Headers/extractors for Range Rover

**walker** · 18th September 2008, 10:46 PM

Thanks Dave, I will try them.

I have always used ACE Exhaust in Croydon, but they say they have to make up the Ypipe so they would need the vehicle and since it is not going it makes it a bit hard.

This is what I was looking at:

HM Headers

I just wonder what the difference between the 2 are and whether the 3.9 would fit mine?

I might just end up fitting my old extractors and exhaust untill I get it all running and then take it into an exhaust place to get a new one fitted. Might be the safest way and since it will be a ute with 2" body lift they can probably custom make the exhaust to sit above the chassis all the way.

Maybe I could bring the exhaust up behind the cab with twin pipes!!! Then again that might look a bit "try hard"! but it would keep the water out of the exhaust.

mike 90 RR · 19th September 2008, 07:35 AM

Originally Posted by walker

Yes, I wasnt expecting massive improvement, but it must make a difference. The exhaust manifold on the 3.5 and 3.9 is very very restrictive.

My understanding is that the 3.9EFI (1990 on) cast iron headers are OK & NOT restrictive .... and putting on extractors is actually a BACKward step in terms of performance

I think that making sure that it is a 2.5 inch system throughout is the main step to getting the most out of this performance mod

So if you fit the extractors ... It will interesting to hear from you on "How it performed" and your thoughts on ..... "Before & After"

Mike

**spudboy** · 19th September 2008, 08:30 AM

Originally Posted by big guy

Car was awesome.

I sold it because of never ending electrical gremlins that kept shorting stuff out.
3 Times at auto electrician in one week.

Oooh - lucky I didn't buy that one for my Mrs, even though I liked it a LOT. We ended up getting her an Alfa 159 Wagon Diesel, which is probably more appropriate for her to get around in.

**walker** · 19th September 2008, 09:19 AM

Originally Posted by mike 90 RR

My understanding is that the 3.9EFI (1990 on) cast iron headers are OK & NOT restrictive .... and putting on extractors is actually a BACKward step in terms of performance

I think that making sure that it is a 2.5 inch system throughout is the main step to getting the most out of this performance mod

So if you fit the extractors ... It will interesting to hear from you on "How it performed" and your thoughts on ..... "Before & After"

Mike

Sorry, there will be no "before". This engine has been rebuilt from the ground up. It has the same 4.6 block but with new High comp pistons and a new liner. The heads are fully recoed 3.9 heads. Before the build up the car had a 3.5 efi motor in it so it will be just a little different.

I think I should have put this thread on the "Dancing Hippo Project" thread, then it would make a bit more sense to some of you.

mike 90 RR · 19th September 2008, 09:25 AM

Originally Posted by walker

Sorry, there will be no "before". This engine has been rebuilt from the ground up. It has the same 4.6 block but with new High comp pistons and a new liner. The heads are fully recoed 3.9 heads. Before the build up the car had a 3.5 efi motor in it so it will be just a little different.

I think I should have put this thread on the "Dancing Hippo Project" thread, then it would make a bit more sense to some of you.

Yep .... I get now ... NOT a stock motor

Dance Hippo Dance

Mike

**big guy** · 19th September 2008, 08:42 PM

Spud boy.

The Rangie you looked at was different, that was my last4.6.
The 4.6 with the electrical gremlin was a light blue one, bridgewater electrical did all the work.
i was fuming one day in there and a guy also a local hills boy came up to me and asked what was up. I told him I had enough and as soon he went for a drive, he was hooked.

He had a V12 jag and it was only just quicker.
Best rangie i ever had, just the electrics drove me nuts.

I now have a disco, great car.
Good to hear all is well.
Condolences on the Alfa though.

Just Kidding.

**justinc** · 20th September 2008, 06:46 AM

Walker,

I used HM headers to suit Disco 3.9 1994 onwards, as the HM ctalogue was unspecific about RR's when I dealt with them some years back. They don't seem to realise the round crossmember appeared in later RR's

I fitted them to my 4.6 RRC, (1992 round crossmember with ZF auto)and went well, bigger bore than some other brands(Hence the lack of performance gains with lesser examples I suspect) and very strong construction. The port finish etc was very good quality, no welds protruding or anything!

They are flanged too, and come with a Y piece to connect to the factory system. No cheapskate slip joints here!

JC

**walker** · 20th September 2008, 08:51 AM

Thanks Justin,
My existing header are HM and I have decided to use them instead of buying new ones.

I went down to supercheap yesterday and bought myself a cheap sandblasting kit. This is the best aie tool I have bought since.....the last air toll I bought.

It was fantastic and cleaned up the extractors in no time. I then put quick coat of Hi-Temp paint on them and they are as good as new, except for a coupe of small dints.

Thanks everyone for your suggestions, you convinced me it was not worth spending the $$ on a new set.

I also realised that my extractors (or the Y pipe) does go over the top of the crossmember not under it, even though I have the old square type crossmember. The only problem with the headers is that they come down from the motor very low before doing a U turn up and over the crosmember, but I will just take my chances with it for now.

Thread: Headers/extractors for Range Rover

Thread Tools

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions