Thread: Supercharger on a 4.6 in a classic

beforethevision and mickrangie - you are getting me excited. I should point out that Ward at GC in Sydney did the Motec and transplant, I just get to enjoy the fruits of the labour.

S/C, low boost AND keep the A/C? Any other variations such as T/C?

I hear you on the big block, Brian Hjelm, but cannot bear the thought of a US heart in my British Racing Green soulmate.

It is also my daily driver, so too much boost associated with auto wreckage and tensioner issues may be difficult.

adding a supercharger only adds problems, once you get the engine right the drive train decides that it was not wanted and behaves like the first born, and craps it'self just to let you know it's not getting enough attention.
then the tyres do the same and the petrol station owner makes you feel welcome,because he sees you so often, by inviting you to his christmas party where you meet the copper who's been trying to find a wheelstanding land rover owner for some time, he then introduces you to his mate at the local
courthouse
bah, supercharging is for machines that need air at altitude, either dig your foot deeper onto the floor or get more cubic inches - there's no substitute for cubic inches!, and volumetric efficiency!
more cubes, more hp, no extra complicated **** crap, just power, same amoumt of mechanical things flopping around in the engine bay, just bigger holes in the things that let the fuel into the engine.
just think how much faster do you want this two ton of rover to leave the lights.
at the end of the day the extra oomph will never see top speed, and even for the money spent it will not change the top speed unless you can rev it harder or change the gearing.
a 3.9 in a stock auto disco revs to 7000 rpm at full throttle before it changes gear, try to rev it harder will probably kill it or cost heaps, supercharging won't change that.

There was a bloke in the LROC in Sydney who had a supercharged V8 Disco. I published a story about his car in one of the LROC News a few years back when I was editor. I'd have the article with pics here on CD-ROM but I don't have the software installed to read it.

Originally Posted by Surferjim

I hear you on the big block, Brian Hjelm, but cannot bear the thought of a US heart in my British Racing Green soulmate.

.

For starters a 6 litre Aluminium Gen 2 or 3 is a
Chev. SMALL block. A BIG block is currently a 454 or 500 cubic inch engine of a quite different engine family that is developed from the 348-409-396-427 engines of the mid-late sixties. The U.S. heart in your BRG? where the hell do you think the Rover V8 came from? It is a 1960 Buick-Oldsmobile mid-sized passenger car engine sold to Rover in 1966 and redrawn by Rover so they could build it in their 1928 engine plant.

I agree with Mr Hjelm, cubes are the only lazy power and torque. I have driven a few blown 3.9's, and neither of them were a patch on my NA 4.7 JD motor for torque etc. I could only imagine what THAT motor would've been like with forced induction...

Gen3 would be cheaper and less complicated than blowing it, and after all, the rover engine was a GM motor in the first place!!!!( By design...)


JC

Originally Posted by harry

adding a supercharger only adds problems, once you get the engine right the drive train decides that it was not wanted and behaves like the first born, and craps it'self just to let you know it's not getting enough attention.
then the tyres do the same and the petrol station owner makes you feel welcome,because he sees you so often, by inviting you to his christmas party where you meet the copper who's been trying to find a wheelstanding land rover owner for some time, he then introduces you to his mate at the local
courthouse
bah, supercharging is for machines that need air at altitude, either dig your foot deeper onto the floor or get more cubic inches - there's no substitute for cubic inches!, and volumetric efficiency!
more cubes, more hp, no extra complicated **** crap, just power, same amoumt of mechanical things flopping around in the engine bay, just bigger holes in the things that let the fuel into the engine.
just think how much faster do you want this two ton of rover to leave the lights.
at the end of the day the extra oomph will never see top speed, and even for the money spent it will not change the top speed unless you can rev it harder or change the gearing.
a 3.9 in a stock auto disco revs to 7000 rpm at full throttle before it changes gear, try to rev it harder will probably kill it or cost heaps, supercharging won't change that.

The good thing about forced induction is that you dont have to take volumeteic efficiency into account as it is Forced induction.

If he wants to spend his money on a super charger and loose his licence then sent him to Mal at Deacons. He has done a few of them now and I hear they go well.

Tell him (after you have paid him) that Howies mate told you to go there so next time I see them I will get a free beer.

I wouldnt be loosing the AC as it does still hit 40+c down here and you will want it.

Andrew had a supercharged (3.9 I think)engine in the orange Rangie that also had Hydraulic suspention and it went pretty well but he never worked all the kinks out while I knew him and last time I saw him he was pedaling his TD5 conversions more than the Hypo stuff but he is quite accomodating if you ask the right questions so I would give him a go aswell.

Good luck, I dont think it is nessesary to be able to blow away cars at the lights but I suppose not everyone likes having a licence and someone has to keep comanies like Deacons and LRA in business doing Hypo mods sor those who do want them.

Originally Posted by harry

adding a supercharger only adds problems, once you get the engine right the drive train decides that it was not wanted and behaves like the first born, and craps it'self just to let you know it's not getting enough attention.
then the tyres do the same and the petrol station owner makes you feel welcome,because he sees you so often, by inviting you to his christmas party where you meet the copper who's been trying to find a wheelstanding land rover owner for some time, he then introduces you to his mate at the local
courthouse
bah, supercharging is for machines that need air at altitude, either dig your foot deeper onto the floor or get more cubic inches - there's no substitute for cubic inches!, and volumetric efficiency!
more cubes, more hp, no extra complicated **** crap, just power, same amoumt of mechanical things flopping around in the engine bay, just bigger holes in the things that let the fuel into the engine.
just think how much faster do you want this two ton of rover to leave the lights.
at the end of the day the extra oomph will never see top speed, and even for the money spent it will not change the top speed unless you can rev it harder or change the gearing.
a 3.9 in a stock auto disco revs to 7000 rpm at full throttle before it changes gear, try to rev it harder will probably kill it or cost heaps, supercharging won't change that.

What do you base this on??

Originally Posted by Brian Hjelm

I repeat, It will be cheaper and better to fit cubic inches. I have visited add-on superchargers and turbochargers in road and race cars at all levels, owner, modifier, fitter, redesigner, fixer of stuff-ups etc. They are worth the trouble and expense if you want the noise and the grunt from high boost, but not if you want the drama and blow-ups. Buy a bloody good tool kit first. You will need it.

Plenty of people have succesfully run superchargers in 4wd drive applications, just because you haven't doesn't make it impossible

Some of us use EFI in lots of conversions and different application with great success to