K series 1.8 inlet manifold set up

What are the advantages of fitting an MGF 135 inlet manifold and throttle body to a FL1 with the st'd plastic inlet set up?

Is there any advantage when in a Freelander?
My understanding is LR tweaked the K Series for maximum torque at lowest RPM. Fitting MG parts may increase the HP but at cost of torque which is more important with the heavier car. My VVC MGF revs nicely up to 7000rpm and gives around 145hp but isn't torquey so you need to rev it to get the performance.

Of course I could be wrong and often am.

Alibro said:

Is there any advantage when in a Freelander?
My understanding is LR tweaked the K Series for maximum torque at lowest RPM. Fitting MG parts may increase the HP but at cost of torque which is more important with the heavier car. My VVC MGF revs nicely up to 7000rpm and gives around 145hp but isn't torquey so you need to rev it to get the performance.

Of course I could be wrong and often am.

Click to expand...

No point in fitting the 52mm throttle body to the Freelander engine. The alloy inlet manifold flange seals better than the plastic manifold though. It uses a proper gasket instead of the rubber thing the plastic manifold uses. Power wise there's nothing to have.
The 52mm TB fitted to my MGF VVC made 6 Bhp over the standard 48mm TB. However my VVC with its cold air pickup and decent exhaust was already making 165 Bhp. Adding the 52mm TB nudged this up to 171 Bhp. The most noticeable thing is that of perceived throttle response. The 52mm TB having a 15 % larger flow capacity gives a 15 % reduction in pedal angle, making response feel better. In reality the total flow for a given power remains the same. It's only the perception that changes.

The VVC engine makes more torque than the 1.8 Freelander. It's just when that torque is delivered that is different.

So a couple of points on this...

There are two different alloy intake manifolds, the VVC and the TF 135 - which have different port sizes.

Using the VVC intake may lose you a handful of hp as it means there will be a hard step from the manifold to the head, which will cause the air to roll off the lip and lower performance.

The MG TF135 is a perfect fit to the standard head - because of the way the air flows through it you'll find that throttle response is a little better but you won't really see a massive boost in hp.

The reason I swapped one on was actually to cure the reliability of the stupid plastic manifold rubber gasket!

You can fit a VVC and probably won't notice much of a difference and you'll not leak water again!

Good info' Thank you all.

If you study the basic engine specifications listed for
the 120 and 135 PS engines above, you'll note that
there is just one difference between them: the cam
shafts. The cams in the 135 are a
good deal warmer: 0.7mm more lift and a much
longer open duration. The consequence of this is an
engine that breaths far better, the 135 PS
engine produces all those extra 15 horses at engine
speeds greater than 4000rpm. Perhaps the greatest
surprise is how little penalty is paid in terms of lowengine-
speed torque. Certainly some pulling power is
lost between1700-2700rpm, but whether this is
noticeable out on the road is debateable.

118ps K4

Power: 118bhp (120PS) @ 5500rpm
Torque: 118lb.ft (160Nm) @ 3000rpm
Capacity: 1796cc
Weight: 104kg
Cylinder head: 4 valve per cylinder
Inlet valve diameter: 27.5mm
Exhaust valve diameter: 24mm
Compression ratio: 10.5:1
Stroke: 89mm
Bore: 80mm

Cam information:
Inlet: opens 12º BTDC, closes 52º ABDC;
lift 8.8mm
Exhaust: opens 52º BBDC, closes
12ºATDC; lift 8.8mm


135ps K4

Power: 134bhp (136PS) @ 6750rpm
Torque: 122lb.ft (165Nm) @ 5000rpm
Capacity: 1796cc
Weight: 104kg
Cylinder head: 4 valve per cylinder
Inlet valve diameter: 27.5mm
Exhaust valve diameter: 24mm
Compression ratio: 10.5:1
Stroke: 89mm
Bore: 80mm

Cam information:
Inlet: opens 11º BTDC, closes 61º ABDC;
lift 9.5mm
Exhaust: opens 51º BBDC, closes 21ºATDC; lift 9.5mm
Valve open duration: 252º


........anyway just changing intake manifold and throttle does not get more torque and bh

I suspect LR predicted most drivers wouldn't often use higher revs in the Freelander so went for the best torque and mpg compromise. That's pretty much how ours is driven 99% of the time. It's a pity they didn't offer the Turbo k series as an option.

Alibro said:

It's a pity they didn't offer the Turbo k series as an option.

Click to expand...

This might be an option....

www.phantomsuperchargers.com

Lol, yeah, if you don't mind spending 3 times the value of the car on it.

I think they were talking in the region of $1,400 US.

Must admit I didn't read it probably. Just saw supercharger and assumed it was a normal one. Never heard of this type before. Mind you it would still be the same price as I paid for the car. Anything coming from the states is usually the same price sterling as it is dollars.

These manifolds are all much of a muchness, and depends what you're trying to get out of the car...

The manifolds themselves won't give you any real world gains other than that they just flow a bit better at mid rpms.

Trying to rice up a freelander K series is a bit pointless unless you're starting to go down the turbo route, and even then danger Will Robinson. If you want a performance edition, grab a T series, bolt it to the L series gearbox, grab an emerald ecu and get on with scaring the **** out of the local boy racers.

Pushing the NA K much further in the freelander is pointless - you'll just wreck the drivability by pushing the torque band up into the shaking-itself-to-bits rev range.

The only reason (for me) for fitting the TF135/VVC manifold is to cure a persistent coolant leak.

Try getting your hands on a Warrior K series.

Warrior Automotive Research & Design were the 1st engine development company (even beating Rover & Lotus) to get the N/A K to over 200bhp, along with more than enough torque for a Freelander.

All steel billet crank, continuing rods & custom ground steel cams to Warriors own specifications (depending on what car the engine was going in & whether road, circuit or rally). Custom inlet manifold with slide throttle & Webber Alpha injection, mapping done on their own dynamometer, again to suit application & much more.

All the while I worked there, we never had 1 fail, even on full race spec & tune. Not sure if the company that bought Warrior still offers the K in those specs.

Surprisingly, even full race spec was quite driveable on the road in traffic

B34R said:

These manifolds are all much of a muchness, and depends what you're trying to get out of the car...

The manifolds themselves won't give you any real world gains other than that they just flow a bit better at mid rpms.

Trying to rice up a freelander K series is a bit pointless unless you're starting to go down the turbo route, and even then danger Will Robinson. If you want a performance edition, grab a T series, bolt it to the L series gearbox, grab an emerald ecu and get on with scaring the **** out of the local boy racers.

Pushing the NA K much further in the freelander is pointless - you'll just wreck the drivability by pushing the torque band up into the shaking-itself-to-bits rev range.

The only reason (for me) for fitting the TF135/VVC manifold is to cure a persistent coolant leak.

Click to expand...

It's not easy to fit a T series in the Freelander as there is no off the shelf gearbox. The L series Freelander gearbox doesn't fit the M, T or KV6 bell housing. LR changed the L series engine adapter plate to match the one PG1 gearbox bell casting .
A turbo K series is the way to go using Rover 75, MG ZT 160 turbo, manifolds and pistons. An after market ECU is the easiest way to get it running.

Nodge68 said:

It's not easy to fit a T series in the Freelander as there is no off the shelf gearbox. The L series Freelander gearbox doesn't fit the M, T or KV6 bell housing. LR changed the L series engine adapter plate to match the one PG1 gearbox bell casting .
A turbo K series is the way to go using Rover 75, MG ZT 160 turbo, manifolds and pistons. An after market ECU is the easiest way to get it running.

Click to expand...

That's quite interesting, I thought the L and the T series had pretty much identical blocks, other than oil sprayers on the L and different head bolt locations?

Did LR bodge the L series on the Freelander? I'm pretty sure I've heard that the T and L are interchangeable, unless its just an urban myth~

B34R said:

That's quite interesting, I thought the L and the T series had pretty much identical blocks, other than oil sprayers on the L and different head bolt locations?

Did LR bodge the L series on the Freelander? I'm pretty sure I've heard that the T and L are interchangeable, unless its just an urban myth~

Click to expand...

You may be right - but I wouldn't expect it to be. The T series was derived from the M, O and (possibly) B Series engines. The L was derived from a Perkins engine. So unless Perkins took a block off Leyland at some point, I can't see them having much similar DNA.

However, they all use PG1 gearboxes and each have their own adaptor plates for the PG1. So presumably you could hook a T series adaptor to a L series PG1 - but the ratios would be pants and I'm not sure how the IRD would bolt up.

It may be easier to interchange T & L Series for FWD.

GrumpyGel said:

You may be right - but I wouldn't expect it to be. The T series was derived from the M, O and (possibly) B Series engines. The L was derived from a Perkins engine. So unless Perkins took a block off Leyland at some point, I can't see them having much similar DNA.

However, they all use PG1 gearboxes and each have their own adaptor plates for the PG1. So presumably you could hook a T series adaptor to a L series PG1 - but the ratios would be pants and I'm not sure how the IRD would bolt up.

It may be easier to interchange T & L Series for FWD.

Click to expand...

Doing a spot of reading...

It all started with the O series, which you could get in petrol or diesel, and were virtually identical blocks.

Perkins took the O series and developed the Perkins Prima diesel from it (or it just became known as this, a little unclear) This was then further developed into the L series.

The O series was also developed into the M, then T series petrols with few block changes.

So, you have O-->PP-->L AND O-->M-->T meaning both engines have effectively the same development root.

As for the gearing, the longer diesel gearing would be a massive advantage, I wouldn't want to try and put 200+hp through the K series 1st gear, its massively too short to,be useful! If you've got the torque, you want lengthy gears or you're going to spend more time changing gear than accelerating.

I'm tempted to pick up a K turbo lump at the end of summer as a winter rebuild project, I hear they may fit with a minimum of wiggling with a V6 nose?

1st gear in a PG1 is more than man enough for 200bhp

Alas, I suspect my turbo'd Freelander may be up for sale in a short while :Cry:

B34R said:

That's quite interesting, I thought the L and the T series had pretty much identical blocks, other than oil sprayers on the L and different head bolt locations?

Did LR bodge the L series on the Freelander? I'm pretty sure I've heard that the T and L are interchangeable, unless its just an urban myth~

Click to expand...

If you are using a Rover FWD PG1 gearbox the Rover L series and T/ M and KV6 are all interchangeable. However the PG1 gearbox fitted to the Freelander used the K series bell pattern. This ment the Freelander L series needed a different adapter plate to mate the L series to the K series 4WD Freelander box. The L series block being an old design, uses an alloy adapter plate between the block and the gearbox bell. This alloy plate also carries the injection pump. The T and M series, also being based on the same old design use a steel adapter plate between the block and gearbox. The K4 and KV6 were a bit different to Rover's normal design, in that they had the adapter plate as part of the block casting. This gave an increase in drive unit rigidity, reduced weight and cost.

As an aside to this - when I was underneath my L Series at the weekend, I noticed a foam 'pad' between the block/plate/gearbox running underneath. It seams a strange place to find a foam pad, is this supposed to be there or has someone wedged it in there for some reason (eg to collect an oil leak) ?