4.4 4.8 power and torque curve

[virgil]

Hi - has anyone got a graph showing the power and torque curve of the ('07ish) 4.4 and 4.8 BM V8s? The're about 330 and 380 respectively, but I want to overlay the curve over the 4.4 (same engine different tune) in the L322 ('02 onward) RangeRover...it's down (a lot) on power, but does it make up for it in torque over the 4.8?

Cheers, Virgil.

[2.5pi]

Hi Virgil

Can't help with the graph but think the RR is a different earlier unit;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_M62

Later bmw cars had;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_N62

Which upped power from 280 ish to 319 ish

Later unit is far better to drive and more durable

4.8 is more and torque at lower revs....cake and eat it

Cheers!

[virgil]

Thanks. I'm currently running a 645i and it's nto a slouch...OK, nearly a ton ligher than a full fat RR, but I'm looking to swap for a RR, 545touring or X5 4.4/4.8...thinking if the 4.4/4.8 was good enough for an X5, why the difference in power in a RR...

[2.5pi]

Hi Virgil

I run an x5 4.4 sport facelift amongst other cars and also have had a range rover 4.4 , the x5 is WAY quicker than the RR for 3 reasons , more power , 320 vs 280 ps , less weight by some 250 kg and a 6 SPD vs 5 on the RR pre facelift and better aerodynamics to boot, 545 tourings look good value tho.

[virgil]

2.5pi said:

Hi Virgil

I run an x5 4.4 sport facelift amongst other cars and also have had a range rover 4.4 , the x5 is WAY quicker than the RR for 3 reasons , more power , 320 vs 280 ps , less weight by some 250 kg and a 6 SPD vs 5 on the RR pre facelift and better aerodynamics to boot, 545 tourings look good value tho.

Of the two, X5 4.4 and RR4.4 which is the comfier more luxurious? And were the running costs (excluding fuel) apprciable?

Whilst I know you don't buy an (older) RR for speed, I do love to put the foot down and I'm going from a lovely 645 which is a nice quick comfy drive...

Whilst I see the X5 as a heavier more practical 645, the RR has that xfactor that's hard to ignor...

[2.5pi]

virgil said:

2.5pi said:

Hi Virgil

I run an x5 4.4 sport facelift amongst other cars and also have had a range rover 4.4 , the x5 is WAY quicker than the RR for 3 reasons , more power , 320 vs 280 ps , less weight by some 250 kg and a 6 SPD vs 5 on the RR pre facelift and better aerodynamics to boot, 545 tourings look good value tho.

Of the two, X5 4.4 and RR4.4 which is the comfier more luxurious? And were the running costs (excluding fuel) apprciable?

Whilst I know you don't buy an (older) RR for speed, I do love to put the foot down and I'm going from a lovely 645 which is a nice quick comfy drive...

Whilst I see the X5 as a heavier more practical 645, the RR has that xfactor that's hard to ignor...

RR was comfiest but X5 handles and goes better, RR had a sense of luxury but didn't keep long enough to get a fair view on running costs , I ve had a few x5 s over the years , petrol, diesel e53 and e70 so I guess you can see the bias !

All x's were/are under BMW warranty and servicing reasonable,

Cheers!

[8Tech]

The engine mapping is different on the Range Rover and the X5. The engine is the same. I know as I supply the specialist engine tools for the BMW M62 engine for rental and apart from a 90 degree flywheel locking pin used on the 4x4 cars, the kit is identical to the 540 and 740.

The engine map can be installed in the Range Rover though to give the same power and torque as the BMW.

BMW owned Rover at the time of development and wanted the X5 to have a head start on the RR.

8Tech.

[2.5pi]

I'm puzzled I thought the earlier lump was single vanos and the later one double ? FWIW...

[virgil]

Good old wiki does seem to suggest the m62 was used in the RR and the n62 in the six series...power outputs also suggest this is confirmed...

I love the engine in my 6...it's a lovely sweet engine...was just wondering if the RR could be brought up to the same power easily with a remap etc...was guessing different cams/induction, but not a complete generation of engine change.

I guess the m62 is the same in the 540 and 740, but not the 6 series and later 5s?

[virgil]

Good old wiki does seem to suggest the m62 was used in the RR and the n62 in the six series...power outputs also suggest this is confirmed...

I love the engine in my 6...it's a lovely sweet engine...was just wondering if the RR could be brought up to the same power easily with a remap etc...was guessing different cams/induction, but not a complete generation of engine change.

I guess the m62 is the same in the 540 and 740, but not the 6 series and later 5s?

[Jobbo]

The N62 had Valvetronic heads which is the main difference from the M62. It was put in the E53 X5 from the facelift, all 645Ci, E65 7-series, E60 5-series etc. Never into the Range Rover.