Joe_H said:
Hi Nodge mate - I presume (32Psi) you must mean 'Gauge' ref 'Absolute' yikes :) .
Also, I would question the cooling ability / or heating effect if you will - of intake temps. IF you use a lot of metal pipes then it is likely that the bay temps / airflow - would 'possibly' offer some unwanted HEATING effect to the pressurised air from the engine bay .. not good.
Actually covering the pipes with heat insulating material would - in theory - only try to rectify a totally user created issue that should never be there !!. (due to the metal pipework ABSORBING heat from the engine bay at low speeds whereas 'normal' pipework does not.)
If the pipework is all 'silicone' (actually a hybrid as very few (if any) places supply pure silicone hoses )- then I can see absolutely - utterly - no increase or decrease in performance over the standard 'automotive type' hose.- period ! - apart from it looking nicer and lasting longer (possibly but - highly debatable and unlikely !)) - the heat transfer one way or the other of 'non metallic' hoses is extremely limited and more influenced (by FAR) via the inter-cooler and the compressor limit PSI.
So, as the OP has found out - apart from looking pretty, the metal / hose combo is actually worse - a detriment to performance !- unless covered. - even then it is absolutely no better than the original. ! - no objective gain at all. !
I think the moral here is to stick with the factory fitment - or aftermarket WITHOUT any metal tubes. They only look 'cool' in piccies' and even then not too much.. also, they are under the bonnet (hood for foreigners ;)) and no begger sees them anyway lol :)
It is all simple utter 'bling' as far as I am concerned. :rolleyes::D
And - offer absolutely no benefit at all. - Even the 'britpart' (Yikes !!:oops:) replacement hoses for boost are absolutely fine and ridiculously cheap.

To recap - apart from the 'bling' / 'chav' value there IS NO absolute benefit at all - indeed - negative issues. sorry but :confused:

Also, I can in no way see any way that the hose 'mods' pictured above can in ANY way be better than the factory spec hoses ? - just not possible - unless of course you are running HUGE boost increases, and even then - I would doubt that ANY difference would be measurable - let alone 'noticeable'
I think this is a case of 'it looks cool therefore it is better' - without ANY data to back it up.
Don't get me wrong :) - cool looks are great... I just shudder when someone quotes ANY noticeable benefit....... err nope - in most cases (>90%!)
Per quote "though it did prove to be a functional benefit to engine performance"
Sorry mate - but not a chance really - I just cannot see how ? - mind over matter -


Joe;)
Click to expand...
The problem Joe is the factory plastic stuff is crap. It's restrictive with molding flash, tight bends and reinforcement ribs all over it. This simply isn't good for smooth air flow. Additionally being black plastic, it absorbs radiant heat from the engine and readily passes this heat into the inlet air. The air flowing through the piping then carries the heat into the the turbo.
So by using smooth walled tubing that doesn't absorb so much radiant heat, a benefit can be found.
I've measured the pre-turbo air trunking at over 60°C. This will heat the air before it gets to the turbo for pressurisation. The boost pressure on the TD4 is circa 32Psi which will make the already heated induction air temperature soar. This means that the intercooler has more work to do and as a byproduct, increases the engine bay temperature.
Heat is the inlet tract is a killer to torque (as you know;) ). So whatever can be done to reduce intake temps it will be of benefit.
 
@ Joe_H
re ..
even then it is absolutely no better than the original. ! - no objective gain at all. !
Click to expand...
how can you write that when you've not been driving my hippo ?????
how do you know it's 'no better than original' ??? and no objective gain ..

for your info Joe .. the performance objective / target was obtained due to that intake mod ..
i.e. one negative aspect of the td4's performance overcome ..

yeah .. could have used wire spiral wrap silicone hosing .. or similar .. for the air intake
and maybe flexible hosing or plastic pipe for the intercooler to egr bit ..
as it happens the alloy tube fit the bill just fine ..

( the mod is a win:win .. better hamster behaviour ..
( 'n one clamp to undo/re-do ..
( instead of three clamps 'n two screws ..
( to access the air-filter housing

as for air-intake temps ..
i've been able to monitor i.a.t's whilst driving this td4 for a couple of years
i know which air intake setup works better in that respect
and it aint the factory ducting ..

bling up a td4/m47r ??????? what for ??? .. they're hardly a piece of visual pleasantry ..
unlike this ..
http://www.hotrod.com/articles/hdrp...dp_0603_bus_11_z-1962_vw_bus-blown_355_engine

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
Last edited:
hd3 said:
@ Joe_H
re ..

how can you write that when you've not been driving my hippo ?????
how do you know it's 'no better than original' ??? and no objective gain ..

for your info Joe .. the performance objective / target was obtained due to that intake mod ..
i.e. one negative aspect of the td4's performance overcome ..

yeah .. could have used wire spiral wrap silicone hosing .. or similar .. for the air intake
and maybe flexible hosing or plastic pipe for the intercooler to egr bit ..
as it happens the alloy tube fit the bill just fine ..

( the mod is a win:win .. better hamster behaviour ..
( 'n one clamp to undo/re-do ..
( instead of three clamps 'n two screws ..
( to access the air-filter housing

as for air-intake temps ..
i've been able to monitor i.a.t's whilst driving this td4 for a couple of years
i know which air intake setup works better in that respect
and it aint the factory ducting ..

bling up a td4/m47r ??????? what for ??? .. they're hardly a piece of visual pleasantry ..
unlike this ..
http://www.hotrod.com/articles/hdrp...dp_0603_bus_11_z-1962_vw_bus-blown_355_engine

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Click to expand...
Agree, the engine is "visual pleasantry", but what they've done to the bus is pants :)

There was a discussion about Chevy Small Blocks on a LR FB group I'm on the other day - I asked if there were adapter plates for Freelanders - didn't go down well :)
 
I think the gearbox would last about 100yds!

standard.jpg
 
Joe_H said:
Hi Nodge mate - I presume (32Psi) you must mean 'Gauge' ref 'Absolute' yikes :) .
Also, I would question the cooling ability / or heating effect if you will - of intake temps. IF you use a lot of metal pipes then it is likely that the bay temps / airflow - would 'possibly' offer some unwanted HEATING effect to the pressurised air from the engine bay .. not good.
Actually covering the pipes with heat insulating material would - in theory - only try to rectify a totally user created issue that should never be there !!. (due to the metal pipework ABSORBING heat from the engine bay at low speeds whereas 'normal' pipework does not.)
If the pipework is all 'silicone' (actually a hybrid as very few (if any) places supply pure silicone hoses )- then I can see absolutely - utterly - no increase or decrease in performance over the standard 'automotive type' hose.- period ! - apart from it looking nicer and lasting longer (possibly but - highly debatable and unlikely !)) - the heat transfer one way or the other of 'non metallic' hoses is extremely limited and more influenced (by FAR) via the inter-cooler and the compressor limit PSI.
So, as the OP has found out - apart from looking pretty, the metal / hose combo is actually worse - a detriment to performance !- unless covered. - even then it is absolutely no better than the original. ! - no objective gain at all. !
I think the moral here is to stick with the factory fitment - or aftermarket WITHOUT any metal tubes. They only look 'cool' in piccies' and even then not too much.. also, they are under the bonnet (hood for foreigners ;)) and no begger sees them anyway lol :)
It is all simple utter 'bling' as far as I am concerned. :rolleyes::D
And - offer absolutely no benefit at all. - Even the 'britpart' (Yikes !!:oops:) replacement hoses for boost are absolutely fine and ridiculously cheap.

To recap - apart from the 'bling' / 'chav' value there IS NO absolute benefit at all - indeed - negative issues. sorry but :confused:

Also, I can in no way see any way that the hose 'mods' pictured above can in ANY way be better than the factory spec hoses ? - just not possible - unless of course you are running HUGE boost increases, and even then - I would doubt that ANY difference would be measurable - let alone 'noticeable'
I think this is a case of 'it looks cool therefore it is better' - without ANY data to back it up.
Don't get me wrong :) - cool looks are great... I just shudder when someone quotes ANY noticeable benefit....... err nope - in most cases (>90%!)
Per quote "though it did prove to be a functional benefit to engine performance"
Sorry mate - but not a chance really - I just cannot see how ? - mind over matter -
Joe;)
Click to expand...

