2.7 or 3.0 Terrano which is best

[Hewey]

Hi All,

Currently got a 1997 2.4i Petrol SWB Terrano, had it about 5-6 years now and it's been brilliant, never let me down but is limited in it's use due to its size.

I'm considering upgrading to a newer LWB one just for practicality. am thinking of a 2004/5 not sure if the 2.7 or 3.0 engine is better, obviously 3.0 has more power but how reliable is each unit.

Not really had much experience with Diesels, what should I be looking for.

Cheers
Hewey

 

[Fez_uk]

go for 2004 as the tax rate changed somewhere in 2005.

id go for a 2.7 but the 3.0 is still a great engine.

 

[davenclaire]

2.7 can be run on svo the 3.0 cant running a 2.7 is like free motoring

 

[Hewey]

Cheers,

Won't be messing around with fuel, any reason 2.7 is better? won't be covering many miles.

Also anything to look out for on them?

Thanks

 

[despot67]

Cheers,

Won't be messing around with fuel, any reason 2.7 is better? won't be covering many miles.

Also anything to look out for on them?

Thanks

Im on my second 2.7 and I did my research on both engines prior to buying and I don't regret my choice. The 2.7 is slightly more agricultural they say and slightly worse on mpg but the dependability of the engine far outweighs these factors in my eyes.

 

[despot67]

Also remember no cambelt or chain to mess with - this is worth its weight in gold, some of these engines can do 500K with regular servicing. Ive got a 03 plate but I beleive the 05 had a slighter nicer interior - moon roof sized sunroof on some in this year and trays on the seat backs for the kids?

 

[Banshee]

2.7 can be run on svo the 3.0 cant running a 2.7 is like free motoring

go for 2004 as the tax rate changed somewhere in 2005.

id go for a 2.7 but the 3.0 is still a great engine.

Exactly the reasons that I brought what I did after my Maverick was written off!!!!

2004 Terrano Commercial :sly

Got the most recent 2.7 I could so I knew I had some degree of reliability and the 2.7 would gobble up my homemade Bio just right :thumbs

Also got the Van I wanted rather than trying to DIY a commercial together again :doh, wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy

 

[Hewey]

Thanks,

Was edging towards the 2.7, firstly I know it's been used for years so although down on power compared to the 3.0 parts are probably more readily available. Also insurance on the 2.7 is about £50 cheaper.

Don't do many miles and at times can be left for a few weeks without use, my old 2.4 has always started on the button every time, just hoping I can expect the same from a Diesel!!

Again any issues I should be aware of or need to look out for on them.

 

[Fez_uk]

C
Won't be messing around with fuel, any reason 2.7 is better? won't be covering many miles.

2.7 Engine parts are generally cheaper or easier to get 2nd hand. The vehicle is usually are cheaper than the 3.0 to buy.

We know more about the 2.7 on here compared to the 3.0

 

[AlexD333]

Im Biased but yeah 2.7 all the way. Easy to work on if you know what a spanner looks like :lol

The 3.0 is a great motor too, but somewhat more advanced, tuning is also more tricky on the 3 and has to be done gently to not throw the ECU on a wobbly.

The 2.7 will run on fish N chips too :naughty

 

[despot67]

Thanks,

Was edging towards the 2.7, firstly I know it's been used for years so although down on power compared to the 3.0 parts are probably more readily available. Also insurance on the 2.7 is about £50 cheaper.

Don't do many miles and at times can be left for a few weeks without use, my old 2.4 has always started on the button every time, just hoping I can expect the same from a Diesel!!

Again any issues I should be aware of or need to look out for on them.

depending on age I went to look at loads that had rotten inner and outer rear sills as water gathers here but Id imagine your 2.4 would be the same. Engine wise with my meagre knowledge they are bombproof. I had to repplace the waterpump as they can go and from experience the stupid plastic thermostat housing is rubbish - see my posts lol.

I beleive some people have gearbox issues but nothing I have had yet!!!!!!

 

[Sweety]

go for 2004 as the tax rate changed somewhere in 2005.

id go for a 2.7 but the 3.0 is still a great engine.

It's only the 55 plates that were regged Jan 2006 onwards (could be a bit later) that got the jump in tax mines November 2005 & paying £285 for tax which is the same as 2002 etc models.
2.7TDI for me:thumbs like the 3L's but engines can suffer a few more problems but a 2.7 with a remap, better air filter & exhaust will put out the same or maybe a little more power than a standard 3L:augie

 

[carpy33]

I can vouch for the east mechanics of the 2.7 as I know next to nothing about cars and I have managed to change filters, glow plugs, water pump with out any issues at all. Obviously had a little help from the kind souls on here :thumb2

Go with the 2.7 as it appears to be the one that most forum members have which in turn means you are much more likely to get a answer to any questions.

 

[Blocky10]

My 04 3ltr is completely standard and it's been great. It's also auto so can only tow 2tn but tows my twin axle 'van very well.
Apparently the early 3ltrs had a few reliability issues.
Yes there are limited power upgrades compared to the 2.7 but unless you're off roading it's plenty. In my opinion.
And everyone has their own opinion. [emoji106]
If you can get a rust free solid motor, you'll be on a winner with the help on this forum.

 

[don simon]

I went for the 2.7 over the 3.0 simply because it'll run on anything, no cam belt/chain problems, one big hammer in the maintenance kit and 100 million London taxis can't be wrong.*
*There may be one or two slight exaggerations in the above.

 

[Hewey]

Thanks for all the advice Chaps.

Will be on the lookout. FOund one from a member on here but not sure I will be able to get to see it in time :-(

 

[zd30]

I have a pretty special one for sale