New Nissan 'YD' 2.5Tdi - comments ?

Submitted: Wednesday, Oct 04, 2006 at 12:14
ThreadID: 38254 Views:4707 Replies:3 FollowUps:20
This Thread has been Archived
Has anyone any comments about the 2.5Tdi 'YD' diesel and the current model Navara it's in ? Apparently it makes 128Kw/403Nm which sounds impressive, but what's it really like ? Too overstressed to be reliable perhaps, or too soon to say ? If successful/reliable I imagine they'll also put it in the rest of the range.
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Snowy 3.0iTD - Wednesday, Oct 04, 2006 at 12:22

Wednesday, Oct 04, 2006 at 12:22
The 3.0iTD with a Safari upgrade box has 133kw and 420 Nm claimed, 0.5L less capacity with basically the same power, and the 3.0L motors already has a chequered history.
AnswerID: 197776

Follow Up By: Leroy - Wednesday, Oct 04, 2006 at 13:37

Wednesday, Oct 04, 2006 at 13:37
and the relationship between the engines? Get with the times Pops. There are may CR diesels on the market now producing similar if not more kw/l and reliably! compare with other diesels not the early 3.0l nissan which we all know had problems.

Leroy
0
FollowupID: 456334

Follow Up By: Snowy 3.0iTD - Wednesday, Oct 04, 2006 at 13:56

Wednesday, Oct 04, 2006 at 13:56
My comment was a general one relating to the simple fact that more power out of a smaller capacity engine equals higher internal stresses on components, leading to shorter life-spans. I assume you have already thought that one through?
0
FollowupID: 456337

Follow Up By: Leroy - Wednesday, Oct 04, 2006 at 14:04

Wednesday, Oct 04, 2006 at 14:04
my comments were relating to the old mindset of big donk = big power. Go back 20yrs and you were getting 80kw out of a holden 6 cycl. eng. and now look at a barina. You are making similar power with a 1.6l 4cycl engine. It's called progress.

Leroy
0
FollowupID: 456338

Follow Up By: Member - Oldplodder (QLD) - Wednesday, Oct 04, 2006 at 16:26

Wednesday, Oct 04, 2006 at 16:26
Snowy, doesn't wear also relate to the actual power output while you are driving?
Drive on full throttle and full power all day will result in a lot less engine life than driving on half throttle most of the time!
The choice is yours about engine life, use the right foot accordingly.
Also metal and lubrication technology has progressed a long way since the old cast iron blocks of the 60s (The 80s holden engine was 60s technology) , and even the 50s when decokes every 30,000m was normal.
0
FollowupID: 456361

Follow Up By: Snowy 3.0iTD - Wednesday, Oct 04, 2006 at 16:40

Wednesday, Oct 04, 2006 at 16:40
Oldplodder alloy technology and lubricants have progressed quite a lot. But the capacity of the engine is determined by nunmber of cylinders and the bore and stroke of the pistons. Generally for the same number of cylinders the smaller the engine capacity the smaller the bore and stroke. Power is generated by force of the bang inside your cylinder and the number of bangs per second, assuming they haven't got it doing some amazing rev speed, then to get more power they have to make the bang bigger producing more force. More force on a smaller area (like the top of smaller piston) equals higher stresses, which are then transmitted to the conrdod, to crankshaft etc. I am not knocking the newer engines, and am all for new technology, but there is a reason why you still see old landcruisers getting around 20 years of more after they were built, I certainly don't expect that my 3.0L engine will still be around in 20 years time.
0
FollowupID: 456364

Follow Up By: Leroy - Wednesday, Oct 04, 2006 at 21:03

Wednesday, Oct 04, 2006 at 21:03
you keep talking about 3.0l engines and we are talking generally about modern diesels. You talk about the top of a small pistons, alloys have also progressed.

Leroy
0
FollowupID: 456426

Follow Up By: Snowy 3.0iTD - Thursday, Oct 05, 2006 at 10:05

Thursday, Oct 05, 2006 at 10:05
You seem to have missed the entire point of my post, go to your local library, pick up a book on Engineering Mechanical Design, and one on the Engineering Properties of Materials and have a read on the sections of basic stress-strain analysis, how steel and alloy materials react to internal stress's, fatigue failure and then have a think about how it all relates. Knowledge is the greatest treasure a person can have.
0
FollowupID: 456479

Follow Up By: Leroy - Thursday, Oct 05, 2006 at 20:46

Thursday, Oct 05, 2006 at 20:46
if you read between the lines of what i said - metalurgy has progressed also. Look at the big trucks and how many kw/l they produce. Look at all the new diesel offerings in new cars. go on....I dare you...have a look.

Leroy
0
FollowupID: 456570

Follow Up By: Member - Oldplodder (QLD) - Friday, Oct 06, 2006 at 08:12

Friday, Oct 06, 2006 at 08:12
Snowy & Leroy.

Snowy, yes I agree. There is a mechanical effeciency there, power from the stroke.
But most cars these days are not driven to maximium power, or maximum bang.
Either the air is limited (petrol engine) or fuel is limited (deisel engine) to control that power. Therefore stresses are lowered from the maximum available.
Think about it, when you design a machine, there is usually a duty cycle include in the calcs. Whether it is a bearing, a crane, or any other machine.
So an engine that is driven at half power is going to give more life than another engine driven at full power. So whether it is 1.0l or 5.0l, life will be extended by driving it at lower than maximum power.
By the way, are not all the older holden 6 cyl. engines you mentioned about the 2.8l to 3.0l mark anyway. 129, 149, 179, 186 ci?

PS - I also have a 30 year old beetle, and like a lot of landcruisers, it has only done 300,000k, and still going strong. Know a few beetles with well over 500,000k.
0
FollowupID: 456638

Reply By: Gerhardp1 - Wednesday, Oct 04, 2006 at 15:17

Wednesday, Oct 04, 2006 at 15:17
Met a guy at Glasshouse mountains caravan park who was towing a 22ft Jayco with a 2.5 Navara.

22.5 Litres per 100.

This definately indicates the engine is too small, no matter what the supporters of small capacity high output engines say.

I may also be old fashioned, but I still believe that bigger is better - just ask all the fans of 4.2 diesels on this forum if they would gladly swap for a 2.5

AnswerID: 197804

Follow Up By: Member - Andrew W (VIC) - Wednesday, Oct 04, 2006 at 16:26

Wednesday, Oct 04, 2006 at 16:26
I think it indicates the guy from Glasshouse needs to learn how to drive when towing!!
My Navara 2.5 Diesel manual get between 15 and 17 l/100 km when towing my 23' Scenic (which is probably a fair bit heavier than the Jayco) - and i travel at the max speed limit most times.
0
FollowupID: 456362

Follow Up By: Gerhardp1 - Wednesday, Oct 04, 2006 at 18:03

Wednesday, Oct 04, 2006 at 18:03
How do you cruise at 100k and get the tecnique wrong?

His was an auto, but that shouldn't matter at cruising speed, since presumably it has a lock up convertor.

Assuming your van is heavier is a false assumption, since you (nor I for that matter) don't know how much the Glasshouse dude's van weighs, nor do you know if he had it loaded to the hilt, and/or the car loaded to the hilt as well.

The point is, his fuel consumption was 22.5, coming from his lips. None of his previous tow vehicles had used so much fuel as this thing.

The only other huge fuel reading we encountered was a bloke towing a 24 foot cabin cruiser, who arrived next to us in the van park at Cairns because it was too rough to put to sea. He was towing with a v8 disc - his wife thought it was using about 20l per 100 when I asked her - I didn't believe that, they can't do that just pulling themselves along!

Asked him later after quite a few reds, and he said morosely "more than 30 but I'm not saying how much more".

His technique was definately wrong - he chose the wrong vehicle.
0
FollowupID: 456386

Follow Up By: Pavo - Wednesday, Oct 04, 2006 at 19:26

Wednesday, Oct 04, 2006 at 19:26
I wonder how much fuel the 24 foot cabin cruiser would use per hour when cruising along at a fair pace...he's probably used to the fuel bills.

0
FollowupID: 456404

Follow Up By: F4Phantom - Wednesday, Oct 04, 2006 at 20:34

Wednesday, Oct 04, 2006 at 20:34
I have a 2.5L navara, but mine puts out 57kw and around 170nm. So basicly its quite slow. On the plus side it uses barely more fuel from towing, the engine is known to do around 500k's without a rebuild and I get 7.6L/100km around town with road tyres and 11.5L with muddies. I like the fact that 55L or so gets me a tick over 700km in a tank. Anyway the point is, I can only dream of the new 2.5L in my car as all that power would be nice, but I do wonder if it will last as long. I agree that more power should probably put more stress on the engine. Also I have towed around 1 tonne and it is fine but not much power. The thing is, with a tonne in tow it uses around 10 to 15% more fuel - not 150% more like the newie. To use 22.5L the things electronics must just pump the fuel through good and proper, because you cant have power without burning more juice. We have to remember that most of the car buying world is not like the majority of people here, who not only know about engines but do all the basics at home. Most people buy, sell, upgrade and waste lots of money all the time. They dont care about the engines lifespan as we all know cars over 200k are worthless.
0
FollowupID: 456418

Follow Up By: Member - Andrew W (VIC) - Wednesday, Oct 04, 2006 at 20:44

Wednesday, Oct 04, 2006 at 20:44
Sorry to say this but the guy who claims his Navara is using 22l/100 'cruising at 100 kph' is either talking complete bull bleep or he has got one sick motor! - Forget the weight bit if you want, my 2.5 Diesel gets over 600 kms per tank on freeway use, towing the van (which works out at just over 13 L/100 kms). That is not from someone i met in a car park somewhere in the Glasshouse mountains, that is based on 36,000 kms travelled with it so far.
Thats fact - not second hand gossip!!
0
FollowupID: 456422

Follow Up By: Leroy - Wednesday, Oct 04, 2006 at 21:08

Wednesday, Oct 04, 2006 at 21:08
i agree with andrew. i was towing 2+ ton and I wasn't using 20+/100km in a 3.0l Something NQR.

Leroy
0
FollowupID: 456427

Follow Up By: Gerhardp1 - Thursday, Oct 05, 2006 at 08:50

Thursday, Oct 05, 2006 at 08:50
Pavo, his boat used 40 litres per hour when returning from one of the islands, it was a 3 hour trip.

You are correct that he was used to fuel bills. He was certainly one of those who doesn't keep a car for the long haul, so when you lease the wrong vehicle/boat for a 3 or 4 year lease you are stuck with the fuel bills if they drink too much, but you are rarely stuck with engine overhauls.

0
FollowupID: 456464

Follow Up By: NicI - Thursday, Oct 05, 2006 at 12:08

Thursday, Oct 05, 2006 at 12:08
There sure are a lot of variables here, but here's another similar anecdote on power and fuel consumption:

A guy I know covers lots of distance in a current Hilux 3LTDi (claimed 120Kw/353Nm) with 800Kg of traytop camper and towing 1.2t of trailer at a steady 100Km/hr - getting 11-12.5L/100km. A decent load with good figures, surely the Nissan YD motor with its (claimed) 128Kw/403Nm should do as well if not better ?
0
FollowupID: 456506

Follow Up By: NicI - Friday, Oct 06, 2006 at 09:33

Friday, Oct 06, 2006 at 09:33
Waddo, it's very refreshing to hear from you as a person with 1st-hand experience with a YD-powered vehicle, which was the feedback I was after. I'm trying to decide between a current Hilux 3LTDi and the Nissan YD - similar prices and performance, although Ron Moon thinks the Nissan is superior offroad.
0
FollowupID: 456650

Follow Up By: NicI - Friday, Oct 06, 2006 at 09:37

Friday, Oct 06, 2006 at 09:37
Hi Waddo, also: how does the 6-speed perform ? I hear 6th is a big gap from 5th, an overdrive, true ? If so, will it hold 6th on long climbs ?

Cheers,

Nic
0
FollowupID: 456651

Follow Up By: Member - Andrew W (VIC) - Friday, Oct 06, 2006 at 10:51

Friday, Oct 06, 2006 at 10:51
e-mail me at apwaddo@bigpond.com and i will happily send you all the details. If i post on here the anti-nissan lobby will come out of the woodwork!
0
FollowupID: 456662

Reply By: Member - Bucky (VIC) - Sunday, Oct 08, 2006 at 08:19

Sunday, Oct 08, 2006 at 08:19
Why would you want to go to a 2.5 TD ?

Have they given up ?

Is this the 500,000 km motor the ZD30 TD was not ?

There is a lot of negative attitudes about the ZD30 motor, especially in the Patrols

Time will tell ,, in the mean time,, I will stick with my late 03 Navara 3.0 TD

Cheers !

Bucky

AnswerID: 198269

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (9)