DD and I are going to have a stab at a Toyota engine Hippo. Any inupt would be cool.

This site contains affiliate links for which LandyZone may be compensated if you make a purchase.
Not sure that that is the best way for optimum power and fuel efficiency as the landrover rcm will be fueling a Toyota engine with rover perameters. Also machining flywheel is gonna be a tad tricky. Depending on sizes of everything a landy clutch plate in a Toyota flywheel and pressure plate might work.
Toyota engine management would propably run better. Although communication with the rest of the car may be an issue.
 
Also meant to ask what year is the donor hippo? The earlier ones may be easier to interconnect the electronic systems.

Edit re read there'd from the start 2001 update.........

About the previous about the ird.... I would have thought it needs to be matched to the gearbox in use. Wouldn't the ratios in the ird be fighting the g/box otherwise?
 
Last edited:
Just another brain fart from me.........

Lotus Elise .... Early had a k series later had a Toyota 1.8zz. What was lotus' solution to gearboxes and engine management? :rolleyes:
 
zefrench said:
I am pretty sure you read this, but this guy has done the modification. He said he also uses a Freelander V6 IRD instead of the 1.8:

Can i install IRD from 2.5l v6 in a 1.8l freelander? - Australian Land Rover Owners

I think this is the same guy:
http://www.landyzone.co.uk/lz/f9/can-i-install-ird-2-5l-v6-1-8l-freelander-220935.html

Some details in there:
Click to expand...

The reason he wanted to fit the V6 IRD to his Freelander was to raise the gearing. I'm not sure if it's even possible to do as the V6 IRD is completely to the non V6 IRD.
Iirc he used the standard LR engine ECU to run the Toyota engine, presumably so the TC still worked. The Toyota engine would require a completely different set of maps so was down on power. Ideally he needed to map the LR ECU correctly.
 
Last edited:
GrumpyGel said:
If you got the 2L engine from a Disco (was that a T series Turbo?) would the electronics be more likely to be compatible?

I think they use the same WEBASHKO (or what ever it is) ABS units.
Click to expand...

Same engine as the 2.0L Disco. IMHO it would be a good conversion.
 
certainly enough ;).

The 820 Turbo used the M16 engine with a water-cooled Garrett T25 turbocharger and intercooler, developed by Tickford.
The new "T" series engine had new inlet and exhaust manifolding, valve springs, exhaust valves, fuel pump and injectors, spark plugs and specially designed Mahle pistons were fitted, and, significantly, all 820 Turbos had a new exhaust system with a three way closed loop catalytic convertor.
The 820 Turbo’s power output of 180bhp at 6100rpm had an impressive torque curve, a description scarcely appropriate, so linear was the delivery of the 159lb/ft maximum figure from 2500 to 6500rpm. This new-found torque turned an engine which always had to be worked hard into an effortless and flexible ground-coverer, which paradoxically was a far more willing revver than the normally-aspirated version, with the side-benefit of the twin cam’s high-end harshness being largely muffled by the turbocharger and new exhaust The turbocharged engine’s forté, in the 820 Rovers, was its prodigious fourth gear acceleration capability, with sub-seven second figures for the 30-50mph and 50-70mph increments.

It was bloody quick, hitting a ton in 3rd easily in the 220 Turbo.
 
Nodge68 said:
The reason he wanted to fit the V6 IRD to his Freelander was to raise the gearing. I'm not sure if it's even possible to do as the V6 IRD is completely to the non V6 IRD.
Iirc he used the standard LR engine ECU to run the Toyota engine, presumably so the TC still worked. The Toyota engine would require a completely different set of maps so was down on power. Ideally he needed to map the LR ECU correctly.
Click to expand...

If he wanted to raise the gearing wouldn't the gearbox need to be from a v6 as well as the ird? Surely the ird ratio only controls the front/rear split not the overall ratio. The gearbox, ird and rear diff ratios need to be balanced (unlike landrover did with the early ones!)

I was under the impression that the landy TC didn't cut the power like normal TC systems on front wheel drive but simply used the braking system to control the traction. If I am right the. TC and engine don't need to communicate.
 
Nodge68 said:
The reason he wanted to fit the V6 IRD to his Freelander was to raise the gearing. I'm not sure if it's even possible to do as the V6 IRD is completely to the non V6 IRD.
Iirc he used the standard LR engine ECU to run the Toyota engine, presumably so the TC still worked. The Toyota engine would require a completely different set of maps so was down on power. Ideally he needed to map the LR ECU correctly.
Click to expand...


If you search in the post I linked, he reported the IRD swap as successful.
 
zefrench said:
If you search in the post I linked, he reported the IRD swap as successful.
Click to expand...

I read that it was a successful swap. I don't see how it can be fitted correctly as the mounting lugs to the gearbox are in different places. All I can think of is some of the lugs line up. Obviously fitting the IRD to the box with half the bolts missing isn't what I'd call a proper job.
 
Last edited:
Can anyone have a look to see what the differenes in gear ratios and final drive is between the NASP and U spec PG1 gearboxes? It would be less faff to fit a 220T with an L series gearbox but I'm not sure it would have the grunt at how RPM to be nice with sich tall gearing.
 
pg1 gear ratio chart

Gearbox model number original application 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th Final Drive
Late models
B4BP Lotus 3.25 1.894 1.307 1.033 0.848 3.937
C4BM MG45 entry 1.8 3.166 1.842 1.307 1.033 0.765 4.2
C6BKUH MG45 Core KV6 3.166 1.842 1.307 1.033 0.765 3.937
G4BSV MG25 VVC 3.25 1.894 1.307 1.033 0.848 4.2
S6BS R25 Diesel 3.25 1.894 1.222 0.848 0.648 3.937
S4EM Freelander 1.8 3.25 1.894 1.222 0.848 0.648 4.2
M4BSQ MG ZR motorsport 2.293 1.894 1.5 1.269 1.034 4.2

Earlier Models
C6BP Elise / MGF 3.25 1.894 1.307 1.033 0.848 3.937
C4BP Elise / MGF (VVC) 3.25 1.894 1.307 1.033 0.848 3.937
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
S6BNU Rover 45 T/D 3.25 1.894 1.222 0.848 0.648 3.937
C6BM Rover 45 1.8 3.166 1.842 1.307 1.033 0.766 3.937
S6BSU* Rover 25 T/D 3.25 1.894 1.222 0.848 0.648 3.937
C6BS Rover 25 1.8 3.166 1.842 1.307 1.033 0.766 3.937
C4BS Rover 25 VVC 3.166 1.842 1.307 1.033 0.766 4.2
B6BS* Rover 25 VVC 2.293 1.75 1.307 1.033 0.848 3.937
S4DTU Honda Accord T/D 3.25 1.895 1.222 0.848 0.649 3.937

* - Unable to read identifier off photocopied fax!
 
The Mad Hat Man said:
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
Click to expand...

Hmmmm so quite a bit taller. Here are the power curves for both engines:

rover25_maf.jpg


K4_1.8_135_versus_K4T.jpg


I cant find one for the 220, I'll keep looking I've seen it somewhere before.
 
Looking at wiring diagrams today.......:emps1: looks like the only connection between abs and ecu (at least on the early models) is throttle position sensor.... Makes life much easier to run with the Toyota engine management and then link into the LR abs etc.
 
WLJayne said:
Hmmmm so quite a bit taller. Here are the power curves for both engines:

rover25_maf.jpg


K4_1.8_135_versus_K4T.jpg


I cant find one for the 220, I'll keep looking I've seen it somewhere before.
Click to expand...

All Freelander PG1 box gear ratios are the same. The final drive ratio is higher on the L series box. The standard L series makes 177ftlb iirc. The turbo T series will make well over 200 ftlb. Even the NASP T series isn't far short of the L series. You will have a nice long legged cruiser. Or change the final drive out of the 1.8 box ;)
 
ZDomZ said:
Looking at wiring diagrams today.......:emps1: looks like the only connection between abs and ecu (at least on the early models) is throttle position sensor.... Makes life much easier to run with the Toyota engine management and then link into the LR abs etc.
Click to expand...

It would depend on what the connection is carrying. If it's a data bus then the Toyota ECU might not output the correct data stream. This is also a face lift Freelander so there are lot of differences.
 
Nodge68 said:
I read that it was a successful swap. I don't see how it can be fitted correctly as the mounting lugs to the gearbox are in different places. All I can think of is some of the lugs line up. Obviously fitting the IRD to the box with half the bolts missing isn't what I'd call a proper job.
Click to expand...

Not sure that I like the sound of any of his solutions to the problems he encountered.

There must be enough interchangeability in the rover range to find a clutch plate to work with Toyota flywheel. Or machine Toyota flywheel to take hippo pressure plate and drive plate. (Less to go wrong with crank to flywheel interface)

Adapter plate to fit the Toyota lump to Gearbox.

Extra brackets to support the ird on back of Toyota lump.

Custom engine mount brackets to suit.

Toyota engine management. Piggybacked to remains of freelander system.

Standard hippo drivetrain to start with. If it is significantly under or over geared then play with internals. Ird ratio and diff.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
As a query how difficult is it to replace engine to gearbox seal as it appears I have leaks around the engine sump and gearbox to engine.
Replies
3
Views
621
tilly2
T
Blob
Back to LR after a long time, and going all-in.
Replies
15
Views
2K
WhiskyLassie
WhiskyLassie
Blob
L322 Let's have your technical opinions then. Coolant leak and cracked manifold?
2
Replies
24
Views
4K
Blob
Blob
codfather79
How stupid am I going to be?
Replies
15
Views
1K
Kenbo
Kenbo
L
Happy to be a part of the community but i have a frustrating problem (jammed up lt77)
Replies
17
Views
969
Lamaine
L
Back
Top