i can see the sense in that, i will give it a go if i fail to get it running right i have carbs as a back up, it was cheap as it has been off the road for a couple of years so its a fun project, l also have a 350 chevy waiting in the wings in case this rover proves to be harder than it looks the chevy has merit for other reasons which i will explain in a minute when i find a pic of what im trying to do
transplanting a V8 lock stock and barrel
- Thread starter Redditch
- Start date
This site contains affiliate links for which LandyZone may be compensated if you make a purchase.
Are you keeping the same auto box? you will need that ecu too.
If you are not using the transfer box I.E no 4WD then you wont have low range anyway.
As for the low range wire I think it uses a different map and throttle response is changed, Think also small changes to the autobox shift points, Have read about it cant remember where though.
You will need the "torque reduction" wire to make gearshifts smoother.
The "rough road" signal I am not sure where it comes from maybe the ABS/TC and yes I believe it just ignores certain things so as to not log a fault, think knock sensor is 1 it ignores if the rough road is triggered.
Again all the reading is out there, its just finding it and putting together what you need. There is a huge amount in RAVE so it would help if you could get it running.
If you cant get RAVE to work search tinternet for the ETM for Range Rover its the same as the section in RAVE and will give all the wiring dias.
J
- Posts
- 33,599
- Location
- North Shropshire
thats a decent engine, 5.7L
Hi yes using the autobox and transfer as it comes out of the P38, the tcu is next to investigate how its wired up once im happy with the ecu, i did start off wanting to use a classic 3.9 engine and autobox as its not electronically controlled and would have been easier but the transferbox drops drivers side and i need passenger side drop hence ive ended up with a P38, i did investigate fitting a p38 transfer to a classic gearbox but i couldent find a way to do it ( cheaply) and yes roughroad input comes from the abs signal, i will perceiver with the rave cd
right a bit of background into why im fiddling with this P38 engine, i have a camper a big 5th wheel Canadian one which ironically i got from the everglades seeing as its a winterpack one but hey ho thats irrelevant what is relevant is its weight its close to 5 tons with the tanks empty 
thats puts it outside the towing capacity of most if not all uk pickups like the hilux,navara etc
so i had to use an iveco 59-12 which has a train weight of 10,000kg and as it only weighs 2.5 tons ive got 7.5tons capacity left to tow with, the 59 is 5.9 tons max vehicle wieght and the 12 is a very optimistic 120 bhp, in your dreams or ive got a very poor engine which i dont think i have as its flys along when not towing.
right so thats the camper and the iveco i presently use but its god dam awful to tow with its so slow its dangerous, modern cars are to quick you go to pull out at an island it looks clear and wham the cars arrive before im out, its like being an old time trucker you look in the mirror and you have a convoy behind you so bad i havent taken it out for a while, so last year i stumbled on another iveco tractor unit same as the one above but the engine was missing and the cab was damaged but its saving grace was it was the 4 wheel drive version, axle difflocks as standard and twin rear wheels all sound good to me, with the cab off its just 2 straight chassis rails front to back same as any lorry, gearbox is still in it but the 3lt turbo diesel engine had been sold as it was worth money, now the gearbox is a ford item and on the back is an integral transfer box that drops passengerside, the interesting part is the transfer box is NP208 which would you believe is also fitted to many american motors including the 350 chevy with the th 350/400 autobox so there is a route to bolt the transferbox straight on to my chevy box and i wont have to alter my prop shafts etc, now a rover or chevy is not going to fit under the cab/bonnet of an iveco daily but as it was damaged its gone in the bin anyway and i ve bough a model AA ford fiberglass body which has a longer bonnet to hide the engine under, like this but with a 5th wheel coupling on the back instead of a body
so its torque im after to get it all rolling which is why maybe the 5.7lt chevy might be better than the 4.6 rover, undecided on that one , so there you go you know as much as me now ..........................
thats puts it outside the towing capacity of most if not all uk pickups like the hilux,navara etcso i had to use an iveco 59-12 which has a train weight of 10,000kg and as it only weighs 2.5 tons ive got 7.5tons capacity left to tow with, the 59 is 5.9 tons max vehicle wieght and the 12 is a very optimistic 120 bhp, in your dreams or ive got a very poor engine which i dont think i have as its flys along when not towing.
right so thats the camper and the iveco i presently use but its god dam awful to tow with its so slow its dangerous, modern cars are to quick you go to pull out at an island it looks clear and wham the cars arrive before im out, its like being an old time trucker you look in the mirror and you have a convoy behind you so bad i havent taken it out for a while, so last year i stumbled on another iveco tractor unit same as the one above but the engine was missing and the cab was damaged but its saving grace was it was the 4 wheel drive version, axle difflocks as standard and twin rear wheels all sound good to me, with the cab off its just 2 straight chassis rails front to back same as any lorry, gearbox is still in it but the 3lt turbo diesel engine had been sold as it was worth money, now the gearbox is a ford item and on the back is an integral transfer box that drops passengerside, the interesting part is the transfer box is NP208 which would you believe is also fitted to many american motors including the 350 chevy with the th 350/400 autobox so there is a route to bolt the transferbox straight on to my chevy box and i wont have to alter my prop shafts etc, now a rover or chevy is not going to fit under the cab/bonnet of an iveco daily but as it was damaged its gone in the bin anyway and i ve bough a model AA ford fiberglass body which has a longer bonnet to hide the engine under, like this but with a 5th wheel coupling on the back instead of a body
so its torque im after to get it all rolling which is why maybe the 5.7lt chevy might be better than the 4.6 rover, undecided on that one , so there you go you know as much as me now ..........................
And, the addition of catalytic converters was for emissions reasons, not to improve the the engine,
Scotty Kilmer reckons engines run better without, if it came out the factory with em, they have to stay
unless, you live in Tennessee.
- Posts
- 33,599
- Location
- North Shropshire
yes engines dont need excessive back pressure, it strangles them. they run better with carbs, tho its harder to gain the last ounce of power
Nope sorry EFI .
"if" you have a tweakable ecu is even more betterer.
Even a standard ecu as the maps can be a better fit to amount of gogo juice under circumstance a carb cant recognize.
Now if want sound yep.
J
- Posts
- 33,599
- Location
- North Shropshire
Define 'better'Nope sorry EFI .
"if" you have a tweakable ecu is even more betterer.
Even a standard ecu as the maps can be a better fit to amount of gogo juice under circumstance a carb cant recognize.
Now if want sound yep.
J
Define 'better'
Why should I do it first
you started it.Ok an AFR (its not always 14.7 -1) can be defined in so many different areas of many maps which are all linked together where they all talk to each other depending on the exhaust results and other stuff.
A carb if you put your foot down can go dull till the vac catches up. and really has no idea of what is the best fuel to deliver at a given moment, its response is nowhere near a tuned (or std) EFI system. TBH.
Even putting carbs on a 4.6 you still need to get round the ECU for ignition and that is not easy or cheap so keeping as a whole is best if you are asking me.
It would sound great through some Holley/Weber downdraft's I am sure
J
Datatek
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 44,883
- Location
- Near Poitiers SW France
In other words, it was about emissions.
Actually, fuel injection on petrol engines preceded the emissions regs and catalytic convertors.
- Posts
- 33,599
- Location
- North Shropshire
exactly what i said better ≠ efficient
better ≠ efficient
Datatek
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 44,883
- Location
- Near Poitiers SW France
Anything is better than a P38 4.6 IMO. Overheating and dropped liners here we come.right a bit of background into why im fiddling with this P38 engine, i have a camper a big 5th wheel Canadian one which ironically i got from the everglades seeing as its a winterpack one but hey ho thats irrelevant what is relevant is its weight its close to 5 tons with the tanks empty
so i had to use an iveco 59-12 which has a train weight of 10,000kg and as it only weighs 2.5 tons ive got 7.5tons capacity left to tow with, the 59 is 5.9 tons max vehicle wieght and the 12 is a very optimistic 120 bhp, in your dreams or ive got a very poor engine which i dont think i have as its flys along when not towing.
View attachment 295365
right so thats the camper and the iveco i presently use but its god dam awful to tow with its so slow its dangerous, modern cars are to quick you go to pull out at an island it looks clear and wham the cars arrive before im out, its like being an old time trucker you look in the mirror and you have a convoy behind you so bad i havent taken it out for a while, so last year i stumbled on another iveco tractor unit same as the one above but the engine was missing and the cab was damaged but its saving grace was it was the 4 wheel drive version, axle difflocks as standard and twin rear wheels all sound good to me, with the cab off its just 2 straight chassis rails front to back same as any lorry, gearbox is still in it but the 3lt turbo diesel engine had been sold as it was worth money, now the gearbox is a ford item and on the back is an integral transfer box that drops passengerside, the interesting part is the transfer box is NP208 which would you believe is also fitted to many american motors including the 350 chevy with the th 350/400 autobox so there is a route to bolt the transferbox straight on to my chevy box and i wont have to alter my prop shafts etc, now a rover or chevy is not going to fit under the cab/bonnet of an iveco daily but as it was damaged its gone in the bin anyway and i ve bough a model AA ford fiberglass body which has a longer bonnet to hide the engine under, like this but with a 5th wheel coupling on the back instead of a body
View attachment 295367
so its torque im after to get it all rolling which is why maybe the 5.7lt chevy might be better than the 4.6 rover, undecided on that one , so there you go you know as much as me now ..........................
exactly what i said
So please explain
EFI will produce better economy and better power in the places that are needed.
J
Datatek
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 44,883
- Location
- Near Poitiers SW France
Cats reduce engine efficiency and increase fuel consumption.exactly what i said
Reduce performance I would agree with to some degree.
Increase fuel consumption, well not so sure.
J
Datatek
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 44,883
- Location
- Near Poitiers SW France
Back in the days when cats were first introduced, there were plenty of reports about the increase in fuel consumption caused by the fueling requirements for cats. Not a huge increase true but an increase none the less. Mitigated perhaps these days by ever more accurate electronic control of injection.
