Ik sta te popelen om een 109 6-cilinder op LPG te kopen, echter.....
De kop is nog standaard, dus geen geharde klepzittingen etc. Door de diverse handelaren wordt verklaard dat dit geen probleem is, maar ja, ik ben nog niet zover dat ik handelaren vertrouw.
Over de Laro 6-cilinder wordt van alles gezegd, waardeloos, geweldig, zijn er nog meningen/ervaringen m.b.t. 6-cilinders, liefst in combinatie met LPG?
6-cilinder op LPG
-
Hermen Vlothuizen
Re: 6-cilinder op LPG
Misschien goed om te weten dat er een apart forum over deze motoren bestaat. Zie:
[www.landrover6pot.org]
Hieronder alvast een citaat van dat forum.
Hermen
--
The 6 cylinder has gained a reputation for being unreliable, thirsty, temperamental and generally a bad engine that's best ripped out and replaced with anything other than another 6. This reputation is totally undeserved and the 6 is, when looked after properly, every bit as reliable and dependable as the more common 4 cylinder and only very slightly heavier on fuel. So how has this reputation come about? It may sound daft but the 6 cylinder's biggest downfall is actually the 4 cylinder 2.25 petrol engine. The 4 cylinder engine is an extremely tough unit that will tolerate levels of abuse and neglect that would destroy any other engine very quickly, plus it will continue to run apparently very well even when so worn it has no right to run at all. Its not unheard of for a 2.25 petrol to cover 25,000 miles without any servicing whatsoever (not even topping up the oil except when the oil light refuses to go out) during which time its thrashed senseless, overheated and generally treated in a way that would have even an ultra-reliable Japanese diesel complaining, and still be running as sweetly after those 25,000 miles as it was before. This might sound like no mean feat until you realise the engine was designed to have oil changes every 3000 miles!
By comparison the 6 won't tolerate that level of abuse. It must be properly maintained with regular oil changes, regular checks on the timing, mixture and cooling system. In essence it must be maintained according to the Land Rover service schedule. Treated properly the 6 is a thoroughly reliable engine. Neglect it and it will suffer. Retarded timing and a weak mixture combined with an ineffective cooling system will result in burned exhaust valves whilst not keeping the oil up to scratch will ultimately kill the bearings. So, provided you are prepared to maintain the engine properly there is no reason not to go for a 6 cylinder based on reliability. If you need one that is going to be able to tolerate neglect then you're better off with the 4.
The quoted output for the 4 and 6 cylinder engines is as follows:-
Petrol: 2286 cc, 77 bhp @4250 rpm, 124 lb-ft @2500 rpm, 4 cylinder
Petrol: 2625 cc, 95 bhp @4500 rpm, 132 lb-ft @1750 rpm, 6 cylinder
Diesel: 2286 cc, 62 bhp @4000 rpm, 103 lb-ft @1800 rpm, 4 cylinder
On paper things look fairly evenly matched with the 4 cylinder petrol being a bit better than the diesel, and the 6 cylinder a bit better than the four. What the figures don't show is the way the power is delivered on the road. The 4 cylinder engines have normal 'humped' power curves, and when you look at their torque there is a definite peak around the peak torque figure. For the petrol this means that the bulk of the torque is delivered between about 2000-3000rpm with it tailing off noticeably either side. It’s a similar story with the diesel, but at lower revs. The 6, however has a very flat torque curve and the bulk of the torque is available between about 1300-4000rpm making the engine extremely flexible. By a coincidence around the 2500rpm mark the torque is almost identical to that of the 2.25 petrol. What this means is that when someone used to the 2.25 first drives a 6 cylinder they drive around 2000-3000rpm and find the performance is very similar to the 4 cylinder and wonder why anyone would bother with the 6. Its only when they allow the engine to go outside that rev range they begin to see the advantages. The 6 will pull at low revs much better than the 4 and continue pulling at high revs after the 4 has started flagging. On the road this means fewer gear changes (3rd or even top can be held at speeds where a 4 cylinder would need to be one gear lower) and a generally more relaxed drive. I once drove a 6 cylinder station wagon from Tring to Bicester via Aylesbury without coming out of 4th gear or touching the clutch even with all the roundabouts to negotiate. Exactly the same journey in a 2.25 petrol would have seen me in and out of 3rd gear quite a bit.
Fuel wise, a 4 cylinder low comp engine will return about 16-18mpg, the high comp about 18-20mpg and the 6 cylinder about 16-19mpg. Diesels tend to return around 24-28mpg. Obviously driving style, speed and road conditions will all affect these figures, but it gives you a feel for how they compare to each other.
When looking at a 6 cylinder all the usual checks apply. Engines that knock, misfire or run hot should be avoided unless you intend doing a rebuild. Also look for signs of weeping head gaskets out the front and back ends of the head (needs the gasket changing and very occasionally the head skimming) and be wary of engines that haven't had the antifreeze levels kept up (the alloy head can corrode badly if there is no antifreeze). Power delivery should be silky smooth with no hesitation or roughness and whilst not exactly high performance it should be noticeably quicker than a 2.25 in the same body.
I'm a big fan of the 6, but I'm not blind to the problems. I know many of the 6's out there have been neglected and may well be a heap of trouble by now, but if you find a good one they're a joy to drive. Ultimately the 4 cylinder is more dependable as it’s less fussy when it comes to servicing and maintenance and will generally keep running in the most appalling conditions, but for me if you don't need that level of extreme dependability the 6 cylinder is an excellent engine.
[www.landrover6pot.org]
Hieronder alvast een citaat van dat forum.
Hermen
--
The 6 cylinder has gained a reputation for being unreliable, thirsty, temperamental and generally a bad engine that's best ripped out and replaced with anything other than another 6. This reputation is totally undeserved and the 6 is, when looked after properly, every bit as reliable and dependable as the more common 4 cylinder and only very slightly heavier on fuel. So how has this reputation come about? It may sound daft but the 6 cylinder's biggest downfall is actually the 4 cylinder 2.25 petrol engine. The 4 cylinder engine is an extremely tough unit that will tolerate levels of abuse and neglect that would destroy any other engine very quickly, plus it will continue to run apparently very well even when so worn it has no right to run at all. Its not unheard of for a 2.25 petrol to cover 25,000 miles without any servicing whatsoever (not even topping up the oil except when the oil light refuses to go out) during which time its thrashed senseless, overheated and generally treated in a way that would have even an ultra-reliable Japanese diesel complaining, and still be running as sweetly after those 25,000 miles as it was before. This might sound like no mean feat until you realise the engine was designed to have oil changes every 3000 miles!
By comparison the 6 won't tolerate that level of abuse. It must be properly maintained with regular oil changes, regular checks on the timing, mixture and cooling system. In essence it must be maintained according to the Land Rover service schedule. Treated properly the 6 is a thoroughly reliable engine. Neglect it and it will suffer. Retarded timing and a weak mixture combined with an ineffective cooling system will result in burned exhaust valves whilst not keeping the oil up to scratch will ultimately kill the bearings. So, provided you are prepared to maintain the engine properly there is no reason not to go for a 6 cylinder based on reliability. If you need one that is going to be able to tolerate neglect then you're better off with the 4.
The quoted output for the 4 and 6 cylinder engines is as follows:-
Petrol: 2286 cc, 77 bhp @4250 rpm, 124 lb-ft @2500 rpm, 4 cylinder
Petrol: 2625 cc, 95 bhp @4500 rpm, 132 lb-ft @1750 rpm, 6 cylinder
Diesel: 2286 cc, 62 bhp @4000 rpm, 103 lb-ft @1800 rpm, 4 cylinder
On paper things look fairly evenly matched with the 4 cylinder petrol being a bit better than the diesel, and the 6 cylinder a bit better than the four. What the figures don't show is the way the power is delivered on the road. The 4 cylinder engines have normal 'humped' power curves, and when you look at their torque there is a definite peak around the peak torque figure. For the petrol this means that the bulk of the torque is delivered between about 2000-3000rpm with it tailing off noticeably either side. It’s a similar story with the diesel, but at lower revs. The 6, however has a very flat torque curve and the bulk of the torque is available between about 1300-4000rpm making the engine extremely flexible. By a coincidence around the 2500rpm mark the torque is almost identical to that of the 2.25 petrol. What this means is that when someone used to the 2.25 first drives a 6 cylinder they drive around 2000-3000rpm and find the performance is very similar to the 4 cylinder and wonder why anyone would bother with the 6. Its only when they allow the engine to go outside that rev range they begin to see the advantages. The 6 will pull at low revs much better than the 4 and continue pulling at high revs after the 4 has started flagging. On the road this means fewer gear changes (3rd or even top can be held at speeds where a 4 cylinder would need to be one gear lower) and a generally more relaxed drive. I once drove a 6 cylinder station wagon from Tring to Bicester via Aylesbury without coming out of 4th gear or touching the clutch even with all the roundabouts to negotiate. Exactly the same journey in a 2.25 petrol would have seen me in and out of 3rd gear quite a bit.
