[Dakar]

Trying to decide which of these suppliers for a 4.6 long engine with flanged liners and performance heads for a new Range Rover Classic project.

Turner offers the ductile iron liners and gasflowed heads plus new rocker gear for around the same price as a V8Developments stage 2 engine (but without the rocker gear). Have only heard good things about both, though V8D engines seem to be more sports car oriented than 4x4s.

Which would you choose to supply a top hatted 4.6?
I intend fitting a Crower 50229 cam and Ford 302 injectors to the 14 CUX along with a Scorcher distribtour to whichever engine I end up getting.

 

[RRToadHall]

If you want to go 4.6 for a block I don't think you going to be able to go with a distributor and CUX system. With a full 4.0/4.6 built engine you loose distributor, standard oil pump, and most mechanical abilities. You also loose most of these with a 3.9/4.2 built block as well. It sounds more like you should do a custom built 215 system from scratch. Although, with any amount of money anything is possible...What exactly are you hunting for as an end product?

 

[Dakar]

We're using an interim 3.9 front cover with the integral post 94 oil pump and distributor hole in the top. It's off a 95 Disco. Bolts right up to the 4.6 block.
We want a 4.6 RRC with considerably more torque than the 3.9, ie. around 300 ftlb. At this stage I'm leaning towards the Turner engine as they have an impeccable reputation for build quality.

 

[stuart460]

have a look at my site http://armsonae.webs.com/ have a look at the exocet spec package i build is done with top hat liners has gut wrenching power and is a in a d2 on a standard ecu and gas! if you are putting it in a rrc then the ecu will need to be chipped as well ball park figure is @320 bhp but the rolling road will confirm this in the next few weeks.
drop me a pm cheers

 

[p76rangie]

We're using an interim 3.9 front cover with the integral post 94 oil pump and distributor hole in the top. It's off a 95 Disco. Bolts right up to the 4.6 block.
We want a 4.6 RRC with considerably more torque than the 3.9, ie. around 300 ftlb. At this stage I'm leaning towards the Turner engine as they have an impeccable reputation for build quality.

You will need to use a spacer on the crank pulley as the 4.0/4.6 has a longer crank and will not tighten up with the 3.9 timing cover. But it is no big deal. I have ran a 4.6 with the old original timing covers as well as the interim 3.9 ones.

 

[Dakar]

You're correct, a 20mm spacer is required to account for the difference in length between the 3.9 and 4.6 crank snouts (70 vs 90mm). Other than that it's a straight swap. As for the 14CUX, it will handle the increased capacity as is, but for optimum performance a Tornado Systems chip is best fitted into the Lucas ecu. Fortunately this is a well-trodden path, thanks mainly to Mark Adams in the UK, who has developed software to suit various applications. Provided the ecu has the EPROM socket installed (some don't) it's a relatively straightforward and not too pricey upgrade, followed by a comprehensive setting up of the mixture, ignition timing, etc.

 

[john-sussex]

You're correct, a 20mm spacer is required to account for the difference in length between the 3.9 and 4.6 crank snouts (70 vs 90mm). Other than that it's a straight swap. As for the 14CUX, it will handle the increased capacity as is, but for optimum performance a Tornado Systems chip is best fitted into the Lucas ecu. Fortunately this is a well-trodden path, thanks mainly to Mark Adams in the UK, who has developed software to suit various applications. Provided the ecu has the EPROM socket installed (some don't) it's a relatively straightforward and not too pricey upgrade, followed by a comprehensive setting up of the mixture, ignition timing, etc.

Agreed, i have a new style 4.6 (ish) using the front cover etc from the original engine. Pulls well and never misses a beat! :dance:
Got mine from RPI.