TD or not TD, that is the question... (1 Viewer)

[Bushtrekker]

Sorry Shakespeare I'm still working out the best options to look for and wondered whether it is better to go for the Turbo option to pull better uphill, or stick to naturally aspirated for economy. I'm still looking to get around 25 MPG if possible.
Cheers, John

 

[wivvy's dad]

Because a non-turbo will have less "grunt", you will find yourself pushing the loud pedal down further to compensate, which leads to a worsening of fuel consumption.

So I reckon you should look again at your priorities, and how you might achieve them.

I've had both, so have a good idea of how they perform, one against the other.

 

[American Dream]

Definately the turbo.....

Far more fuel-efficient as Wivvy's Dad said. The extra power makes all the difference.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[waynesworld]

Turbo all the time for road work and long cruising:thumb:.

 

[wizzer59]

Is it possible to even get a non turbo engine nowadays

 

[Terry]

Sorry Shakespeare I'm still working out the best options to look for and wondered whether it is better to go for the Turbo option to pull better uphill, or stick to naturally aspirated for economy. I'm still looking to get around 25 MPG if possible.
Cheers, John

Lots of vans get around 25 mpg :thumb: be it 1.9s to 3 ltrs -As a rule anything with a big bump on the front is going to get around 20/24 mpg anything low profile around 25/30 mpg and RVs around 10 mpg but some claim a lot more All depends how and where you drive Most RVs never venture off the m-way ( 50/55mph) so in reality never get to take in around town figures hence some claim 14 mpg Of course some RVs have gas conversions that take then near to = 18 mpg oh: Same with some larger euro vans. Turbo every time for me :thumb:All ish
terry

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}