Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 53

Thread: Who has had a dyno run on their LR?

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    18
    Total Downloaded
    0
    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

  2. #22
    p38arover's Avatar
    p38arover is offline Major part of the heart and soul of AULRO.com
    Administrator
    I'm here to help you!
    Gold Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Western Sydney
    Posts
    30,722
    Total Downloaded
    1.63 MB
    Quote Originally Posted by LandyAndy View Post
    Hi Ron
    Have you had your injectors serviced???
    Yep, I had them serviced by the engine builder at the time the engine was built.
    Ron B.
    VK2OTC

    2003 L322 Range Rover Vogue 4.4 V8 Auto
    2007 Yamaha XJR1300
    Previous: 1983, 1986 RRC; 1995, 1996 P38A; 1995 Disco1; 1984 V8 County 110; Series IIA



    RIP Bucko - Riding on Forever

  3. #23
    p38arover's Avatar
    p38arover is offline Major part of the heart and soul of AULRO.com
    Administrator
    I'm here to help you!
    Gold Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Western Sydney
    Posts
    30,722
    Total Downloaded
    1.63 MB
    Quote Originally Posted by Lotz-A-Landies View Post
    4.6 Motec ECU - Michelin synchrome 225/75 R16, ZF auto RRc.
    Thanks very much, Diana. Yours is much better than mine.
    Ron B.
    VK2OTC

    2003 L322 Range Rover Vogue 4.4 V8 Auto
    2007 Yamaha XJR1300
    Previous: 1983, 1986 RRC; 1995, 1996 P38A; 1995 Disco1; 1984 V8 County 110; Series IIA



    RIP Bucko - Riding on Forever

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    East-South-East Girt-By-Sea
    Posts
    17,668
    Total Downloaded
    1.20 MB
    Quote Originally Posted by p38arover View Post
    Thanks very much, Diana. Yours is much better than mine.
    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 won't find me on: faceplant; Scipe; Infragam; LumpedIn; ShapCnat or Twitting. I'm just not that interesting.

  5. #25
    p38arover's Avatar
    p38arover is offline Major part of the heart and soul of AULRO.com
    Administrator
    I'm here to help you!
    Gold Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Western Sydney
    Posts
    30,722
    Total Downloaded
    1.63 MB
    Quote Originally Posted by markate View Post
    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
    The cam was suggested by the engine builder who has been building performance LR engines for many years. He is surprised, too.
    Ron B.
    VK2OTC

    2003 L322 Range Rover Vogue 4.4 V8 Auto
    2007 Yamaha XJR1300
    Previous: 1983, 1986 RRC; 1995, 1996 P38A; 1995 Disco1; 1984 V8 County 110; Series IIA



    RIP Bucko - Riding on Forever

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Douglas Park, NSW
    Posts
    9,347
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by p38arover View Post
    I drove Remy's car today. It has very smooth power delivery and just keeps accelerating. 0-80km/h in 9 seconds (time on a watch).

    Then I drove mine. It's running out of breath by about 3000 rpm. 0-80km/h in 14 seconds.

    I drove the cars back to back for the timed runs. Remy's is consistently 5 seconds faster than mine.

    Note that neither car was really driven hard, just left in Drive (not Sport) and pushed. Mine was full throttle, Remy's wasn't pushed as hard as mine as it wasn't my car.
    Maybe if you removed the 2t of off road accessories, they might be an even match .
    Scott

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Gold Coast, QLD
    Posts
    3,570
    Total Downloaded
    0
    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!!!

  8. #28
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Safety Bay
    Posts
    8,041
    Total Downloaded
    0
    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

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    East-South-East Girt-By-Sea
    Posts
    17,668
    Total Downloaded
    1.20 MB
    Quote Originally Posted by Grimace View Post
    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.
    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 won't find me on: faceplant; Scipe; Infragam; LumpedIn; ShapCnat or Twitting. I'm just not that interesting.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Safety Bay
    Posts
    8,041
    Total Downloaded
    0
    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

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... 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!