My penny-worth on this is: Factory parts/engines are designed to work within predetermined parameters. Gains can be made my mod'ing the factory bits or adding aftermarket bits. My plastic IM had petal-like plastic flash protruding into it from manufacture - I carefully removed these and smoothed out other irregularities. The exhaust manifold and down pipes has welding splatter and protruding pipe lips where they are fitted together prior to welding. Again I removed and smoothed out things. I added a CAF and an aftermarket A/F and a remote thermostat and a host of other additions / mod's too.

My motor worked well prior to my mod'ing, well within LR spec's, but I feel it now operates better than the st'd factory spec's. So for me the moral is, factory fitment is okay, but you can make things better. And owing a K 16 you certainly have to to avoid HGF .... lol
 
htr said:
My penny-worth on this is: Factory parts/engines are designed to work within predetermined parameters. Gains can be made my mod'ing the factory bits or adding aftermarket bits. My plastic IM had petal-like plastic flash protruding into it from manufacture - I carefully removed these and smoothed out other irregularities. The exhaust manifold and down pipes has welding splatter and protruding pipe lips where they are fitted together prior to welding. Again I removed and smoothed out things. I added a CAF and an aftermarket A/F and a remote thermostat and a host of other additions / mod's too.

My motor worked well prior to my mod'ing, well within LR spec's, but I feel it now operates better than the st'd factory spec's. So for me the moral is, factory fitment is okay, but you can make things better. And owing a K 16 you certainly have to to avoid HGF .... lol
Click to expand...
How's about moving away from water for cooling and onto waterless instead for the next mod HTR? I think the K16 and KV6 are perfect candidates for such a mod.
It's something that I will be looking into if my KV6 powered MGF ever gets off the ground.
 
Nodge68 said:
How's about moving away from water for cooling and onto waterless instead for the next mod HTR? I think the K16 and KV6 are perfect candidates for such a mod.
It's something that I will be looking into if my KV6 powered MGF ever gets off the ground.
Click to expand...
Some say the K series engines spend half their lives waterless - either boiled dry or undergoing the next rebuild.

What if you install a turbo charger, but instead of blowing air into the inlet manifold, blow it into the block water inlet?
 
htr said:
My penny-worth on this is: Factory parts/engines are designed to work within predetermined parameters. Gains can be made my mod'ing the factory bits or adding aftermarket bits. My plastic IM had petal-like plastic flash protruding into it from manufacture - I carefully removed these and smoothed out other irregularities. The exhaust manifold and down pipes has welding splatter and protruding pipe lips where they are fitted together prior to welding. Again I removed and smoothed out things. I added a CAF and an aftermarket A/F and a remote thermostat and a host of other additions / mod's too.

My motor worked well prior to my mod'ing, well within LR spec's, but I feel it now operates better than the st'd factory spec's. So for me the moral is, factory fitment is okay, but you can make things better. And owing a K 16 you certainly have to to avoid HGF .... lol
Click to expand...
Hi HTR, firstly, apologies as I didn't mean to cause offence. Re-reading my post I can well see how it did. so again - apologies.
Of course, anyone is absolutely entitled to do as they wish with their cars. I Just (personally) don't hold much stock in *most* types of mods. I worked in the business of actually tuning cars and RR dyno testing the results and most 'bolt on goodies were simply not noticeable in the slightest - in some cases causing a negative effect.
As to the intake on the M47(r) - the 'compressed' plastic part. In a non forced induction car I can see a possible increase by altering the path and shape slightly. On a forced induction - not so (but of course that is MO). Same with exhaust to turbine on a forced induction. slight deficiencies prior to the turbine are not (again in MO) going to make any tangible difference.
Often even the accumulation of lots of small mods can make no discernable difference.
Obviously a lot depends on the 'mod' and how restrictive or beneficial a change would be to a pre-installed part.
When forced induction is used the normal 'gas flow path' rules tend to be not 'as' applicable.
A small 'decrease' - or indeed - 'increase' in IAT is of no noticeable benefit in reality - whereas a considerable negative difference can make a difference. The limitation is the inter-cooler really and of course - the ambient temps.

As a quote from Honeywell Garret indicates -
"
Q. I want to turn up my boost, is a larger intercooler necessary?
A. Usually, it is not necessary to upgrade the intercooler when raising boost levels. The pressure drop contributed by the intercooler is proportional to it's flow (CFM) squared. This relationship shows that it is highly unlikely the change resulting in loss from higher boost levels will require a larger intercooler. If there is a significant change however, such as 40% or 50%, then a larger intercooler may be necessary."
This is also indicative of any supposed pressure 'loss' in the intake system post inter-cooler.
Small changes make beggar all difference in reality.

However, the end result is that you are happy, and of course, this is all about our hobby and whatever we enjoy doing. I also love messing and playing with my freeby - I just try - where possible to indicate potential misnomers -and - to myself I say ;) - People in glass houses etc (like me in my greenhouse) :rolleyes::oops:)
Keep on with what you do, it is a really great hobby and the Landy is a credit to you.
Joe
 
Last edited:
Absolutely no offence taken by me.:)

Nodge68 said:
How's about moving away from water for cooling and onto waterless instead for the next mod HTR? I think the K16 and KV6 are perfect candidates for such a mod.
It's something that I will be looking into if my KV6 powered MGF ever gets off the ground.
Click to expand...

"waterless" as no liquid or "waterless" as in some form of modified liquid less H2O?
 
htr said:
"waterless" as no liquid or "waterless" as in some form of modified liquid less H2O?
Click to expand...
Waterless as in this new coolant that doesn't contain H2O. Because of this, it boils at 180° C and it doesn't therefore require high pressure to maintain the coolant in the system.
I think it's ideal for "problem cooling systems" like the K series.
 
Nodge68 said:
Waterless as in this new coolant that doesn't contain H2O. Because of this, it boils at 180° C and it doesn't therefore require high pressure to maintain the coolant in the system.
I think it's ideal for "problem cooling systems" like the K series.
Click to expand...
Hi Nodge - apart form the early HG issues (AFAIK) the K series is not really that problematic is it ??? ///// (ie - WHERE are the problem areas in the K series ? !!) - apart from early head gasket design and really asking too much of a pokey engine in a heavy AWD vehicle ?
I consider it something similar to the triumph stag where many many people blamed the inefficiency of the cooling system AND where it was eventually proved that the cooling system was not an issue in reality - it was simply poor maintenance - also build quality - where in the K - that could be HG design. - I not believe there are other real issues.
Could it not be that the K in the FL was plagued by issues early on in it's life that continued even after a 'repair' ? - ie, once boiled - it was potentially captain cooked ?
I think the K is simply a bad choice for a power unit for such a heavy vehicle.
Joe
 
Last edited:
The K series HG issue is a mixture of design issues and poor build quality. The Chinese claim they have it sorted but I guess time will tell.
In the meantime those stupid or ignorant enough to buy them (I had three at one point so guess which category I fall into) live with having to replace the HG every 40 to 60 K miles.
 
Joe_H said:
Hi Nodge - apart form the early HG issues (AFAIK) the K series is not really that problematic is it ??? ///// (ie - WHERE are the problem areas in the K series ? !!) - apart from early head gasket design and really asking too much of a pokey engine in a heavy AWD vehicle ?
I consider it something similar to the triumph stag where many many people blamed the inefficiency of the cooling system AND where it was eventually proved that the cooling system was not an issue in reality - it was simply poor maintenance - also build quality - where in the K - that could be HG design. - I not believe there are other real issues.
Could it not be that the K in the FL was plagued by issues early on in it's life that continued even after a 'repair' ? - ie, once boiled - it was potentially captain cooked ?
I think the K is simply a bad choice for a power unit for such a heavy vehicle.
Joe
Click to expand...
The K series does suffer hot spots and localised boiling of the coolant. Mostly around the liner tops and combustion chamber. This is the problem with it that I'm thinking watterless coolant will solve. The actual cooling capacity of the system is well up to the task.
The header tanks are known to split over time due to the pressure that the system has to maintain, just to keep the coolant from boiling off. This is a direct consequence of the localised boiling of the coolant in the engine. So replace the coolant with a variety that won't boil and two problems are solved in one go. The waterless coolant doesn't reqire high cap pressures.

