New Tr - Which Diesel?

[BassaJay]

Contemplating a new Avensis TR and I am having difficulty deciding between the D-4D 2.0ltr and the D-4D 2.2ltr. My annual mileage is very low, approx 5K and for the past few years I have been driving petrol automatic/semi automatic transmissions so I am currently suffering from lazy left foot syndrome. After dismissing the Avensis 1.8 petrol automatic, the final choice is between the two diesels and any advice/comments would be appreciated in helping with my final choice.

[bjw]

I would suggest that you try both engines out this is a major purchase and I am sure you do not want to make a mistake .

Most dealers will let you have a 24 hour test drive ! also the clutch can tend to be a bit heavy so you can see why a 24 hour test drive makes sense

I am sure somebody will post soon who have these models.

Hope it helps

[BassaJay]

I would suggest that you try both engines out this is a major purchase and I am sure you do not want to make a mistake .

Most dealers will let you have a 24 hour test drive ! also the clutch can tend to be a bit heavy so you can see why a 24 hour test drive makes sense

I am sure somebody will post soon who have these models.

Hope it helps

Thanks for the reply bjw, are you saying that the Avensis cluch is on the heavy side?

Will arrange a 24 hour test drive trying out both - perhaps the extra torque of the 2.2 could be an advantage?

[bjw]

I would suggest that you try both engines out this is a major purchase and I am sure you do not want to make a mistake .

Most dealers will let you have a 24 hour test drive ! also the clutch can tend to be a bit heavy so you can see why a 24 hour test drive makes sense

I am sure somebody will post soon who have these models.

Hope it helps

Thanks for the reply bjw, are you saying that the Avensis cluch is on the heavy side?

Will arrange a 24 hour test drive trying out both - perhaps the extra torque of the 2.2 could be an advantage?

If it was me buying an Avensis I would go for the 2-2 D4D

[shylad]

Hi there,

I have the 2.2 Avensis and am glad I went for it over the 2.0

Laods of torque ;)

[Dunkelmann]

I have a new model March 07 D4D 2.0L. I tried out it and the 2.2L. As advised above, you need to try them both. Make sure you are given a new model 2.0L since it has a more powerful engine than the previous 2.0L.

Like you I have a low annual mileage and I was interested in a balance between economy and performance. I used to have a 1.8VVTI and would not buy a petrol engine again. My clutch is quite light, certainly lighter than the 1.8. The torque is perfectly fine (better than the 1.8) and comes in best between 2000rpm and 3000rpm (see the performance charts in the brochure). Yes the 2.2 feels more powerful but returns worse fuel economy. I got 60mpg having done 7500 miles going from near Edinburgh to Portsmouth doing a steady 70ish. On the return journey I got nearer to 51mpg but I was hammering it about 80mph.

I'm sure with either choice you'll be happy, but if you want power over economy you may favour the larger engine.

[BassaJay]

I have a new model March 07 D4D 2.0L. I tried out it and the 2.2L. As advised above, you need to try them both. Make sure you are given a new model 2.0L since it has a more powerful engine than the previous 2.0L.

Like you I have a low annual mileage and I was interested in a balance between economy and performance. I used to have a 1.8VVTI and would not buy a petrol engine again. My clutch is quite light, certainly lighter than the 1.8. The torque is perfectly fine (better than the 1.8) and comes in best between 2000rpm and 3000rpm (see the performance charts in the brochure). Yes the 2.2 feels more powerful but returns worse fuel economy. I got 60mpg having done 7500 miles going from near Edinburgh to Portsmouth doing a steady 70ish. On the return journey I got nearer to 51mpg but I was hammering it about 80mph.

I'm sure with either choice you'll be happy, but if you want power over economy you may favour the larger engine.

That's it in a nutshell, economy vs power. Looking at the maximum torque figures there is not a lot in it, at least on paper, the 2.0 D-4D has 300 Nm at 2000 to 2800 rpm and the 2.2 D-4D 150 has 310 at 2000 to 3200 rpm. On the economy front the 2.0's advantage over the 2.2, if you can believe the figures, are approx 3 more mpg on the combined cycle, VED band C instead of D and probably a one or two insurance group/s less. The 2.0 is shown as 6mph slower on top speed and 1.3 secs slower on the 0-62 sprint. The 2.2 in TR spec. has a retail premium of £500 over the 2.0.

Excuse the cliches but 'the proof of the pudding is in the eating' and it's' horses for courses' - whichever I eventually choose, I will probably be 'over the moon' - I am awaiting the dealership to arrange my test drive on both engines.

What Car magazine show the T2 2.0 D-4D as best buy out of the whole range. Hmm.

[bristolmotorspeedway]

What Car magazine show the T2 2.0 D-4D as best buy out of the whole range. Hmm.

Yesss, odd that. I'm not sure why they find the T2 spec so appealing. The T3-X has so much more equipment, for not much more money if I remember correctly.

My vote on the engine - 2.2, but then I would say that :) . For info, I have seen over 60mpg on long Mway dawdles, whilst generally high 40s to low 50s is what I achieve on a usual tankful (mixed 70% mway/30% urban commuting), depending on how many journeys have 'time in hand'. These are measured mpgs, not just relying on the trip computer.

Strange thing is, the recent 20k service seemed to include a 'drill hole in fuel tank' option, the mpg has plummeted by around 5-7mpg I reckon. Could be the new tyres, even though they are the same brand and spec?

[bjw]

To be honest with a mileage of 5000 miles a year fuel economy should not play that much of a part in your decision as the difference over a year will be small .

The main concerns in my opinion would be driveability and resale value and this is why I think the 2-2D4D is the better choice .

Good luck with your decision I am sure you will like which ever one you choose

[BassaJay]

What Car magazine show the T2 2.0 D-4D as best buy out of the whole range. Hmm.

Yesss, odd that. I'm not sure why they find the T2 spec so appealing. The T3-X has so much more equipment, for not much more money if I remember correctly.

My vote on the engine - 2.2, but then I would say that :) . For info, I have seen over 60mpg on long Mway dawdles, whilst generally high 40s to low 50s is what I achieve on a usual tankful (mixed 70% mway/30% urban commuting), depending on how many journeys have 'time in hand'. These are measured mpgs, not just relying on the trip computer.

Strange thing is, the recent 20k service seemed to include a 'drill hole in fuel tank' option, the mpg has plummeted by around 5-7mpg I reckon. Could be the new tyres, even though they are the same brand and spec?

Yes, it struck me as a strange decision by What Car, after all the basic T2 seems to miss out on a lot of the bells & whistles plus it is not available with the 2.2 D-4D engine.

The special edition TR appears to be a bit of a bargain since it inherits T3-s & T3-x specs. and costs just £400 more - that equates to a fair bit of free kit.

Having just done on-line insurance quotes for the 2.0 & 2.2 - there was only approx. £15 difference in premiums for my details. It appears that the biggest drawbacks, if you can call them that, with the 2.2 over the 2.0 are the extra £500 new cost plus the extra £25 p.a. on the VED band. Fuel economy-wise there appears very little difference between the two and is insignificant for low mileage folk.

Have the feeling that the 2.2 is currently on provisional pole but final qualifying will be the real decider.

[bjw]

What Car magazine show the T2 2.0 D-4D as best buy out of the whole range. Hmm.

Yesss, odd that. I'm not sure why they find the T2 spec so appealing. The T3-X has so much more equipment, for not much more money if I remember correctly.

My vote on the engine - 2.2, but then I would say that :) . For info, I have seen over 60mpg on long Mway dawdles, whilst generally high 40s to low 50s is what I achieve on a usual tankful (mixed 70% mway/30% urban commuting), depending on how many journeys have 'time in hand'. These are measured mpgs, not just relying on the trip computer.

Strange thing is, the recent 20k service seemed to include a 'drill hole in fuel tank' option, the mpg has plummeted by around 5-7mpg I reckon. Could be the new tyres, even though they are the same brand and spec?

Yes, it struck me as a strange decision by What Car, after all the basic T2 seems to miss out on a lot of the bells & whistles plus it is not available with the 2.2 D-4D engine.

The special edition TR appears to be a bit of a bargain since it inherits T3-s & T3-x specs. and costs just £400 more - that equates to a fair bit of free kit.

Having just done on-line insurance quotes for the 2.0 & 2.2 - there was only approx. £15 difference in premiums for my details. It appears that the biggest drawbacks, if you can call them that, with the 2.2 over the 2.0 are the extra £500 new cost plus the extra £25 p.a. on the VED band. Fuel economy-wise there appears very little difference between the two and is insignificant for low mileage folk.

