Sorry, I missed the fact you have a manual trans. Now this is just an idea, but there are different spacers for the CKP based on what style tranny. And you would have pushed in the clutch around the time this is going on... Attached page with spacer spec. Don't know with all the work if a CKP sensor got swapped out.

Also attached are GEMs factory manual and the Bosch manual (which shows scope patterns for the CKP), in case you don't have them.

Last, for background, see LAND ROVER. This fellow went thru the improve it myself project of converting a carb Rover to fuel injection, fabbed many parts, tests, etc. Perhaps review of what he did and photos will prompt you to find the missing link in your project. As thorough as you have been, it has to be something very small and obscure.

Keep the forum posted, and keep up the good fight.

 

I mentioned in reply #36 of hard highway run in 4th and 5th gear as well reply #39 able to bump start a blessing having a 5 speed.
I needed a 4 door vehicle having young kids vs the 2 door 84 Montero Sport 5-speed, manual hubs, my V-6 5 speed install vs the 2.6L four. So sad it only had rear lap belts plus 2 door was why the D1 replaced it. If it weren't for the Rover's aluminum V8 and knowing this engine back in the 60's plus a 5-speed I wouldn't of purchased a D1 especially with a slush box.

The above reply files I opened up relate to 96 onwards OB2 vehicles, i'm OB1 for a reason hence why I purchased a used 95 OB1 D1 in 1-2000.
Wifes friend had a 97 with coil pack failures then the slush box failure, convinced me enough besides hating slush boxes with the added lack of little performance it already had.

There was a reason why the 98 D1 came out with a 4.6L engine, sad but too late in the production game against other SUV's offered back then.

Off to research the details and specs of replacement parts off other brands of manufactured vehicles for parts replacements on my 95 D1.
Carl.....~~=o&o>.....

 

4.6L in a factory '98 DI? Whatchoo talkin' 'bout Willis?

 

Heres something with the 14CUX version in it, and it contains some electrical and pressure specs for various components. Will look for the 14CUX manual.

https://landroverforums.com/forum/at...ionsystems-pdf

see Rover 14CUX Hot Wire Mass Flow EFI: Service and Troubleshooting for additional details and pix

and How Glen Towery Installs Rover EFI on MGB V8 Conversions

and one more http://www.g33.co.uk/fuel_injection.htm (seems like might be the best)

and attached 14CU manual, in four parts, first came on the Range Rover.

Also see Land Rover Manuals for more manual choices.

 

Savannah, any and all added specs are a plus to work out the puzzle.

Here's a bit on injector testing process, gives you an idea when building your own; http://fuelinjectorman.com/OurService.html

With solid rain all week until next tuesday I haven't had any under hood time beyond checking the plenum vacuum and rail pressure again. Rail pressure isn't stable.
Engine at idle whth vac gauge on the fuel regulator vacuum port I have a idle reading of 15" Hg, snapping the throttle open reading hits 0 Hg (zero) plenum vacuum.
Too much rain to do more plenum vacuum readings with engine under loaded conditions at different rpm's.
With a few spare Rover regulators (two new one used) pressure fed off my injector pressure chamber regulated pressure applied plus a vacuum pump I had readings when bypassing started;

0" Hg (no vacuum applied like hitting full throttle) bypass began at 37 psi.

15" Hg (same as at idle) bypass began at 29 psi.

25" Hg (vacuum test like on a carbed engine on decel) bypass began at 22.75 psi.

Only with the vacuum hose disconnected as with full throttle demand would the regulators reading come within Rover's specs of 34 to 38 psi.
Rover specs mentioned readings below or above these set specs to replace the regulator.
Right from start Rover regulators read below factory spec, this causing a weaker injector spray pattern with poor atomization.

I tested three other spare regulators identical looking to Rover but for a non Rover brand vehicle, all three readings were almost identical;

0" Hg (no vacuum applied like hitting full throttle) bypassed at 43.00 psi, one read 43.25 psi the odd one a 0.25 psi difference increase.

15" Hg bypass began at 37.50 psi (Rover idle reading within spec Hg)

25" Hg (vacuum test like on a carbed engine on decel) bypass began at 30.25 psi.

By changing regulators from 2.5 to 3.0 Bar regulator testing the readings come closer to within Rover factory specs.

Next to do road tests checking pressure readings under load with the old Rover regulator then install a 3.0 Bar regulator then retest again under load.

Carl.....~~=o&o>.....

 

You may be closing in on it. I atached a Rover publication that shows the differences between various versions of the injection system, along with spec pressures and such.

