Page 14 of 16 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 155

Thread: D2 4.6 conversion owners. 4.6 ECU swap & EOI.

  1. #131
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Adelaide Hills
    Posts
    13,383
    Total Downloaded
    0
    depends if the MAF was a bottleneck or not
    Current Cars:
    2013 E3 Maloo, 350kw
    2008 RRS, TDV8
    1995 VS Clubsport

    Previous Cars:
    2008 ML63, V8
    2002 VY SS Ute, 300kw
    2002 Disco 2, LS1 conversion

  2. #132
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    On The Road
    Posts
    30,031
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Battler View Post
    Would changing to the larger MAF make any difference if the throttle body and the inlet tube remains the same size?
    A question for Mark perhaps,,

    all I know is my ECM has been setup/calibrated/coded for the larger maf,, it expects X amount of airflow and is only getting X-minus 19%.

    I would imagine X-plus 19% if you just add the bigger maf without the coded ECM....
    "How long since you've visited The Good Oil?"

    '93 V8 Rossi
    '97 to '07. sold.
    '01 V8 D2
    '06 to 10. written off.
    '03 4.6 V8 HSE D2a with Tornado ECM
    '10 to '21
    '16.5 RRS SDV8
    '21 to Infinity and Beyond!


    1988 Isuzu Bus. V10 15L NA Diesel
    Home is where you park it..

    [IMG][/IMG]

  3. #133
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Stone Creek
    Posts
    269
    Total Downloaded
    0
    I'm no expert but I think the MAF measures the air coming into the engine so it can adjust fuel mixture accordingley. So I would have thought, unless you increase the diameter of the parts pre and post MAF there would be no difference in the amount of air passing through the MAF.

    I hope I'm wrong as I have a 4.6 and I would love to get more air into the engine. Then there's the problem of the inlet manifold.

    I know JE Engineering in the UK did something with the throttle body and inlet manifold to get more power. But not sure of the outcome. I'll see if I can find something on it.

  4. #134
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    On The Road
    Posts
    30,031
    Total Downloaded
    0
    If that was the case,, LR wouldnt have made the 4.6 maf bigger,,
    need inlet options?
    http://www.mez.co.uk/ms12-new.html

    yea, lots of cool inlet manifolds/throttle bodies,, none give you the low down torque of the original.
    this is nice
    need
    "How long since you've visited The Good Oil?"

    '93 V8 Rossi
    '97 to '07. sold.
    '01 V8 D2
    '06 to 10. written off.
    '03 4.6 V8 HSE D2a with Tornado ECM
    '10 to '21
    '16.5 RRS SDV8
    '21 to Infinity and Beyond!


    1988 Isuzu Bus. V10 15L NA Diesel
    Home is where you park it..

    [IMG][/IMG]

  5. #135
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Stone Creek
    Posts
    269
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Yeah I guess there must be some reason for the larger MAF.

    Those inlet manifolds are nuts. You would have to fully work the heads to get the full benefit of them. Money and more money for HP. Would be cheaper to put in a 5.7l LS1.

  6. #136
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Shropshire, United Kingdom
    Posts
    41
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by ozscott View Post
    Mark you are a champion. So i understand can i get a p38A air box lid and a 4 6 P38a thor motor MAF and the lid will connect up to the 4.0 D2 air box base and the 4.6 MAF will connect and fit to the 4.0 plastic intake tube that runs up to the throttle body?

    How would such a mod go without the Tornado upgrade....i know Tornado would be the ultimate but any downside in the meantime to me doing the 4.6. maf?

    Cheers
    Normally I like to quote from experience, backed up with the science. The Disco II market is an unusual one for me, in that most of my clients are overseas dotted around the world.

    Several of my clients have reported that the Throttle to MAF hose will fit on the larger P38 MAF, simply by dunking the end in some hot water first. When you measure the outside diameter (OD) of the stock D2 MAF where the hose goes on it is 80mm, and the P38 one is actually only 83mm!

    The difference is that the side wall thickness of the D2 MAF is much greater; surprisingly so in fact! However it does mean that only a small stretch is required to make the trunk stretch onto the P38 MAF.

  7. #137
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Shropshire, United Kingdom
    Posts
    41
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Battler View Post
    Would changing to the larger MAF make any difference if the throttle body and the inlet tube remains the same size?
    That's a very valid question. As it turns out, the D2 MAF is quite a lot smaller than the cross-sectional area of the tubing it is connected to. Using a P38 just makes more of this available (19.5% increase), so in essence it reduces an already-present restriction.

  8. #138
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Shropshire, United Kingdom
    Posts
    41
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Battler View Post
    Would changing to the larger MAF make any difference if the throttle body and the inlet tube remains the same size?
    That's a very valid question. As it turns out, the D2 MAF is quite a lot smaller than the cross-sectional area of the tubing it is connected to. Using a P38 just makes more of this available (19.5% increase), so in essence it reduces an already-present restriction.

  9. #139
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Shropshire, United Kingdom
    Posts
    41
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Battler View Post
    Yeah I guess there must be some reason for the larger MAF.

    Those inlet manifolds are nuts. You would have to fully work the heads to get the full benefit of them. Money and more money for HP. Would be cheaper to put in a 5.7l LS1.
    The big challenge with changing engines in these is very rarely the cost of the engine. Unless you have a manual transmission and no other equipment on the vehicle, there are major issues with interfacing to these other systems.

    Also you then have a vehicle that cannot necessarily be fixed from the Land Rover parts bin, which despite its faults is readily accessible in most corners of the globe.

    I've done quite a few transplants myself (and indeed have a 4.8 Litre Ford Sierra with a GEMS-managed engine in), and I know that the engine is usually less than half the cost of the job.

  10. #140
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Shropshire, United Kingdom
    Posts
    41
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Pedro_The_Swift View Post


    A question for Mark perhaps,,

    all I know is my ECM has been setup/calibrated/coded for the larger maf,, it expects X amount of airflow and is only getting X-minus 19%.

    I would imagine X-plus 19% if you just add the bigger maf without the coded ECM....
    Sorry about this giant post, but there's quite a lot to this one!

    Using a larger MAF will cause the system to see less air flow than the engine is actually consuming, so it will never add enough fuel. On top of this, there will probably be too much ignition advance at high loads for the same reason. This is why it is a great time to incorporate this modification, as all these things can be accounted for in one go

    Motronic actually performs a very sophisticated measurement of the exact quantity of air the engine is consuming, which is the basis of all the fuelling and ignition calculations. In order to do this it needs to know the exact characteristics of the MAF meter, which are hard-programmed into the software.

    Whilst the Motronic system will run a 4.6 engine even with a 4.0 Litre tune and standard MAF, you certainly won't be getting the best out of it. As your motor has Oxygen sensors in the exhaust, the fuelling runs in closed-loop which gives it the ability to trim the fuelling to suit the engine. Of course it will only be using the preset factory targets for this function. The ignition has knock detection to prevent detonation, which will also trim back any dangerous levels of ignition advance.

    A few years ago when nobody could do anything with these systems, the stark choice with a capacity upgrade was to drop it in the hole and see what happened. As you can see from the last paragraph, Motronic will have a good shot at making the best of it. Indeed there are hundreds of these vehicles running around with 4.6 engines operating on 4.0 Litre tunes.

    The fact that they work has lead to the general opinion that the conversion works, which is evidently true. However I will explain why you can get a very big improvement by reprogramming the ECM to suit the new larger engine.

    As a bit of background, there are over 150 versions of the software for the Disco and it is important that you have the correct one. Earlier systems such as GEMS had software that would cope with pretty well any configuration of the vehicle, with just a few software switches. Although there are four types of Motronic ECM, the software is unique to each possible configuration of the vehicle.

    The ECU mapping will need revision to accommodate the larger capacity, and here are the reasons why you would get a bad result from a 4.6 engine on a 4.0 map. The engine's fuel and ignition requirements are determined by engine speed and load. Engine load is determined by measuring the true mass of air that the engine is consuming at any particular speed, using the "Hot Film" Mass Air Flow (MAF) meter.
    Mass airflow is proportional to the torque that the engine is producing (for this type of engine), and hence it is closely related to the engine capacity. This is also heavily influenced by atmospheric conditions such as barometric pressure, temperature, etc.

    Therefore it is vital that the software is programmed with the correct maximum mass air consumption of the engine, known as airflow meter scaling. This is vital for good driveability and fuel economy especially on large capacity engines, and allows correct control of part throttle fuelling. Note that airflow meter scaling determines when the top of the fuel map is reached. When using an engine of larger capacity than the software was designed for, the top of the map will be reached too soon. This leads to over-fuelling at part throttle, and under-fuelling at full throttle.

    A re-profiled Fuel Map which provides good fuel economy on part throttle, and allows engine to rev more freely (standard profile reduces fuelling heavily after 4000RPM). This produces quicker, more progressive throttle response and better mid range torque.

    Although the ECU can work around large errors in the fuelling where Oxygen sensors are present where the map is significantly incorrect, when it reaches the limits of adjustment it will upset the entire fuelling learning process.

    When re-calibrating the Motronic ECM for a larger capacity engine, there are actually over 38 maps that need re-scaling for both engine load and speed. This level of detail is one of the reasons why the Tornado upgrades are not cheap, although I do believe that the quality is unmatched.


    Last edited by Mark Adams; 26th November 2015 at 12:22 AM. Reason: Accidentally used a huge typeface!

Page 14 of 16 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 LastLast

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Search AULRO.com ONLY!
Search All the Web!