Mate I don't get the camshaft selection. A RR 3.5 cam is designed to fill a cylinder from a 3.5 low revving engine to produce torque rather than top end. A 4.6 cam is designed to do the same for the bigger engine. How can you fit the smaller engines cam into the larger engine and expect more power and torque. It simply will not allow enough mixture past the valve. Your engine sounds like it doesn't rev or produce power hence the advice of blocked cats not letting flow out, I reckon it isn't getting the flow in due to the cam. If I were you a would go on the american comp cams website and check out high torque cam specs and then look at your 3.5 and 4.6 specs and see which one should go better. An old trick to get a 3.5 going was to put in a 3.9 cam as it had higher lift etc allowing more mmixture in.

Good luck whatever it turns out to be

Mark

Yep, I had them serviced by the engine builder at the time the engine was built.

__________________
Ron B.

1995 P38A Range Rover HSE 4.6 V8 Auto; 1968 LR Series IIA trayback (Holden 202); Yamaha XJR1300, Suzuki DL650 V-Strom



RIP Bucko - Riding on Forever

Thanks very much, Diana. Yours is much better than mine.

__________________
Ron B.

1995 P38A Range Rover HSE 4.6 V8 Auto; 1968 LR Series IIA trayback (Holden 202); Yamaha XJR1300, Suzuki DL650 V-Strom



RIP Bucko - Riding on Forever

Ron

Yes, I was quite surprised yours is very down on what is essentially the same engine on that same dyno.

Mine is a low compression engine so I would expect your 4.6 high compression engine to be better on LPG than mine. Will try to time my car to 80KPH for a comparison.

Diana

BTW: The dyno was done at the same time as Ward activated the dual mapping in the Motec for the LPG, so when you see the initial on LPG it is very close to yours and that was prior to the new LPG map.

__________________
You either have: a Land Rover or Money!
80" Gunna & Bemboka
SIIA Emmett & Goldfields
SIIB Cardwell, Tooby, Capt.Pneumo & Gog
SIII Ffreddy
Mk3 Wazza
RRc Vague & Avis
D6X6 Ikea
No5 MaryAustin & Greaser
MGB & Haulmark

The cam was suggested by the engine builder who has been building performance LR engines for many years. He is surprised, too.

__________________
Ron B.

1995 P38A Range Rover HSE 4.6 V8 Auto; 1968 LR Series IIA trayback (Holden 202); Yamaha XJR1300, Suzuki DL650 V-Strom



RIP Bucko - Riding on Forever

Maybe if you removed the 2t of off road accessories, they might be an even match .

__________________
Scott

1987 Range Rover
1996 Range Rover

I noticed all your vehicles were tested in 2nd gear. Where as mine was done in 3rd. I wonder why it is so?

I would have expected more power from a 4.6 equipped rover. Maybe it's the torque that makes the world of difference.

Still keen to see what the outcome of this is. Keep us posted.

__________________
I rule!!!

2.4" of Pure FURY!!!

I have always been told that you should do the dyno run in which ever gear is near 1-1 direct drive.I would have thought 2nd or 3rd would give a higher reading through lower gearing. Pat

Grimace

I'm thinking that your vehicle is a manual - @ Cooper's manual gearboxes are dynoed in 3rd and auto boxes in 2nd. According to Ward there is no difference in the engine tuning results just the curve is in a different place.

__________________
You either have: a Land Rover or Money!
80" Gunna & Bemboka
SIIA Emmett & Goldfields
SIIB Cardwell, Tooby, Capt.Pneumo & Gog
SIII Ffreddy
Mk3 Wazza
RRc Vague & Avis
D6X6 Ikea
No5 MaryAustin & Greaser
MGB & Haulmark

Wouldn't that mean the result is wrong?.If the curve is in the wrong place it would mean the power is higher or lower dependent on were it is printed on the sheet. Pat