Have the feeling that the 2.2 is currently on provisional pole but final qualifying will be the real decider.

I think what it is with what car some of data may be old ie they did not take the TR spec into the equation as it was not released when they compiled there best buys there is no doubt it is an excellent buy

[BassaJay]

What Car magazine show the T2 2.0 D-4D as best buy out of the whole range. Hmm.

Yesss, odd that. I'm not sure why they find the T2 spec so appealing. The T3-X has so much more equipment, for not much more money if I remember correctly.

My vote on the engine - 2.2, but then I would say that :) . For info, I have seen over 60mpg on long Mway dawdles, whilst generally high 40s to low 50s is what I achieve on a usual tankful (mixed 70% mway/30% urban commuting), depending on how many journeys have 'time in hand'. These are measured mpgs, not just relying on the trip computer.

Strange thing is, the recent 20k service seemed to include a 'drill hole in fuel tank' option, the mpg has plummeted by around 5-7mpg I reckon. Could be the new tyres, even though they are the same brand and spec?

Yes, it struck me as a strange decision by What Car, after all the basic T2 seems to miss out on a lot of the bells & whistles plus it is not available with the 2.2 D-4D engine.

The special edition TR appears to be a bit of a bargain since it inherits T3-s & T3-x specs. and costs just £400 more - that equates to a fair bit of free kit.

Having just done on-line insurance quotes for the 2.0 & 2.2 - there was only approx. £15 difference in premiums for my details. It appears that the biggest drawbacks, if you can call them that, with the 2.2 over the 2.0 are the extra £500 new cost plus the extra £25 p.a. on the VED band. Fuel economy-wise there appears very little difference between the two and is insignificant for low mileage folk.

Have the feeling that the 2.2 is currently on provisional pole but final qualifying will be the real decider.

I think what it is with what car some of data may be old ie they did not take the TR spec into the equation as it was not released when they compiled there best buys there is no doubt it is an excellent buy

Assessed the 2.2 today and covered approx 100 miles, what a fantastic engine - so torquey and quiet. Very responsive when overtaking together with low revs at 70-75 - a very relaxing motor with plenty of urge when required.

Trying the 2.0 tomorrow - will have to exceptional to better the 2.2.

[BassaJay]

What Car magazine show the T2 2.0 D-4D as best buy out of the whole range. Hmm.

Yesss, odd that. I'm not sure why they find the T2 spec so appealing. The T3-X has so much more equipment, for not much more money if I remember correctly.

My vote on the engine - 2.2, but then I would say that :) . For info, I have seen over 60mpg on long Mway dawdles, whilst generally high 40s to low 50s is what I achieve on a usual tankful (mixed 70% mway/30% urban commuting), depending on how many journeys have 'time in hand'. These are measured mpgs, not just relying on the trip computer.

Strange thing is, the recent 20k service seemed to include a 'drill hole in fuel tank' option, the mpg has plummeted by around 5-7mpg I reckon. Could be the new tyres, even though they are the same brand and spec?

Yes, it struck me as a strange decision by What Car, after all the basic T2 seems to miss out on a lot of the bells & whistles plus it is not available with the 2.2 D-4D engine.

The special edition TR appears to be a bit of a bargain since it inherits T3-s & T3-x specs. and costs just £400 more - that equates to a fair bit of free kit.

Having just done on-line insurance quotes for the 2.0 & 2.2 - there was only approx. £15 difference in premiums for my details. It appears that the biggest drawbacks, if you can call them that, with the 2.2 over the 2.0 are the extra £500 new cost plus the extra £25 p.a. on the VED band. Fuel economy-wise there appears very little difference between the two and is insignificant for low mileage folk.

Have the feeling that the 2.2 is currently on provisional pole but final qualifying will be the real decider.

I think what it is with what car some of data may be old ie they did not take the TR spec into the equation as it was not released when they compiled there best buys there is no doubt it is an excellent buy

Assessed the 2.2 today and covered approx 100 miles, what a fantastic engine - so torquey and quiet. Very responsive when overtaking together with low revs at 70-75 - a very relaxing motor with plenty of urge when required.

Trying the 2.0 tomorrow - will have to exceptional to better the 2.2.

Thanks for your views and input - for me, the slightly extra grunt of the 2.2 D-4D 150 won the day - the 2.0 D-4D ran it very close though since they are both superb units.

Looking forward to picking it up in a week or so - a TR in Venetian Silver.

[bjw]

What Car magazine show the T2 2.0 D-4D as best buy out of the whole range. Hmm.

Yesss, odd that. I'm not sure why they find the T2 spec so appealing. The T3-X has so much more equipment, for not much more money if I remember correctly.

My vote on the engine - 2.2, but then I would say that :) . For info, I have seen over 60mpg on long Mway dawdles, whilst generally high 40s to low 50s is what I achieve on a usual tankful (mixed 70% mway/30% urban commuting), depending on how many journeys have 'time in hand'. These are measured mpgs, not just relying on the trip computer.

Strange thing is, the recent 20k service seemed to include a 'drill hole in fuel tank' option, the mpg has plummeted by around 5-7mpg I reckon. Could be the new tyres, even though they are the same brand and spec?

Yes, it struck me as a strange decision by What Car, after all the basic T2 seems to miss out on a lot of the bells & whistles plus it is not available with the 2.2 D-4D engine.

The special edition TR appears to be a bit of a bargain since it inherits T3-s & T3-x specs. and costs just £400 more - that equates to a fair bit of free kit.

Having just done on-line insurance quotes for the 2.0 & 2.2 - there was only approx. £15 difference in premiums for my details. It appears that the biggest drawbacks, if you can call them that, with the 2.2 over the 2.0 are the extra £500 new cost plus the extra £25 p.a. on the VED band. Fuel economy-wise there appears very little difference between the two and is insignificant for low mileage folk.

Have the feeling that the 2.2 is currently on provisional pole but final qualifying will be the real decider.

I think what it is with what car some of data may be old ie they did not take the TR spec into the equation as it was not released when they compiled there best buys there is no doubt it is an excellent buy

Assessed the 2.2 today and covered approx 100 miles, what a fantastic engine - so torquey and quiet. Very responsive when overtaking together with low revs at 70-75 - a very relaxing motor with plenty of urge when required.

Trying the 2.0 tomorrow - will have to exceptional to better the 2.2.

Thanks for your views and input - for me, the slightly extra grunt of the 2.2 D-4D 150 won the day - the 2.0 D-4D ran it very close though since they are both superb units.

Looking forward to picking it up in a week or so - a TR in Venetian Silver.

Silver really suits the Avensis it gives the car an executive look

[matty2767]

i ordered my tr today. i too went for the 2.2.

[BassaJay]

i ordered my tr today. i too went for the 2.2.

Good for you, which colour have you gone for?

Should pick my Venetian Silver up later today. The TR grade is excellent value coming with plenty of standard bells & whistles and that 2.2 D-4D is a gem, even in the 150 bhp.version.

The only slight disappointments for me were the non availability of the steering wheel controlled bluetooth HFT since this is, apparently only available on the non sat nav cars - plus the non advertised side protection mouldings, which are in fact available, except in, you've guessed it, Venetian Silver !!

Hoping Toyota will eventually remedy this.

[matty2767]

went for the black one which is the same as my current avensis and looks ok if i manage to keep it washed each week. i always thought the 116bhp was a bit low for this size of car which is why i had it chipped but my new one will have more power and the right gearing.

looking forwards to collecting it but have to wait another week. i havent seen the protection thingys though.

[BassaJay]

went for the black one which is the same as my current avensis and looks ok if i manage to keep it washed each week. i always thought the 116bhp was a bit low for this size of car which is why i had it chipped but my new one will have more power and the right gearing.

looking forwards to collecting it but have to wait another week. i havent seen the protection thingys though.

Yes, the 2.2 is fantastic, loads of torque.

There's a picture of the side protectors on another thread entitled " Side Protectors for Current Model" They look to blend in nicely as well as offering some protection and you're OK with black but I am still waiting for Toyota's response, probably in vain, to the currently unavailable Venetian Silver ones.

I have the option of having them colour match sprayed but they require to be hard baked for durability and the all in fitted cost would be an astronomical £400 plus!!!!

Hope you enjoy your new TR.