2Litre Turbo Hippo
- Thread starter The Mad Hat Man
- Start date
This site contains affiliate links for which LandyZone may be compensated if you make a purchase.
WLJayne
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 3,810
- Location
- Derpyshurr
So there's no way to use L series gearsets and bearings in a K series bolt parrent housing?
It is possible to use the L series gear set in theory. I've never tried as I've only ever run a 180 gear set. I'll look at the ratios when I get a few minutes. Don't forget if you gear it to high it could be worse on fuel instead of better
It's all about matching available torque with the desired road speed. If your engine is out of it's torque range you will need to put your foot down more which will use more food.
WLJayne
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 3,810
- Location
- Derpyshurr
It is possible to use the L series gear set in theory. I've never tried as I've only ever run a 180 gear set. I'll look at the ratios when I get a few minutes. Don't forget if you gear it to high it could be worse on fuel instead of better
It's all about matching available torque with the desired road speed. If your engine is out of it's torque range you will need to put your foot down more which will use more food.
Well, given that the remapped turbo K will have more toque than the L series, I'd imagine it would be ok? But I do see what you mean. The 220T uses the same gears I believe.
Will.
All you can do is try it. The standard turbo K makes just under 160Ftlb at 2100rpm iirc. This is less than the standard L series but obviously the petrol engine has a rev limit of around 7,000 rpm so if you can map the ECU to give 160Ftlb at 6,600 you will have 201bhp!!
The standard gearbox should take 160Ftlb of torque
WLJayne
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 3,810
- Location
- Derpyshurr
Well everywhere I've looked says the Di produces approx 155 FtLb's, the map I'm considering sees a max torque of 200 FtLb's at 3000 Rpm. Because I'm looking for a more refined ride rather than all out power, I think it's fair to say that it would be sensible to bring the gearing down a bit so that the engine is doing fewer revs at motorway speeds thus conserving a bit of fuel and reducing noise.
According to this chart the K series box it geared at 0.848:1 in 5th whereas the L series is geared at 0.648:1 in fifth. So instead of doing 3000RPM at 60 like mine currently does it would instead do roughly 2300RPM at 60 according to my calculations. That does seem to be quite a big difference.
Incidentally the 1st and 2nd gear rations are identical on both gearbox's, so off-road performance won't suffer.
Could it work???
According to this chart the K series box it geared at 0.848:1 in 5th whereas the L series is geared at 0.648:1 in fifth. So instead of doing 3000RPM at 60 like mine currently does it would instead do roughly 2300RPM at 60 according to my calculations. That does seem to be quite a big difference
.Incidentally the 1st and 2nd gear rations are identical on both gearbox's, so off-road performance won't suffer.
Could it work???
Last edited:
Well everywhere I've looked says the Di produces approx 155 FtLb's, the map I'm considering sees a max torque of 200 FtLb's at 3000 Rpm. Because I'm looking for a more refined ride rather than all out power, I think it's fair to say that it would be sensible to bring the gearing down a bit so that the engine is doing fewer revs at motorway speeds thus conserving a bit of fuel and reducing noise.
According to this chart the K series box it geared at 0.848:1 in 5th whereas the L series is geared at 0.648:1 in fifth. So instead of doing 3000RPM at 60 like mine currently does it would instead do roughly 2300RPM at 60 according to my calculations. That does seem to be quite a big difference
Incidentally the 1st and 2nd gear rations are identical on both gearbox's, so off-road performance won't suffer.
Could it work???
It could work. With 200Ftlb of torque the box will need to be properly sorted as will the clutch
Just remember that gearing the final drive to high could require the engine to be boosted while cruising which would seriously effect the fuel economy and put lots of extra load on the engine. It's generally better to cruise it light throttle even if the revs are higher than we would like. It's going to be a bit of trial and error to get it rite!!
Garboy88
Active Member
- Posts
- 475
- Location
- South Wales
It would prob be easier to ask around and get prices to get the 1.8 box rebuilt to cope with the extra grunt!
It would prob be easier to ask around and get prices to get the 1.8 box rebuilt to cope with the extra grunt!
The standard bearing sizes won't take that kind of torque!! Even the High Torque box was designed to take 180Ftlb.
Diesel Do
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 5,213
- Location
- Nottingham
Just do it
WLJayne
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 3,810
- Location
- Derpyshurr
Remember though that the IRD goes a long way to reducing the amount of torque that the gearbix is subjected to - I imagine it's not quite like doing it in an MGZR or something
. But unless I'm dropping the clutch or seriously thrashing it I very much doubt that the box will see 180 ftlbs.But you're right about the cruising boost - that would trash the fuel economy.
WLJayne
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 3,810
- Location
- Derpyshurr
WLJayne
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 3,810
- Location
- Derpyshurr
Ahhhh wait now, I have read the chart wrong!
S4EM Freelander 1.8 3.25 1.894 1.222 0.848 0.648 4.2
S7EMU Freelander T/D 3.25 1.894 1.222 0.848 0.648 3.647
So the L series has a taller final drive but the actual gearing is the same. Or am I a blind muppet?
S4EM Freelander 1.8 3.25 1.894 1.222 0.848 0.648 4.2
S7EMU Freelander T/D 3.25 1.894 1.222 0.848 0.648 3.647
So the L series has a taller final drive but the actual gearing is the same. Or am I a blind muppet?
Diesel Do
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 5,213
- Location
- Nottingham
WLJayne
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 3,810
- Location
- Derpyshurr
The ird final drive is the same across the board int it? Just reduces the gearbox output rpm by a fixed amount?
The IRD reduction is probably to help the engine overcome the Freelander's extra weight and tyre diameter! The torque the gearbox sees is reduced by reduction ratio of 1.4 odd. A gear ratio giving an engine speed of around 3,000 rpm at 70 mph would be ok. This is what my MG is geared to.
WLJayne
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 3,810
- Location
- Derpyshurr
So the NASP spec box should be good for the IRD adjusted torque of 140 ish ftlbs? The NASP final drive is something like 3500 RPM at 70 curently, way too high for a turbo engine in my thinking. You're right about being off boost at cruise speeds though, that's a pretty important thing. But the off boost toque and power is upped by about 10% on the map anyway so that might help.
Following with interest!!
WLJayne
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 3,810
- Location
- Derpyshurr
Well if it works nicely who knows, might be a real option for those that want V6 power without the drinking
. As long as you're on top of cooling I don't see why it should be a problem - that mahoosive radiator sure isn't going to run out of cool water. But turbo engines do run hotter, so I imagine that the stat aperture will be greater most f the time, that's all .The quibbling about the gears is just icing on the cake really, if I can squeeze a bit more fuel economy and quiet out of it then that's a big bonus.