Fuel wise, a 4 cylinder low comp engine will return about 16-18mpg, the high comp about 18-20mpg and the 6 cylinder about 16-19mpg. Diesels tend to return around 24-28mpg. Obviously driving style, speed and road conditions will all affect these figures, but it gives you a feel for how they compare to each other.
When looking at a 6 cylinder all the usual checks apply. Engines that knock, misfire or run hot should be avoided unless you intend doing a rebuild. Also look for signs of weeping head gaskets out the front and back ends of the head (needs the gasket changing and very occasionally the head skimming) and be wary of engines that haven't had the antifreeze levels kept up (the alloy head can corrode badly if there is no antifreeze). Power delivery should be silky smooth with no hesitation or roughness and whilst not exactly high performance it should be noticeably quicker than a 2.25 in the same body.
I'm a big fan of the 6, but I'm not blind to the problems. I know many of the 6's out there have been neglected and may well be a heap of trouble by now, but if you find a good one they're a joy to drive. Ultimately the 4 cylinder is more dependable as it’s less fussy when it comes to servicing and maintenance and will generally keep running in the most appalling conditions, but for me if you don't need that level of extreme dependability the 6 cylinder is an excellent engine.
-
Dennis
Re: 6-cilinder op LPG
Heavier on fuel consumption... mmm
Zit nu met een goed 4 cylinderblok aan de 1:5...
kan het dus nog heavier!
Zit nu met een goed 4 cylinderblok aan de 1:5...
kan het dus nog heavier!
-
Erwin 110TD
Re: 6-cilinder op LPG
Ken ook iemand met een SIII 6-cyl.
Die heeft er ook LPG in laten zetten,
volgens hem (en dus ook volgens mij
) hoefde het blok niet aangepast....
Mail evt. off-topic voor zijn mailadres/mobielenummer
Erwin
110TD
[home.wanadoo.nl]
<img src="[home.wanadoo.nl];
Die heeft er ook LPG in laten zetten,
volgens hem (en dus ook volgens mij
) hoefde het blok niet aangepast....Mail evt. off-topic voor zijn mailadres/mobielenummer
Erwin
110TD
[home.wanadoo.nl]
<img src="[home.wanadoo.nl];
-
Mees
Re: 6-cilinder op LPG
Hier zonder aangepaste kop e.d. geen enkel probleem (wel met zo'n druppelsysteem er in)
-
Nardo, LR109, 2,6 liter 6 cil.
Re: 6-cilinder op LPG
Hoi,
Ik heb er ook een, rijd prima !
Zie je mailbox, ik heb je het e.e.a. toegestuurd.
Groeten Nardo.
Ik heb er ook een, rijd prima !
Zie je mailbox, ik heb je het e.e.a. toegestuurd.
Groeten Nardo.
-
janzzen
Re: 6-cilinder op LPG
een van de vragen die mij altijd bezig hou is de volgende, waarom zou je je kop bij voorbaat al laten aanpassen . de meeste motoren lopen probleemloos op lpg, mocht je bij het stellen merken dat het fout gaat kun je dat altijd nog laten doen... het is niet zo dat je motorblok met een enorme klap de geest geeft, je kleppen zullen langzaam maar zeker wat dieper inslijten, en dat komt er bij het stellen wel uit. als je het merkt dat dat aan het gebeuren is heb je nog ruim de tijd om je maatregelen te nemen voordat de schade echt groot word. de meeste van onze toch wat oudere auto's rijden niet zo bar veel km, en het is niet perse een feit dat het ook gaat gebeuren. rij maar rustig verder, happy on lpg!!
janzzen
janzzen