4.0L turbo upgrade?
Discussion
It's not so much about upgrades as having an engine that's not to worn, anything that's starting to have excessive tolerances is gonna be found out when all that power and thrust hits it.
I think I'm right in saying as long as your 4.0 is in good health then it's almost ready for the turbo as is,,,
Others with more knowledge will confim this or not,,, new brakes will need to be employed im sure of that
I think I'm right in saying as long as your 4.0 is in good health then it's almost ready for the turbo as is,,,
Others with more knowledge will confim this or not,,, new brakes will need to be employed im sure of that
How many people have done a turbo upgrade on a 4 / 4.6 now. I must admit im tempted on my road car to go turbo route, its part of the reason I've not built the 4.6 for it yet, cant decide if i build a high comp 4.6 or go stock compression and a hairdryer.
really interested in views from people who have done it, on what its like to drive and what issues.
really interested in views from people who have done it, on what its like to drive and what issues.
Hi all , I am doing mine as we discuss this topic :-) I have gone for updated drive shafts a diff and gearbox rebuild prop shaft recon also changing all bushes and wheel bearings as I am at it with new powder coating to all the arms , also updated clutch and lightened flywheel . I will take out engine baffle the sumo and weld an oil return in to the top of the sump also replace all my main and big ends , and re vamp engine bay whilst at it and new heat shields etc etc ,
Will take photos and also changing outriggers to stainless steel , as work will die out after Xmas can't wait to get going into full throttle :-)
Ste
Will take photos and also changing outriggers to stainless steel , as work will die out after Xmas can't wait to get going into full throttle :-)
Ste
phazed said:
My car copes with 380/460 with several TDs, sprints and drag days under its belt without any problems.
400 should be fine.
Derek's standard box and diff have handled more!
Given that our engine specs aren't worlds apart It never fails to amaze me how your extra 500cc gives the best part of an extra 100lbsft of torque..400 should be fine.
Derek's standard box and diff have handled more!
Your 380/460 compared to my 360/350 (near enough).... Just can't understand where that extra 20/100 comes from Peter (well the 20 I can).... Shirly it's not just the cam (or is it)... Our induction/heads/exhaust are nearly identical and we're both running after market ECU's....
Or am I missing something here
Not at all sure why, all I know is it pulls like a train.
It will pull 5th from 800 rpm all the way to 6,000 but its party trick is flooring it in 5th at about 70-80 mph. Scalded cat springs to mind!
It has so much more torque than my 4.6 which was about 350.
It has slightly less BHP and more torque with the solid version of the H414 cam, makes no sense……..
It will pull 5th from 800 rpm all the way to 6,000 but its party trick is flooring it in 5th at about 70-80 mph. Scalded cat springs to mind!
It has so much more torque than my 4.6 which was about 350.
It has slightly less BHP and more torque with the solid version of the H414 cam, makes no sense……..
phazed said:
Not at all sure why, all I know is it pulls like a train.
It will pull 5th from 800 rpm all the way to 6,000 but its party trick is flooring it in 5th at about 70-80 mph. Scalded cat springs to mind!
It has so much more torque than my 4.6 which was about 350.
It has slightly less BHP and more torque with the solid version of the H414 cam, makes no sense……..
Yep very strange.... I don't have that low down torque, it's generally a bit pussy cat below 3.5 to 4.0k rpm.. but at 4k the torque and bhp seem to work together and the damn thing goes completely mental It will pull 5th from 800 rpm all the way to 6,000 but its party trick is flooring it in 5th at about 70-80 mph. Scalded cat springs to mind!
It has so much more torque than my 4.6 which was about 350.
It has slightly less BHP and more torque with the solid version of the H414 cam, makes no sense……..
The advantage is it's quite tractable at low revs but it won't try and spit you off the road with that typical 5.0litre high torque shove in the rear end that you get with the standard 5.0 lump at really low revs... so wet/slippery roads are a doddle... easy to drive and no stress
OP - sorry to hijack your thread...
Here's my last Dyno....
Just to clarify, the big difference between the earlier and more recent figures were solely down to removal of the main cat and putting a Clive F Y in... I believe it just allowed all the earlier top end mods to finally breathe to their full capacity...
Edited by ChilliWhizz on Thursday 17th December 20:17
Your torque figure seems low Chilli,, Peters is astonishing though
I've always been of the understanding to get big hp figures out of these engines the corresponding torque figure will be far higher again,,,, like Peters car is,,,, so going by that reckoning yours should be nearer 400 ?
I asked Dom at Powers about this and he said it's absolutely true,,, in all his years he says he's never seen an RV8 have a high Bhp figure that didn't have a higher torque figure!
What's going on ?
I've always been of the understanding to get big hp figures out of these engines the corresponding torque figure will be far higher again,,,, like Peters car is,,,, so going by that reckoning yours should be nearer 400 ?
I asked Dom at Powers about this and he said it's absolutely true,,, in all his years he says he's never seen an RV8 have a high Bhp figure that didn't have a higher torque figure!
What's going on ?
ClassiChimi said:
Your torque figure seems low Chilli,, Peters is astonishing though
I've always been of the understanding to get big hp figures out of these engines the corresponding torque figure will be far higher again,,,, like Peters car is,,,, so going by that reckoning yours should be nearer 400 ?
I asked Dom at Powers about this and he said it's absolutely true,,, in all his years he says he's never seen an RV8 have a high Bhp figure that didn't have a higher torque figure!
What's going on ?
Dunno Alun... I've always been happy with the bhp figure, but I've never understood why the torque appears relatively low.... I'm sure Rob would have the answer if I asked.... I've always been of the understanding to get big hp figures out of these engines the corresponding torque figure will be far higher again,,,, like Peters car is,,,, so going by that reckoning yours should be nearer 400 ?
I asked Dom at Powers about this and he said it's absolutely true,,, in all his years he says he's never seen an RV8 have a high Bhp figure that didn't have a higher torque figure!
What's going on ?
Mine is 315 bhp and 350 talks.....with a very wide torque band. Over 300 ft lbs between 1500 and 5500 rpm.
We need to get yours on Jools' dyno, Chilli, to get comparable numbers, though your description backs up your torque curve.
It may just be that your cam and ECU tuning are both slanted towards willy waving, at the cost of drivability? I dunno.
Let's meet up on a dry day and drive/passenger in both and compare?
We need to get yours on Jools' dyno, Chilli, to get comparable numbers, though your description backs up your torque curve.
It may just be that your cam and ECU tuning are both slanted towards willy waving, at the cost of drivability? I dunno.
Let's meet up on a dry day and drive/passenger in both and compare?
GasDoc said:
What engine/gearbox upgrades should be considered in order to handle the extra load imposed by the Powers Performance turbocharger, or can it just be bolted on (so to speak!)
Thanks
I bought a low mileage 4.0 with the sole intention of fitting a turbo. Less than 50,000 miles and Dom @ Powers inspected the engine before commencing - engine has to come out anyway to fit the 5.0 clutch and modify the chassis. Cam was worn down (nothing new there) but the cam bearings were badly scored. Further inspection of the crank found worn out shells.Thanks
So it was full rebuild and turbo conversion. Standard gearbox and diff on Powers' advice. Its the torque, not the BHP that destroys them and the advice was up to 500 lbs/ft should be okay.
Currently mine is 355 bhp and 481 lbs/ft at the wheels from before figures of 203 and 207 respectively.
I do not regret doing this conversion one second. The acceleration from 3,000 rpm is stunning in ANY gear and with that huge torque figure, the car is still easily driveable in town.
Never ever be tempted to do a 'bolt on' job. The additional stresses on an already worn engine will destroy it tout de suite. You must sort the gubbins first!!!
stesrg said:
Hi all , I am doing mine as we discuss this topic :-) I have gone for updated drive shafts a diff and gearbox rebuild prop shaft recon also changing all bushes and wheel bearings as I am at it with new powder coating to all the arms , also updated clutch and lightened flywheel . I will take out engine baffle the sumo and weld an oil return in to the top of the sump also replace all my main and big ends , and re vamp engine bay whilst at it and new heat shields etc etc ,
Will take photos and also changing outriggers to stainless steel , as work will die out after Xmas can't wait to get going into full throttle :-)
Ste
About bl##dy time too Steve Will take photos and also changing outriggers to stainless steel , as work will die out after Xmas can't wait to get going into full throttle :-)
Ste
ChilliWhizz said:
Given that our engine specs aren't worlds apart It never fails to amaze me how your extra 500cc gives the best part of an extra 100lbsft of torque..
Your 380/460 compared to my 360/350 (near enough).... Just can't understand where that extra 20/100 comes from Peter (well the 20 I can).... Shirly it's not just the cam (or is it)... Our induction/heads/exhaust are nearly identical and we're both running after market ECU's....
Or am I missing something here
That 500 cc can contain a lot of extra fuel and air when under boost esp with an upper end camshaft. It could feel like an extra litre of capacity and torque is a function of horsepower calcs. This is why turbo engines are so great. They make huge gobs of torque and raise hp without having the need to increase the rpm's and stress the engine mechanically.Your 380/460 compared to my 360/350 (near enough).... Just can't understand where that extra 20/100 comes from Peter (well the 20 I can).... Shirly it's not just the cam (or is it)... Our induction/heads/exhaust are nearly identical and we're both running after market ECU's....
Or am I missing something here
But isn't all that extra torque stressing the engine more at any given revs anyway Boosted,
Here's a question for all turbo/supercharged RV8 owners,,,
How long do you expect your engines to last,,
Has anyone completed say 20,000 miles or more with all this power,,
If the advice is don't go turbo unless your engines in tip top shape,,,what about when it's all worn from a few years of huge grunt,,, engine re builds ??
I'd just like to hear from at least one owner who can say there engine is still strong and safe even after 3-4 years of turbo use and proper mileage. City use, long distance work, reliability during winter,,,
I'm not knocking turbos etc and the power is a nice thought but I'm not rich enough to re build engines in a hurry,,
Am I being paranoid or do I have a valid point !
If someone can point me in the direction of a Tvr owner who can confirm my queries of engine reliability over long periods of time I might start thinking this is a good idea,, or am I just miles off the mark.
it is coming to my mind that these engines can handle upto 500 torques ok,,, I'm sure someone told me that,,,
If that's the case then most of us should be safe?
I read Doms offered the rolling road to Mac for free,,, I just wonder why,,,, cos he can't understand the power curve on that engine,,,and wants to see for himself,,, or blow it up,,
That's my thought not his,,,,,
I've read lots from people who have gone turbo and most seem very happy with it,,, I've heard very little about how long the engines last under the extra stresses these turbos apply.
Ok there's plenty of boys out there with fat enough wallets to not give a feck but for most that's a bit unrealistic so
My question is simply how many miles with FI before you'll require another re built engine,,,
Nobody knows the answer is my fear!
Here's a question for all turbo/supercharged RV8 owners,,,
How long do you expect your engines to last,,
Has anyone completed say 20,000 miles or more with all this power,,
If the advice is don't go turbo unless your engines in tip top shape,,,what about when it's all worn from a few years of huge grunt,,, engine re builds ??
I'd just like to hear from at least one owner who can say there engine is still strong and safe even after 3-4 years of turbo use and proper mileage. City use, long distance work, reliability during winter,,,
I'm not knocking turbos etc and the power is a nice thought but I'm not rich enough to re build engines in a hurry,,
Am I being paranoid or do I have a valid point !
If someone can point me in the direction of a Tvr owner who can confirm my queries of engine reliability over long periods of time I might start thinking this is a good idea,, or am I just miles off the mark.
it is coming to my mind that these engines can handle upto 500 torques ok,,, I'm sure someone told me that,,,
If that's the case then most of us should be safe?
I read Doms offered the rolling road to Mac for free,,, I just wonder why,,,, cos he can't understand the power curve on that engine,,,and wants to see for himself,,, or blow it up,,
That's my thought not his,,,,,
I've read lots from people who have gone turbo and most seem very happy with it,,, I've heard very little about how long the engines last under the extra stresses these turbos apply.
Ok there's plenty of boys out there with fat enough wallets to not give a feck but for most that's a bit unrealistic so
My question is simply how many miles with FI before you'll require another re built engine,,,
Nobody knows the answer is my fear!
Gassing Station | Chimaera | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff