2.5TD vs 3.0V6

[WilliamCorrea]

Hi Prem,

What a question! - But a good one, all the same.
I think owners of each will cheer for what they have, and I suppose that's understandable. They'll have chosen best otc phentermine it, got to know it, and probably got pretty involved with what makes it tick. Some folk are incurable collectors . . . and often of the same type.

Power figures tell a story:
3.0i V6 / 2.5TD

bhp: 194 @ 5500rpm / 130 @ 4300rpm
torque: 197 ft.lbs @ 4000rpm / 217 ft.lbs @ 2000rpm
weight: 1591kg / 1580kg

The V6 can get to 60mph quicker, and top speed is 18mph more than the 2.5's listed 125mph max, but who drives like that? or can afford to?

The V6 is smoother at very low revs (eg hard throttle below 1500), but the 2.5 smoothes out perfectly by 1200, and then peak torque available at 2000, no need to run the engine up to twice that (or to hold a lower gear) to come into the peak torque band. Both engines are equipped with balancer shafts, so are smooth and vibration-free in all normal circumstances.

With lower rpm comes longevity, and with the gearbox too. Forum pages detail the need for on-going care of the automatics, costly repairs, and the need to be super-vigilant over fluids and filters. In contrast the 5-speed manual box (option on the V6, no choice on the TD) is a splendidly reliable and long-lived piece of engineering. The manual change, together with its upmarket pull-action clutch, offers some of the easiest manual changes to be had (for the era), especially with the correct GL-4 oil in it.

Fuel consumption. Our 2.5 averages 32-33mpg (mixed urban, mountain track and motorway), and 38mpg on local motorway commuting. For international travel, it returns 41-42, and that's at speeds averaging 60mph. Others will be able to list V6 figures, but they won't read like that.

Lots of cylinders is wonderful, and I look back fondly to the sound and smoothness of a Rover V8 - both auto and manual. But I don't look back with fondness to the 17-24mpg that went with it.

We decided we preferred diesel a long time ago now. First was the BX19RD - our son had a BX19GTi - and the comparison was interesting, as was the amount of fettling needed to keep the GTi mobile. 44mpg from the RD, a bit over half that from the GTi. Hmm...

So, I'm glad not to have to look after plugs and leads, HT and distributor, ignition modules, in-tank fuel pumps, and all those bits. Exhausts on diesels last longer, and pumps and injectors are fairly bombproof, if you keep the air out. Routine servicing almost boils down to just two items: oil + filter.
Put aside an auto box, too, and the transmission is almost forgettable.

But it's not a simple as that. Just look at the numbers on our Members' Cars list...
http://www.club-xm.co.uk/forum/viewtopi ... aga#p81829
Out of the 63 XMs there, petrol and diesel split almost equally, 33 vs 30, just like global sales (181k vs 151k).
19 are V6s, 14 are 2.0i
25 are 2.1TD, and only 5 (8%) are 2.5.

This small number of 2.5s is interestingly almost exactly the same as the global proportion of 2.5s produced (7%)...
http://www.club-xm.co.uk/forum/viewtopi ... res#p93060
...22,785 hatch and estate.

Easy to work on, and access? No, but neither is any XM, with well-stuffed engine bays. The 2.5 is towards the sod-awkward end, with a good few jobs (new belts, replacement starter, turbo access) not a lot of fun. The upside is that these jobs don't need tackling very often, and overall reliability - if you look after basic servicing - is extraordinarily high.

I'll let someone else tell the V6 story. They'll be no shortage of detail, I'll bet!

Parts are probably about the same between 2.5 and PRV now, scarce to impossible.

So I think it depends on your driving style and whether you can afford the fuel or not. With the 2.2 if you drive like a gentleman you can expect 7 to 8 km/l

[Ferdinand]

I have a DK5 BVM, and it runs and drives like a steamtrain… Not a sportscar but plenty of power. My ES9 V6 BVA feels slow and I hate the autobox! My PRV 12V BVM feels faster and more controlable then the ES9…

[Julianw]

Comme ci, comme ca. I've only come to properly respect autoboxes having returned to (very) urban delivery work, and not in an XM, at that. How else can one efficiently navigate mini roundabouts with a Costa coffee in one hand? :>
Plus, while I haven't tried an auto XM, the parking brake pedal only seems to make sense when you have just two other pedals.

But I love a slick manual gearbox with the right ratios, and the torque figures of the 2.5 cannot be argued with: my experiences with the 2.1TD has proven my addiction to mid range heave-ho...

So now I'm strongly regretting turning down Lankytim's 2.5 when he had it up for grabs about 7 years ago...

Comme ci, comme ca

[wethjohn]

The zf4 hp20 auro box in the v6 is... delicate. . Anything after 100k with no history is on borrowed time. Claimed to be a sealed for life box they arent and do need oil services to live long..

The older prv engines up to 1996 used the 4 hp18 box Mk 2866 for sale which is very simply serviced and if oil changed every 6k can do 200k no problem..

Exhausts on v6 are or were dealer only. Motor factors never made them so come replacment you need deep pockets or have a specialist fabricate a stainless one.. 2.5 td ones are available.

great