There's also a theory that the localised boiling will cause the liners to expand more than normal, so reducing fire ring and elastopolymer life.
This is why I think waterless coolant is the way forward, particularly after the HG has been replaced.
 
lol, people moan about VCU discussions going on-and-on with different entrench view points - it ain't go nuffin on the K HG & cooling :)

I suppose the ability not to boil up, pressurise the system and create gas areas in just the places where it needs to be picking up heat from is a very good thing. Just as importantly though, unless the original creators of ICEs were very lucky and the free stuff out of the tap has exceptional (rapid) thermal pickup and loss characteristics, I'm sure there must be some other substance that can do a better job. I suppose like all things its a play off of functionality against cost.
 
Nodge68 said:
Waterless as in this new coolant that doesn't contain H2O. Because of this, it boils at 180° C and it doesn't therefore require high pressure to maintain the coolant in the system.
I think it's ideal for "problem cooling systems" like the K series.
Click to expand...

Possibly, but there are some downsides.

From the Evans Coolant spec, http://www.evanscoolant.com/Customer-Content/www/CMS/files/spec-sheets/download-files/high-performance-spec-sheet.pdf

Specific Heat (ability to move heat around the system) is just over half that of water, so cooling passages should be made even bigger
Flash point is 120C (hope it does not leak)
When water boils (at about 100C) it absorbs a great deal of latent heat, which tends to hold the max temp at about 120C until it has boiled dry. This gives some time for the driver to respond to temp gauge or warning light (if they are awake). Water is unique in have such a high latent heat of boiling.

So I think I will live with H2O for a while.
 
Waterless coolant is something I have trouble wrapping my head around. I get it that it is a fluid that won't reach boiling point in an engine,
therefore running at a lower pressure than conventional coolant, but doesn't the pressure contribute to coolant flow?
If the stuff was a more reasonable price I would consider giving it a go but the thought of a burst hose dropping a couple hundred dollars worth
of coolant on the road depresses me. I know, with lower pressure there is less chance of a hose bursting but with my luck the coolant wouldn't last a week! :(
 
Nodge68 said:
The K series does suffer hot spots and localised boiling of the coolant. Mostly around the liner tops and combustion chamber. This is the problem with it that I'm thinking watterless coolant will solve. The actual cooling capacity of the system is well up to the task.
The header tanks are known to split over time due to the pressure that the system has to maintain, just to keep the coolant from boiling off. This is a direct consequence of the localised boiling of the coolant in the engine. So replace the coolant with a variety that won't boil and two problems are solved in one go. The waterless coolant doesn't reqire high cap pressures.

There's also a theory that the localised boiling will cause the liners to expand more than normal, so reducing fire ring and elastopolymer life.
This is why I think waterless coolant is the way forward, particularly after the HG has been replaced.
Click to expand...

I've just seen the cost of this stuff! £195 approx plus shipping for 6 litres of prep and 6 litres of coolant. that buys a few hoses/pumps... and a rad or two!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Help!
Replies
13
Views
673
Nodge68
Nodge68
B
Freelander TD4 Mk1 Rear Diff - Does anyone have any advice on how to replace the rear diff?
Replies
1
Views
261
Freddie17
Freddie17
R
LED side lights not working
Replies
9
Views
742
RickyFreelander
R
C
Rear wheel bearings or diff
Replies
11
Views
1K
Nodge68
Nodge68
L
Freelander 1 2005 Land Rover Freelander 1 HSE - Loose Gear Selector in Automatic Transmission
Replies
3
Views
634
Hippo
Hippo