discomania
Well-Known Member
The 2.25 was crap.
dsj1979
Active Member
The thing is I've always liked the 2.25 engines I've had, and sooo cheap for all parts.... and strangely I've never found them as underpowered as people say.... always being able to get a decent speed on the motorway. I see a lot of people put the 2.5 engine in the landys and I gather they fit straight onto the standard transmission? I was wondering how much of a difference there was? i.e. power, mpg, servicing, cost of parts?
discomania
Well-Known Member
I have the 2.5, and fitted AT tyres I get over 30mpg, and can cruise at 70mph (road speed) happily after a short wind up.
Its a good engine, runs well, and is pretty solid.
Its a good engine, runs well, and is pretty solid.
ormus
New Member
theres a world of difference. the 2.5 is a much better engine.
the 2.25 models were woefully underpowered. although reliable enough if serviced right.
trouble was, most were owned by tight hamfisted bumkin farmers.
and you dont wanna take a 2.25 on the motorway for a long period. about one junction is best.
the 2.25 models were woefully underpowered. although reliable enough if serviced right.
trouble was, most were owned by tight hamfisted bumkin farmers.
and you dont wanna take a 2.25 on the motorway for a long period. about one junction is best.
