3.5 Carb or EFi??? Also Manual or Auto???

[simon15]

What are the advantages/dissadvantages of them both really?


Most Rangies seem to be auto so are they any good off road compared to a manual??????

[fezzy192]

i prefer carbs less trouble but with efi a bit more power
but efi has relays, ecu and alot of electric things that could go wrong

[simon15]

What about fuel?


Are there much differences in the 2?

[Guardian.]

if your gonna gas it the conversion is much, much cheaper for the  carbs, thats how our 110 is, carbs, and runs sweet as a nut, in this week for gassing i hope.

[fezzy192]

to be truthful i get about 12-14 to the gallon
i hear people say they get 18-20  to the gallon but they must switch off  the engine going down hills lol

[Range Rover Blues]

I prefer EFi, more power, more reliable, self-tuning, easier to LPG.

And I have heard of 3.5 EFi bettering 20mpg

[Guardian.]

we have all heard of them doing 20mpg+ but there isnt one that will actually really do it.
in the good old days me and a mate both had identicle 4.6hse's bought them together same spec everything except colour, and mine did same as every range rover ive ever had 11mpg mucking about and if i was lucky 15mpg on a run, as for every other one i have owned and i have had a few!
but my mate jonyboy would insist his did 20mpg all the time, same as his v8 jag, constant 25mpg, he just would not accept he was talking rubbish, i drove his on several occasions, and guess what, exactly the same as mine.
simon, if you prepare yourself for 12 - 14 to the gallon, you know what shes gonna cost to run, and if you get more its a miracle, sorry, bonus.

[clbarclay]

Based on fuel usage for a given milage recorded by the car, my 3.5 EFI (flapper type) returns about 17 mpg with an auto box, though it doesn benefit from having no rear seats, carpets etc. though then it does carry a fair weight of tools all the time so I doubt its lost and weight over all.

I do drive steadily to achive that, though the engine is not in the best of tune so after some TLC an improvement of an MPG or 2 may be possible, though I expect it will just end up more driveable.


The biggest thing that puts me of carbs is the amount of trouble some people I know have gone to tunning them to get them to run, let alown running well. Fitting snorkels or different air filters will also affect the tune of carbs compared to EFI systems cope better with the change of airflow.

[Welshbreed]

mine has carbs, would do about 17-19mpg if running at about 95-100mph in a straight a line as possible (not on the roads, of course...).

[simon15]

Just added Manual and Auto into the topic :)

[Big Rich]

I've got a 3.9 efi auto and it runs like a dream. Not too bad on fuel and the gas coversion helps.

Its very quick. Even good when towing.

Rich

[DEANO3528]

we have all heard of them doing 20mpg+ but there isnt one that will actually really do it.

Must be right then!

So my carb'ed V8 pick-up with LT95 and overdrive couldn't have averaged 23mpg to Billing and back in 2002 with the missus driving following me in my 2.8 Paj engined RR SE with the 'van on back*. Even though I checked the fuel used against mileage covered. Just like it couldn't average 18 to Billing and back the first time I took it as a proper 2dr RR with a caravan on the back.
Anyhooooo!
EFi is far preferable due to the lack of surging and playing around on steep stuff I reckon, and so smooth it is.
Still keep a spare set of carbs for Shed in case it all goes chest up but so far I think it only needs a temp sensor to make it right again (but living with it for 18 months now)!
To be fair (for a change) Shed used to do around 13 to the gallon most of the time but then it is fairly well armoured with a light bar front and back up top and the spare wheel mounted up there.
TBH the Paj engined one didn't do much more than that when towing!!!

*Or that my mate with his ex-comp-safari 110 V8'ed S2a could regularly get 24 on a run with a gentle right foot.

Nope your right.

[Pete5844 as was]

3.5 EFI only ever done more than 12mpg on the back of the RAC truck after a play day,well after nearly every play day.Water and V8,s never a good idea :lol:  

[clbarclay]

Manual v Auto?

For on road driving it has to be manual all the way, I find there is no advatage to the auto above a manual. Its something I just have to live with.

Off road is a different matter, first time out with the v8 auto even with various critical problems I was still impressed with the way it just crawled over obsticles that the diesel manual struggled with a run up. The only thing I dislike is the lack of engine breaking for decents, though this also has a fair bit to do with running oversized tyres and of course a v8 that has a lower compression ratio than a diesel.


In a nut shell
on road = manual
off road either manual or auto depending on personal preferance



Ps. Interesting side point, during the course of an off road weekend with the v8 auto I used no more fuel than previous weekends with the diesel manual. My theory is that driving a gas guzzler can affect the way you drive for the better (though this may only apply to skint students).

PPs. A lot of the cheapest RRC are Auto, possible due to them being more common on the late 80s RRC and due to manuals being preffered by most buyers.

[Range Rover Blues]

I disagree.

The time honoured advice was manual for off-road, better control on descents etc but TBH the smoother power delivery of an auto for climbing added to the free left foot to cover the brake for controll has won me over and the engine braking in 1st low on an auto is fantastic, just be careful it doesn't pull you into trouble as in 1st low it has quite a lot of grunt at idle.

I'm converiting Blue to Auto when I get time to strip the engine and box from the donor.

On road, no question Auto all the way.  Auto boxs suite big engines, my LSE is way faster up through the gears than Blue which has the LT77 peice of cack, it's on it's second and they are both rubbish.

Julie's TDi has the R380 which is way better and quite nice to drive, but surprisingly the TDi auto my sister has is also a very nice car.

Given how many clutches I've had to swap and how tiring I find driving a manual RRC, even before considering the poor choice on offer I'd have to say give serious thought to an auto.

[DEANO3528]

Slush box every time for me!
Don't like stick shift and that's that.
Engine braking isn't too much of an issue: steep descents need cadence braking and low 1. Most of my offroading is done in low 1 as it's the better gear especially where it's rutted/choppy. The gearbox is there to be used, L1 as previously mentioned, L2 when you climb a slope and when you need momentum just go for L3 or L4 and let it make it's own mind up. I think a lot of people think you use D regardless but it's not like that at all.

[Range Rover Blues]

Absolutely, if you only needed D there wouldn't be any choice in it.

[fezzy192]

i love my auto when i off road and the engine braking is superb so easy to control when off road and so smooth on the road no clunky gear changes like the manual gearbox :lol:

[clbarclay]

My comments about engine breaking was refering to it locked in 1st low range. After a weekend of cadence breaking to maintain a suitable speed the breaks were suffering.

On road, no question Auto all the way. Auto boxs suite big engines, my LSE is way faster up through the gears than Blue which has the LT77 peice of cack, it's on it's second and they are both rubbish.

Interesting, personal I had never been impresed with mine on the road, mainly at higher speeds where it feels very sluggish, how much this has to do with a tired eingine though waits to be seen.

[anaxemurderer]

Sure this has been done before but for me its all about having fun and manuals are more fun (IMHO), just doesn't feel right without a gearstick in my hand!

But technically auto's have alot of advantages over manual in terms of control and power delivery.

I also like to keep it simply so i prefer carbs. I know how that works (well mostly), i've no idea how that ecu nonsense happens.

Nick

[Range Rover Blues]

Funnily enough though when I asked the same question earlier this year no-one could give me a reason why I should keep the manual box when I swap the engine, the more I think about it the more the idea has grown on me and for towing it's a no-brainer.

[Range Rover Blues]

My comments about engine breaking was refering to it locked in 1st low range. After a weekend of cadence breaking to maintain a suitable speed the breaks were suffering.


Interesting, personal I had never been impresed with mine on the road, mainly at higher speeds where it feels very sluggish, how much this has to do with a tired eingine though waits to be seen.

If your enngine is tired then engine braking will suffer quite a bit anyway, but I'm surprised you think the Auto box sluggish at speed, mine is anything but.

[clbarclay]

Will have to compare it once the engine has been sorted out then, I've go another engine just not the time.

[Range Rover Blues]

I know that feeling well, I'm planning to replace the V7 in blue with a 4.6 auto.

Best laid plans :oops: