FE34FEF.jpeg
    66751579-F87D-4FB2-A53C-0CF54FE34FEF.jpeg
    39.3 KB · Views: 192
  • 983BF087-6D8A-44A1-97C7-5B1970E51957.jpeg
    983BF087-6D8A-44A1-97C7-5B1970E51957.jpeg
    37.1 KB · Views: 187
  • E18709BD-4399-4E63-8A4C-7D331A13923B.jpeg
    E18709BD-4399-4E63-8A4C-7D331A13923B.jpeg
    27.9 KB · Views: 191
  • DE95370C-7BDA-4559-9951-D67F305052B6.jpeg
    DE95370C-7BDA-4559-9951-D67F305052B6.jpeg
    210 KB · Views: 186
Reevo83 said:
It’s a ‘79 series 3 - military look a like
Click to expand...
I see why it is cheap now.
I don't know much about military vehicles, but from your post, I assume that it is a civilian vehicle done up to look like a military one. And that would reduce it's value to classic vehicle enthusiasts, who place a value on originality.

Nonetheless, paint doesn't cost very much, and the other stuff could be unbolted and sold, so I would still think that is excellent value.
 
Last edited:
Buy it. Drive it around, if you don't like it, put it up for sale again. The way second hand series prices are at the moment, you might get more than you paid for it
 
Can't help with a comparison yet but I specifically sought out an original 2.6L because I wanted the extra torque and for the rarity value
 
I wouldn't be worried about the 2.6 engine, as long as it's in reasonable condition.
I've had Series Landies with both the 2.25 and the 2.6 and the six-pot is a nice engine - smooth, makes a nicer noise, has a bit more low-end torque. It does like a drink, but not dramatically more than the 2.25.
My concern would be if it needs work - spares can be harder to find. But if it's in good condition and you treat it well, it will probably go on for years with no major issues. These engines don't like to be worked hard, though. Many years ago, we took our six-pot 109 SW on a long, hot summer trip and burned out the exhaust valves (a known weakness with this design). But these days, most Series are just driven gently on shorter trips and, with regular oil changes and general maintenance, the six-pot should be fine.
Ideally, you'd do a compression test and check the oil pressure, but if it runs smoothly with no nasty noises and oil/coolant are clean, you could have a good 'un!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
Thank you
Replies
6
Views
409
Hippo
Hippo
300bhp/ton
Driven: New Defender - On & Off Road. Is it a Pretender?
2
Replies
29
Views
5K
tottot
tottot
reverendalc
2006 RRS with suspension fault and crash mode
2 3
Replies
56
Views
14K
reverendalc
reverendalc
L
You can go fast. I can go anywhere
Replies
12
Views
2K
zeaphod
zeaphod
S
Are japs controlling the Blue Ribbon Coalition?
Replies
3
Views
2K
R
R
Back
Top