Defender Source Forum banner

Comparing Rover Diesel Engines, VM vs 200Tdi

9K views 17 replies 10 participants last post by  Mybluett 
#1 ·
Having only driven a 200Tdi out of the three Rover diesels, I can't compare it to the earlier and later engines. How do the engines compare to each other?

Why do the later engines seem to always be preferred over any of the earlier engines? Noise and vibration? Parts availability? Longevity? Likelihood it will (not) start? Lure of the "new" always being better? The VM not being a true "Rover" engine?The bare-bones specs for the three diesels:

Diesel VM - Turbo D
Max power: 119.4 bhp (89 kW) at 4200 rpm.
Max torque: 284.0 Nm (209.5 lb ft) at 1950 rpm

Diesel 200 Tdi
Max power: 111 bhp (83 kW) at 4000 rpm.
Max torque: 265.0 Nm (195 lb ft) at 1800 rpm

Diesel 300 Tdi

Manual Trans
Power: 111 hp (83 kW) @ 4,250 rpm
Torque: 195 lbf·ft (264 N·m) @ 1,800 rpm
Auto Trans
Power: 122 hp (91 kW) @ 4,250 rpm
Torque: 210 lbf·ft (280 N·m) @ 1,800 rpm

And finally, the new Cummins for a non-Rover alternative. Costly, and likely slightly more expensive than an LSx swap, but about the same weight.

Cummins R2.8 Turbo Diesel
Torque: 267 lb-ft @1500-3000 RPM
Horsepower: 161 hp @ 3600

 
See less See more
#2 ·
Not sure what you really want from this. The 200 and 300 are pretty much the same for power. The have pros and cons. The 300 fix some things and added some other problems. Parts are more available for the 300. VM engines are not common.

The Cummins swap cost will be nearly the same as an LS if you are comparing new to new. Obviously a new modern engine is completely different to a 20 year old used engine. It is better compared to a TD5.
 
#4 ·
I did forget the TD5.

Diesel TD5

Power: 122 hp (91 kW) @ 4,850 rpm (Defender version)
136 hp (101 kW) @ 5,000 rpm (Discovery version)
Torque: 221 lbf·ft (300 N·m) @ 1,950 rpm

The "why" is that I've got a Rover being delivered with a VM. I was initially planning to trying to live with it's power, and if I couldn't, I'd swap an LSx. But, thinking about it some more I thought I'd just do a different diesel. Looking at the alternate, later, Rover diesels, they don't look any more appealing than the VM is. So I was wondering why some people liked the 200/300 Tdi.

All that said, I may find that I like the VM as long as it's not troublesome.

FWIW, this isn't a what-if pipe dream. I engineer swap kits as part of my job at a race shop. But I don't have much experience doing this with diesels, and less experience with Rover diesels.
 
#6 ·
Fly up here and I can put you behind the wheel of a 2.0NA, 2.5NA, 19J-Td, 200Tdi, 300Tdi, Td5, and R2.8...

I've got or lived with all of the above (the first R2.8 is still in build stage so no real world on that one for another month or so) - here is the short version.

2.0NA Diesel (S1) tractor

2.25 NA tractor

2.5 NA Tractor with enough power to not feel like you are going to get run over on the surface streets, but not enough to not feel like you are going to get run over on the highway Hills area still a no-go.

2.5Td (19J) - when fully rebuilt the engine works well enough to keep up on the highway (especially in a 90) but hills are a killer, and heat just sucks the power out of it.

200tdi - fast tractor - freeway is workable, hills still are painful as gearing (Lt77) is more off-road than on-road

300tdi (Lt230/R380) - freeway capable tractor, I can run 80mph all day, pass semi-trucks on an incline (barely) and keep it running with a mcguyver toolkit. My preference for long term ownership as maintenance is easier than the 200tdi or the Td5, parts are readily available (longest production lifespan of any Rover Diesel engine) and the engine operation is entirely mechanical. Downside is noise as it is still very tractor like.

Td5 - car engine feeling - same as a 300tdi but when you want just a bit more power than the 300 there is a bit more power. Not necessary to plan ahead for hills and passing as much as a Tdi. Downside is the reliance on electrical power for operation (fuel system is electrical and failed alternator or battery means the truck will not run)

Tdci - didn't feel like a Defender to me - nice engine, gearing was too close (overlap) - same reliance on electrical needs as Td5

R2.8 - TBD

As to the petrol engines - rover or other - I don't like them in a Defender so I will refrain from commenting.
Hope this helps -

My preference for myself is the 300Tdi (I have a 300tdi 110 and 130) for a truck that is used as a car first id do a Td5, and off-road only any of them 300tdi or earlier would fit the bill.

I just did a break-in run on a Td5 130 we are building and it was flawless averaging 800 miles a day over 4000 miles with a top speed of 150kmh (in a 130 with a roof tent, three passengers, and gear for two weeks) - my 300tdi could do the distance but not the speed, and if we were venturing further off pavement I'd prefer the simplicity of the Tdi.
 
#7 ·
I have had two Rover vehicles with the VM 2.5, Rover SD1 and a Range Rover. not the fastest for motorway work but on per with our first 200 discovery.

Only had to change the head gaskets on one engine in the thousands of miles of use. As for parts all will have to come from the UK but if the engine has been looked after you should get many miles of use.

Would I get another Rover with one, most likely if it was a two door RRC.
 
#9 · (Edited)
Why do the later engines seem to always be preferred over any of the earlier engines?
Your fundamental assertion is incorrect.

The later engines are almost never preferred over earlier engines.

The reason why your question is difficult to answer is that you're starting with a false statement and then asking us to prove to you why it's true. Which it's not. Which is why we can't answer your question.
 
#10 · (Edited)
Exactly, early engines like the 200/300 tdi are desirable because they can get you to highway speed, easy to repair and completely mechanical. Trans and tcases are also widely available and they swap easily into trucks with even earlier engines.

My fav is the 200tdi defender spec.

If I ever upgraded and was willing to go electronic it would be to a later model td5 that can still fit on the r380 and can be tuned to about 200hp.

Without driving the new Cummins I'd take the td5 over it... At the moment.
 
#15 ·
The VM has not been used in Rover products for many years (since the 1980s I think).
They were a basically good engine that got a bad rep, mainly by people who didn't maintain them.
The VM is smooth sounding compared to the clunky sound of the TDI.
The individual cylinder heads were a carry over from the days of marine and industrial use.
Would think that by now replacement parts would be expensive and/or hard to come by.
 
#16 ·
Lots of good information in this thread, I'm glad I ran across it!

However, one of my favorite specs is missing.

Could folks chime in with MPG data on their rigs?
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top