How much power is too much in an old 110?

[Lefty]

I've got a bit of a bitsa 110 ongoing project.

110 V8 CSW, registered in 1987 on a D plate.

After a messy accident involving wet grass and a rocky gully she got a complete CSW body from a 1983 110 CSW (very, very early 110, more like a stage 1 TBH. Sliding door windows, non-opening loadbay windows etc).

Few years ago she got a galv chassis by the previous owner.

Anyway, I've had her for a year or so. Replaced the rapidly deteriorating LT95 4 speeder with a recon r380 and LT230 which is a really sweet unit. I've got a stainless sport exhaust fitted (and tubular headers although they're not fitted yet because it's an engine-oot job).

I've also rebuilt the brakes, replaced the steering box, repaired a knackered b-pillar and my mechanic is about to tackle a really horrible job - one of the underfloor body crossmembers. £20 part but a veritable metric stload of labour.

The original lo-comp 3.5 is needing a proper rebuild and I'm looking at an engine swap. I've got a 4.6 from a p38 in a mates workshop but I don't know what condition it's in (never heard it running.)

Thing is, I don't want EFi but am thinking that a 4.6 on carbs is going to make around 240 nags and this might be a bit of overkill and is likely to break things.

Anyone got experience of a high-ish power 110?

Is the r380/LT230 up to the job? Half shafts I would imagine could be a weak point.

Might I be better trying to get a 3.9 from a Disco? I would think 180-190bhp might be a bit more sympathetic. I'm not looking for massive power, just flexibility and decent grunt for towing and when fully laden (think 6 guys with guns and a beer fridge).

Ta

[eliot]

I doubt there is any rover lump will have the minstrels to give an LT230 any cause for concern.
I'm running 500ft-lb through mine and this chap is running a 454 big block in a 90 also through an LT230:

http://mez.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=793

[hidetheelephants]

Depends; what are you going to do? Tow heavy things? Rock crawling? If it's just going to be a toy with light leisure use then it'll be fine. Even driven with heavy boots on you shouldn't wear out an R380 in less than 50k. The transfer boxes are fairly bulletproof.

[Caractacus]

If you want to uprate the drive shafts, etc, take a look at what JE Engineering do with their 'Zulu' product.

http://www.jeengineering.co.uk/zulu.html

You probaably don't need to uprate things right now, but if you do while all else is out you'll be in better shape when you're after more power in the future (and you know you'll hanker after more eventually!).

Have fun.

Cheers,

C.

[eliot]

Caractacus said:

(and you know you'll hanker after more eventually!).

I could wind the wick up on my turbos, but haven't felt the need. So i guess to answer to the original question is that around 400-450 should be "adequate sir"

[bakerstreet]

Power figures for those engines are known to be exagerated, so it probably won't be anything near 240bhp.

[Hooli]

I'd say that unless you can flick in the lockers & light all four wheels by flooring it in high fifth on dry tarmac then it's capable of taking more power

[hidetheelephants]

Caractacus said:

If you want to uprate the drive shafts, etc, take a look at what JE Engineering do with their 'Zulu' product.

Why would you uprate any of it? There's nothing in the 110 drive train that can't take 250hp in general road use, or even mudplugging, provided it's in good condition. Unless you're intent on Moab-style rock crawling or burn-outs at the Pod it's a bit excessive.

[300bhp/ton]

Lefty said:

I've got a bit of a bitsa 110 ongoing project.

110 V8 CSW, registered in 1987 on a D plate.

After a messy accident involving wet grass and a rocky gully she got a complete CSW body from a 1983 110 CSW (very, very early 110, more like a stage 1 TBH. Sliding door windows, non-opening loadbay windows etc).

Few years ago she got a galv chassis by the previous owner.

Anyway, I've had her for a year or so. Replaced the rapidly deteriorating LT95 4 speeder with a recon r380 and LT230 which is a really sweet unit. I've got a stainless sport exhaust fitted (and tubular headers although they're not fitted yet because it's an engine-oot job).

I've also rebuilt the brakes, replaced the steering box, repaired a knackered b-pillar and my mechanic is about to tackle a really horrible job - one of the underfloor body crossmembers. £20 part but a veritable metric stload of labour.

The original lo-comp 3.5 is needing a proper rebuild and I'm looking at an engine swap. I've got a 4.6 from a p38 in a mates workshop but I don't know what condition it's in (never heard it running.)

Thing is, I don't want EFi but am thinking that a 4.6 on carbs is going to make around 240 nags and this might be a bit of overkill and is likely to break things.

Anyone got experience of a high-ish power 110?

Is the r380/LT230 up to the job? Half shafts I would imagine could be a weak point.

Might I be better trying to get a 3.9 from a Disco? I would think 180-190bhp might be a bit more sympathetic. I'm not looking for massive power, just flexibility and decent grunt for towing and when fully laden (think 6 guys with guns and a beer fridge).

Ta

As others have said, it all depends on what you plan to do with it, and also how you drive. If you like using the load pedal and are either a hooligan or like to "power out" of off road obstacles, then you are likely to break far more stuff.

+1 on the LT230, these are pretty stout and I believe there area few guys in Dubai pushing nearer 600hp through them.

The R380 is potentially an issue, it's really just a revised LT-77 and the 380 tag actually means it's max torque rating... which is 380nm, so only 280lb ft of torque, which a descent 4.6 is likely to make.

I must confess I have knackered out an R380 with an only midly tweaked 300Tdi 90.

That said, these gearboxes are easily available and if you don't beat on it all the time will probably be ok and not a huge pain to swap over should you need to.

You'll have the normal drivetrain issues with halfshafts and diffs, all of which can be upgraded.

If you have a drum rear axle you might want to consider a disc conversion and if you plan heavy fast road use, then you'll want to upgrade thee front brakes too.


Other than that, I see no reason why it shouldn't be fine.


Personally if I had the money I'd go Megasquirt or some other stand alone EFI setup over carb, more power, more control, smoother power delivery and more efficient.

If you are going carb, then I'd say look at a Weber/Edlebrock 500, twin SU's will strangle it.

[Caractacus]

hidetheelephants said:

Caractacus said:

If you want to uprate the drive shafts, etc, take a look at what JE Engineering do with their 'Zulu' product.

Why would you uprate any of it? There's nothing in the 110 drive train that can't take 250hp in general road use, or even mudplugging, provided it's in good condition. Unless you're intent on Moab-style rock crawling or burn-outs at the Pod it's a bit excessive.

Ahh, so it doesn't break???

Prevention is better than the cure, no?

[300bhp/ton]

hidetheelephants said:

Caractacus said:

If you want to uprate the drive shafts, etc, take a look at what JE Engineering do with their 'Zulu' product.

Why would you uprate any of it? There's nothing in the 110 drive train that can't take 250hp in general road use, or even mudplugging, provided it's in good condition. Unless you're intent on Moab-style rock crawling or burn-outs at the Pod it's a bit excessive.

[900T-R]

300bhp/ton said:

The R380 is potentially an issue, it's really just a revised LT-77 and the 380 tag actually means it's max torque rating... which is 380nm, so only 280lb ft of torque, which a descent 4.6 is likely to make.

Maybe if you're using Pilot Sport Cups or Mickey Thompsons on the back of your Land Rover, otherwise not likely a problem. Not too many LT77 failures on 4.3 and early 5.0 litre TVRs either (in fact I can't think of one at all)...

[Caractacus]

900T-R said:

Maybe if you're using Pilot Sport Cups or Mickey Thompsons on the back of your Land Rover, otherwise not likely a problem. Not too many LT77 failures on 4.3 and early 5.0 litre TVRs either (in fact I can't think of one at all)...

To be fair, they are not anywhere near the same weight (therefore stress would be considerably lower) and the bhp the 4.3 or 5.0 RV8 put out, as we all know, is utter tosh.

So, realistically, if someone was to put a true 250+ bhp through an LT77 upgrading whilst all else is out would make sense. No harm in having things a tad more robust, after all.

[900T-R]

Caractacus said:

To be fair, they are not anywhere near the same weight (therefore stress would be considerably lower)

Not neccesarily - all depends on the amount of grip you can generate. Whether that grip is being used to accelerate a 2,000 kg vehicle moderately quickly or a 1,000 kg car very quickly is of secondary importance at best.

Reversing the argument - lower weight means lower stress on drivetrain (and chassis/body structure, and suspension, and brakes) given equal levels of acceleration (both longitudinal and lateral)...

That, and you'll find even the non-'utter tosh' output of a TVR 4.3 or 5.0 lies somewhat beyond what a std LR 4.6 can muster (220 bhp on paper, a bit less in reality)... BTW the first dozen or so Griff 500s appear to have had 234 cams and a true power output in excess of 300 bhp. As the period Autocar road test confirmed they weren't that nice to drive... but they didn't break the 'box either.

[bakerstreet]

900T-R said:

That, and you'll find even the non-'utter tosh' output of a TVR 4.3 or 5.0 lies somewhat beyond what a std LR 4.6 can muster (220 bhp on paper, a bit less in reality)... BTW the first dozen or so Griff 500s appear to have had 234 cams and a true power output in excess of 300 bhp. As the period Autocar road test confirmed they weren't that nice to drive... but they didn't break the 'box either.

My cousin has had three Griffith 500s and none of them have produced anywhere near 300bhp. If I put a P38 4.6 on a rolling road, I'd expect anything from 150-175bhp and certainly not the 225 that they are advertsied at.

Back on topic. I'd still upgrade the half shafts and at least the clutch.

[300bhp/ton]

900T-R said:

Maybe if you're using Pilot Sport Cups or Mickey Thompsons on the back of your Land Rover, otherwise not likely a problem. Not too many LT77 failures on 4.3 and early 5.0 litre TVRs either (in fact I can't think of one at all)...

Off road on big tyres the drivetrain stress is far greater and is amplified, partly due to the weight and due to the rolling radius.

Also off road can be brutal as wheels will and can go, from spinning freely to stopped dead instantly by and obstacle, you are also likely to find yourself using quite a few revs at time, so actually a lot of load on the gearbox. Off roading can at times demand you be quite brutal with your gear selection too, as you often don't have a lot of time to change gear and it's likely imperative that you are in the correct gear for the conditions and obstacle being tackled.

e.g.

this is a size comparison of a typical TVR/car tyre vs what you might find on a modded Land Rover (similar to what I run on mine).

[900T-R]

bakerstreet said:

If I put a P38 4.6 on a rolling road, I'd expect anything from 150-175bhp and certainly not the 225 that they are advertsied at.

Indeed - so I wouldn't expect one on a single four-barrel Edelbrock, let alone twin SUs, to do any better...

I think it's well established that any of the 'production' 500s with the 435 cam would be nearer 260 bhp... the one lent to Autocar as well as a couple of other early ones obviously was a bit different; I'd like to think the subsequent detuning was a result of the road testers' (and probably others') comments being taken on board.

[E-B]

If you did fancy the Efi route then you could easily get 300+hp from a BMW M3Evo lump in. Easy job too, the 2.8 version with 197hp was fitted to defenders in South Africa by the factory and the parts feature on Microcat at all dealers here in the UK.

Thats what i'm looking at doing with my RRC

[900T-R]

300bhp/ton said:

e.g.

this is a size comparison of a typical TVR/car tyre vs what you might find on a modded Land Rover (similar to what I run on mine).

Fair point on off road useage and rotating weight, but all a bigger rolling radius does is diminish torque at the wheels for a given torque output?

[Lefty]

900T-R said:

Not neccesarily - all depends on the amount of grip you can generate. Whether that grip is being used to accelerate a 2,000 kg vehicle moderately quickly or a 1,000 kg car very quickly is of secondary importance at best.

Reversing the argument - lower weight means lower stress on drivetrain (and chassis/body structure, and suspension, and brakes) given equal levels of acceleration (both longitudinal and lateral)...

That, and you'll find even the non-'utter tosh' output of a TVR 4.3 or 5.0 lies somewhat beyond what a std LR 4.6 can muster (220 bhp on paper, a bit less in reality)... BTW the first dozen or so Griff 500s appear to have had 234 cams and a true power output in excess of 300 bhp. As the period Autocar road test confirmed they weren't that nice to drive... but they didn't break the 'box either.

That's interesting and something I hadn't really thought of. The 4.6 in the P8 was indeed advertised at something like 225 and I assumed (knowing little of such matters) that a big juicy carb like an Edelbrock 500 along with my free flowing exhaust and tubular headers would probably increase power.

Good to hear all the opinions that the r380/LT230 should be up to the job too.

Since I've got the engine I'll probably go for it. As I said, never heard it running but we'll give it a bit of a clean up.

Regarding EFI vs. carb, how big a job is it make the efi work? I wanted to keep clear of doing any fancy electrickery but if I could save the £500 odd quid for a decent carb it would be nice.

Not really interested in an M3 motor, not after high revving power, more low amd mid-range grunt.

It does indeed have the old drum-braked axle, a disco or defender disc-braked one would be a nice upgrade.

Cheers!

Lefty