Discovery 2 LS Conversion
#272
Love what you’re doing, but I’m holding out for when you can get the gen V engines in the Disco/RRC. There is a company called Mo Tech that’s fitting Gen V engines into JK wranglers. He has experience with Gen 3, 4 and Gen V and seems to think that the way forward is with the Gen V and the 8 speed transmission. So if I were to invest into a swap into a disco, then I’d really wanna use a Gen V and the 8L90 transmission. I’m really hoping that if you choose to develop the Gen V as a swap option for the disco, that you would do it paired with a GM gearbox. Here is a link to the video where he talks about it...
Second, for a kit, even the Gen 3 swap is close to the limit of what most enthusiasts could do at home without a lift. The Gen V swap would be quite a bit more complicated. However, again, I could see shops doing it in-house.
Don't think that I am knocking this idea, I like it, but there are some practical limitations. We have looked into going this route in the future, and I am sure that we will pursue it down the road -- we should actually be able to electrically support it now. I probably would not go with the 8-speed, but jump straight to the new 10-speed. The 8-speed will have a relatively short production run; I think the 10-speed will be around for a while. It comes down to build goals: if you want a solid replacement for the Rover V8, using the ZF and a Gen 3 LS engine is a great option, fairly straightforward to install, and competitively priced with a Turner engine. If you want to make the Discovery into the absolute best possible vehicle it can be, then the 6.2L and 10-speed may be an attractive option.
#273
When pulling the 4.6 is it necessary to pull the heads in order to gain access to the top bolts that bolt the block to the transmission? Or can you get to those without removing the heads when you lower the engine (after removing the engine mounts)?
Also, are you guys leaving the steering pump lines attached to then engine and pump and removing all together or leaving the pump and lines in the engine bay?
Thanks!
Also, are you guys leaving the steering pump lines attached to then engine and pump and removing all together or leaving the pump and lines in the engine bay?
Thanks!
#274
When pulling the 4.6 is it necessary to pull the heads in order to gain access to the top bolts that bolt the block to the transmission? Or can you get to those without removing the heads when you lower the engine (after removing the engine mounts)?
Also, are you guys leaving the steering pump lines attached to then engine and pump and removing all together or leaving the pump and lines in the engine bay?
Thanks!
Also, are you guys leaving the steering pump lines attached to then engine and pump and removing all together or leaving the pump and lines in the engine bay?
Thanks!
It is easiest to remove the power steering lines and pull the power steering pump with the engine.
#275
You have to pull the upper intake, but you do not need to remove the heads. The top bell housing bolts are difficult, but not impossible with the heads on. Once you take out the motor mounts and lower the engine, there is a fair amount of room to get at the bolts.
It is easiest to remove the power steering lines and pull the power steering pump with the engine.
It is easiest to remove the power steering lines and pull the power steering pump with the engine.
#276
The 6.0s are pushing past the recommended torque limit of the transmission. We've been looking at options with a 6.0, but at a minimum the transmission cooler would need to be upgraded. It also would be advisable to use the larger torque converter from the P38. Definitely would want to use a 4HP24 instead of a 4HP22.
6.0s are often a lot more expensive than the 5.3s as well. It's definitely a better value to go with the 5.3. If I was going for more performance I would go with a 5.3 plus an aftermarket truck camshaft.
6.0s are often a lot more expensive than the 5.3s as well. It's definitely a better value to go with the 5.3. If I was going for more performance I would go with a 5.3 plus an aftermarket truck camshaft.
And side note, if ANY of you think your rover is slow and you DON'T live at altitude, you need to quit your whining because you already have almost 40 more HP to use than I do!
#277
Lets just say your rover will spend its entire life in the altitude range of 5000-13,000 feet. so you're looking at a minimum power loss of 15% and as high as 40% going over passes. How about then? I would think then the 6.0 would perform at altitude like the 5.3 at sea level, so in theory it wouldn't push the power limits. Thoughts?
And side note, if ANY of you think your rover is slow and you DON'T live at altitude, you need to quit your whining because you already have almost 40 more HP to use than I do!
And side note, if ANY of you think your rover is slow and you DON'T live at altitude, you need to quit your whining because you already have almost 40 more HP to use than I do!
Regardless, you will want to make sure the transmission stays in its proper temperature range -- I'd get a second or larger cooler. I would stick with a 4HP24 and consider the larger torque converter from the P38 (still working on this option).
#278
I think in that situation, you would likely be fine. The life of the transmission can be significantly influenced by how you drive. With proper care and no abuse, I doubt it would be a problem.
Regardless, you will want to make sure the transmission stays in its proper temperature range -- I'd get a second or larger cooler. I would stick with a 4HP24 and consider the larger torque converter from the P38 (still working on this option).
Regardless, you will want to make sure the transmission stays in its proper temperature range -- I'd get a second or larger cooler. I would stick with a 4HP24 and consider the larger torque converter from the P38 (still working on this option).
#280
The following users liked this post:
ACEngineer (02-24-2019)