Home · FAQ · New Posts · My Posts · PMs · Search · Members · Members Map · Calendar · Profile · Donate · Register · Log In |
Home > General > Who is interested in seeing the Si4 in a FL2 in the UK?? |
|
|
|
richardk Member Since: 11 Jan 2009 Location: Norwich Posts: 909 |
You obviously haven't driven an Evoque with that engine in then! |
||
24th Sep 2012 6:42 pm |
|
richardk Member Since: 11 Jan 2009 Location: Norwich Posts: 909 |
If you do lots of miles then derv is the only way...but if you only do 10,000 miles per year then petrol is cheaper than diesel to offset the lower mpg.
|
||
24th Sep 2012 7:13 pm |
|
rchrdleigh Member Since: 18 Aug 2007 Location: Somewhere in the East of England Posts: 1601 |
For those worried by DPF issues in Freelander 2 or Evoque diesels pop along to your nearest LRE Centre and ask them if they have any problems with them - I'm pretty sure the answer is they don't and their vehicles do plenty of short, slow journeys.
|
||
24th Sep 2012 7:32 pm |
|
harveyg77 Member Since: 25 May 2006 Location: Derby Posts: 125 |
That 2.0 Ecoboost drinks fuel! I had the 203ps version in my Mondeo and couldn't better 27mpg. My neighbour had it in a Galaxy and could squeeze it to 30mpg on a long motorway run.
|
||
24th Sep 2012 7:52 pm |
|
Andy S Member Since: 07 Aug 2011 Location: Sevenoaks Posts: 82 |
The reason I'd like the Si4 engine is because my SD4 has had DPF issues; its the only car I've ever owned (and I've had a few old bangers in my time) that has had to be recovered from a motorway due to a DPF sensor failure leading to limp mode. That episode seriously undermined my confidence in the car. I'd prefer the choice of a petrol engine. |
||
26th Sep 2012 7:42 pm |
|
Mav71 Member Since: 15 Nov 2008 Location: Leicester Posts: 2575 |
The comments about weight and mpg is rubbish to a degree. It can't be compared to a Mondeo or Galaxy. Apart from the fact that these two cars do not run the same spec of engine as the LR version.
It's not NA, the Si4 is a 240bhp turbo.
Er, the 2.0 Turbo Si4 developed more power and torque than the old 3.2, with more mpg and lower emissions. Freelander 2 HSE Lux 2013MY - Barolo Black with Ivory Leather. Alpine DVD - Privacy -Evoque 20" Dynamic Wheels and more to come......... |
||
30th Sep 2012 10:59 am |
|
Andy S Member Since: 07 Aug 2011 Location: Sevenoaks Posts: 82 |
Mav, you have set out the arguments for the Si4 far more eloquently than I could. I do max 12K pa, mix of short (up to 20 miles) and long (500 mile round trips) followed by sometimes weeks of sitting idle; for that kind of mileage and drving pattern a petrol engine is the way to go. LR seem intent of not giving us the choice though, even the Dolly Trolley is diesel only in UK now.
|
||
30th Sep 2012 2:27 pm |
|
harveyg77 Member Since: 25 May 2006 Location: Derby Posts: 125 |
Why is it rubbish? Every car derived engine used on a LR product has been slower, used more fuel and had higher emissions than its car source. The Evoque diesels develop lower emissions and better economy than their Freelander equivalents - engine for engine. Yet the Si4 in the Evoque develops higher emissions and uses more fuel on paper than the Mondeo unit; meaning it would be fair to assume a Fl2 using the Si4 would be similarly worse for economy/emissions than the Evoque, further compounding the difference between a Fl2 and Ford application. In addition, we swapped between s-Max, Mondeo and Fl2 as family cars, which also makes the comparison relative for our use. If you get 36 from a Fl2 Si4 then you should hit 50 in a diesel. |
||
30th Sep 2012 3:14 pm |
|
Andy S Member Since: 07 Aug 2011 Location: Sevenoaks Posts: 82 |
Thoughtful reply Harvey. Thing is, what you refer to is marginal to someone like me. What I want is a choice; mpg and emissions are relative, especially on my mileage and whilst the SD4 is a good unit, there is much in it which can (and does) go wrong. For that reason, i would prefer to go with a petrol engine next. May have higher mpg and emissions, but as I say, on my mileage, its hardly going to amount to a hill of beans. |
||
30th Sep 2012 3:40 pm |
|
harveyg77 Member Since: 25 May 2006 Location: Derby Posts: 125 |
TBH, I am PRO a Si4 Fl2 being introduced in the UK, as I think the customer should have the choice. Co-car tax rules being in CO2 means we'd have to go diesel, plus we only need a GS and I'm sure LR would only bring in the Si4 as a HSE, oh and it's an auto so I'm stuffed on 3 counts.
|
||
30th Sep 2012 4:16 pm |
|
Mav71 Member Since: 15 Nov 2008 Location: Leicester Posts: 2575 |
Harvey, your arguments are flawed. Of course a diesel will get more to the gallon, but you have to weigh this up against the fact the diesel costs considerably more than a petrol to buy and that diesel is more to buy and diesels cost more to service.
|
||
30th Sep 2012 4:32 pm |
|
richardk Member Since: 11 Jan 2009 Location: Norwich Posts: 909 |
After having drive the Si4 in an Evoque and being gobsmacked on how well it performed I would love it in a FL2. This would be a private purchase..any company car for me has to have CO2 of under 120 (hence the current FL2 auto is a personal car too).
|
||
30th Sep 2012 5:24 pm |
|
rchrdleigh Member Since: 18 Aug 2007 Location: Somewhere in the East of England Posts: 1601 |
The first Evoque at LRE Rockingham was an Si4 and it performed brilliantly, the current one is an SD4 which is also a great drive.
|
||
30th Sep 2012 6:07 pm |
|
richardk Member Since: 11 Jan 2009 Location: Norwich Posts: 909 |
boo hiss..confirms what I'd heard from Mr M. Fingers crossed JLR read this site. Not sure I can stretch to an Evoque at the moment |
||
30th Sep 2012 6:45 pm |
|
|
All times are GMT |
< Previous Topic | Next Topic > |
Posting Rules
|
Site Copyright © 2006-2024 Futuranet Ltd & Martin Lewis