On the fuel pump, it shows 2.4 - 2.6 bar spec.
On the stock injectors it show full flow at minimum 2.5 bar
On TPS is shows the voltages that could be measured (varys due to adaptaive change)
On ECT it shows various values

But for the fuel rail temp sensor, it shows one ohms value for a GEMS and another value for the 14CU series. This is a place where if a sensor for one got swapped with another, things would be different. If electrical connection was oxidized, resistance would be higher and ECU fooled into thinking fuel rail was cold. It is also a place where you could parallel some additional resistance, to lower the effective resistance, and fool the ECU into thinking it was warm enough to initiate the hot restart purge cycle. Or even as testing add a resistor in parallel controlled by a switch - drop the effective resistance to 170 - 150 ohms, start, if no stumble, release test switch. Just thoughts. Rover provides clues, but not the small details.

https://landroverforums.com/forum/at...ionsystems-pdf

 

Savannah,
you made me laugh as I already cut apart a defective coolant and fuel rail temp sensors and kept the terminal ends allowing me to add pots to perform the next series of tests.
First I must get the fuel rail pressure bumped back up to within a common sense range.

Thanks bud for the British V8 site.
I read they also had done their homework on intake tract runner lengths as they are not equal for a wider operating TQ rpm range.
Their 5,100 rpm max TQ rpm is the first shock wave numbers not the weaker shadow of the secondary sonic waves.

Carl

 

Well, with the changes, you may have moved the temp point at which the increase in pulse width is needed to purge the injectors. You have not changed the size of the line, but you have changed the flow thru injectors and will soon change fuel pressure. So your logic that adjustment of the fuel temp signal seems practical. I don't recall if the fuel temp is used only in calculating when to "purge" the fuel or if it also is used to constantly impact fuel trim.

Now if you get out your die grinder and start hogging out ports, then the jelly gets nailed somewhere else on the tree. May want to resolve this before other changes.

 

After rethinking the past 12 years of Rover hiccups and notes (hell a thick book) with simple cures I went back starting with checking the exhaust manifolds to heads torque. This an on going 60 day recheck thing.
When the 4.6 was installed this great dealership also forgot to install the manifold bolt locking plates hence rechecking them as I never installed these locks. I had to replace the motor mounts as the dealership also did not reinstall the heat shields, oh so nice these factory trained techs. Cooked the rubber mounts, hell torn one apart being aggressive on the throttle.
Farther on down at the collector flange to down pipe flange another area that can have small leaks causing all kinds of trouble for Mr. O2 to read sending the proper F/A signal the engine requires to injectors, this also causing very poor running conditions.
I mill filed the down pipe flanges that are warped from factory welding but milled the manifold flanges as I was able to mount and mill them.
With all joints sealing properly no exhaust leaks out or air being sucked in.

Today I removed the fuel regulator and tested, it went bonkers with random lack of regulated control 4 to 7 psi, adding to this it was chattering when becoming unseated and seated again.

With my raised intake system the regulator is easy to replace with a NIB 3.0 Bar regulator after I did pressure vs vacuum signal testing on new.

Not only this cured from the hot restart problems idle now comes down much quicker to the ECU set idle rpm's. Actually RPI's chip set rpm's.
In the past it took 10-20 seconds once dropped to 1,100 to slowly return back to base idle, now it returns within 3-4 seconds, this means a lot with engine braking especally a 5 speed plus the ease of shifting in matching rpm's.
At hot idle i'm reading solid 37.50 psi, within Rover's specs 33.99 to 38 psi, punch the throttle vacuum signal drop increasing rail pressure to 44 psi with engine under load then drops down as manifold vacuum increases again.

A before manifold vacuum of 15" Hg best now at 16-16.15" Hg off a
digital pressure gauge known to be accurate.
I had to choke down my adjustable restrictor more I installed in the IAC hose as the cold fast idle as well hot restart rpm's are now higher than I set in the past. This is another added item not found in the books. Cold start idle rpm's limited to 850-875 rpm's no cold start high rpm's with wear factor. The pre-oiler another engine saving item vs Rover's long cold daily dry starts or oil change.

Idle is now holding solid, hot restarts quickly a couple cylinders over compression.
Cold starts one to two cylinders over, takes only a flick of the key to start.
I'd safe to say it runs better now than ever and it already ran great in the past plus it passes smog.

A spare set of Moroso Ultra 40 Race Wires (40 ohms / ft) will replace the Crane Fire Wires (25 ohms / ft) as they are old but still working and metering out good. Make the rain stop!

Prost,

Carl

 

So this old FPR was the source of the "twitching" fuel pressure all along you think?