My new-to-me 6.2L Disco

[David Harris]

Yeah, there are options out there -- the issue I can foresee is getting the intake past the coolant and washer fluid boxes. There really isn't much room or depth unless I really snake the intake.

I think I'd consider taking out the washer fluid box and replacing with a much smaller reservoir. It's definitely not essential to have 2 gallons of washer fluid sloshing around in there.

I saw a guy who took a piece of PVC pipe with threaded caps on it and made it into a washer reservoir. He bolted it in down under the rad somewhere, then just extended the hoses down to it. On the Disco, though, the pump is integral with the tank to an extent, so you may need to use another pump, like one from a Range Rover Classic which is stand alone.

 

[LtFuzz]

that is pretty cool.

are those motors pretty close to the same size as the 4.0 V8 and 4.6 V8?

It would be pretty cool to have a oil burner in my Range Rover:elkgrin:

Not sure on the dimensions. The oil pan doesn't hang particularly low and it fits in the engine bay very well, as you can see. I have two batteries in the bay, mounted behind each headlight, which you can't see, and there is still plenty of room.

It has a very well-built custom radiator (3 core? I'll have to check) and I think they saved a bunch of space with that.

 

[LtFuzz]

I saw a guy who took a piece of PVC pipe with threaded caps on it and made it into a washer reservoir. He bolted it in down under the rad somewhere, then just extended the hoses down to it. On the Disco, though, the pump is integral with the tank to an extent, so you may need to use another pump, like one from a Range Rover Classic which is stand alone.

I wonder if I could just live without it... I can't even remember the last time I used window-washer fluid.

 

[Wander]

it you get into a dusty/muddy trail or have something splatter onto your windshield while on the hwy you would miss the washer and it could be a potential safety issue so I would keep it. Is a snorkel something you really need? If so and you go the P/S route I can see using a flex pipe to fit between the washer and coolant and into the intake or maybe you could cut an access slot into the top of the hood and run the snorkel from the cowl.

 

[dieselcruiserhead]

The biggest issue is altitude. They lose about 3%+ of power for every 1000 feet so at 7000-8000 feet you are at a 25% loss or 15% for most base mountain area elevations like Utah or Arizona or Colorado. On my last naturally aspirated diesel I actually thought something was wrong when I got to Colorado coming from the east, and it was smoking.

I have friends who swear by them and some who dislike as well. If you can start shopping for a turbo or start looking for a home brew setup. You can assume volume of similar diesels is a good starting point. The Holset turbos off Cummins are great. It will bring out a whole new truck and that gets rid of altitude problems.

 

[David Harris]

The biggest issue is altitude. They lose about 3%+ of power for every 1000 feet so at 7000-8000 feet you are at a 25% loss or 15% for most base mountain area elevations like Utah or Arizona or Colorado. On my last naturally aspirated diesel I actually thought something was wrong when I got to Colorado coming from the east, and it was smoking.

I have friends who swear by them and some who dislike as well. If you can start shopping for a turbo or start looking for a home brew setup. You can assume volume of similar diesels is a good starting point. The Holset turbos off Cummins are great. It will bring out a whole new truck and that gets rid of altitude problems.

That's a great point. I had a GMC Suburban with a NA 6.2 and it was fine on the flatlands in Colorado, but when I took it into the mountains, I set up a nice smokescreen for everyone behind me, and had much less power. These motors are great candidates for a nice turbo install. I would go with the Gale Banks setup as it's made for the NA 6.2 and was a factory option back in the eighties on these motors. However, the real problem is that your going to be putting out around 400 ft lbs of torque with a turbo and that R380 is not going to take the strain for long, since it's technically only rated to 380 Nm, or around 280 ft lbs, and your already at that. For my Isuzu build, I'm installing a GM NV4500 mated to the LT230 in the Disco. This would be a relatively easy upgrade for your Disco as its stands, since you already have a GM motor and manual trans. The only question is driveline length. You may need new driveshafts. The NV4500 is a much better tranny than the R380. It can handle big block torque and has a nice granny first with tall overdrive. You can keep the 3.54's in the diffs with this low gear. It's a pretty short tranny too, so the driveline won't have to move much.

 

[ArmyRover]

Nice looking install, it makes me think I need to wonder out to the motorpool and do some parts shopping

 

[LtFuzz]

Yeah the Banks turbo is an option. Just eyeballing it looks like it shouldn't be too much of an issue fitting it. However Banks seems to get mixed reviews online. Another option is a used turbo from a 6.5L.

But at this point this motor has more than enough power. I'll see how she runs in Sierra Vista, AZ (5400 ft) when I get out there. No immediate need or or plans to juice the motor -- if this really is a milspec 6.2 putting out milspec numbers, than I'm already pretty close to what a basic turbo will add to the Chevy 6.2.

 

[mongosd2]

So what transmission and transfer case or did I miss that?

 

[David Harris]

Yeah the Banks turbo is an option. Just eyeballing it looks like it shouldn't be too much of an issue fitting it. However Banks seems to get mixed reviews online. Another option is a used turbo from a 6.5L.

But at this point this motor has more than enough power. I'll see how she runs in Sierra Vista, AZ (5400 ft) when I get out there. No immediate need or or plans to juice the motor -- if this really is a milspec 6.2 putting out milspec numbers, than I'm already pretty close to what a basic turbo will add to the Chevy 6.2.

Yeah. Just run it as it is for a while and see how it does. At 5400 ft I think you'll be fine based on my experience at 5280 ft on the front range in Colorado with my 6.2. It will only be when you go up into the high mountains above 8000 ft or so that you will see a real difference. The problem with using the 6.5 turbo is that it puts out too much boost for the compression ratio on the 6.2. So, to use it you have to change the heads as well. The Gale Banks, on the other hand, is made to work with the stock 6.2 and actually outperforms the 6.5 turbo according to many.

 

[LtFuzz]

So what transmission and transfer case or did I miss that?

R380 mated to what I assume is an LT230 with apparently a Mark's 4x4 of Australia adapter kit.

I don't have my floor jack and jackstands and all that with me here, gotta wait till I get home to GA to figure out exactly what's up.

 

[David Harris]

R380 mated to what I assume is an LT230 with apparently a Mark's 4x4 of Australia adapter kit.

No doubt that's what you've got. That kit even has motor mounts that just bolt to the stock Rover mounts, so the whole thing is as easy as it could be. There's a version for the auto HP22 as well. The kit works for any older Chevy V8, and the 6.2/6.5 because it shares the bolt pattern and mounts with the gas motors.

 

[mongosd2]

Let me know when you get out to SV...I'm in Tucson

 

[4Rescue]

Interesting and certainly UNIQUE Rover for sure. I am unfortunately in the HATE camp with the GM 6.2L N/A diesel. I'm sure in a rover it might do a better job then in anything it was ever put in from the factory. The guys who did the conversion sound like they did an amazing job of factoring in the weight of the engine (suspension/spring capacity) and chasis needs (Brakes etc) but as many say I would REALLY watch those Rover axles. An FJ80 Diff-swap plus some upgraded Axle Shafts would solve ALOT of those issues eh.

I like the stance/height too eh, it's begging for some taller tires now

that's pretty cool, David. thanks for posting that info. I might actually consider a Disco if it had a Chevy motor in it.

Man... I have no doubt mate that if we met in person we get along smashingly... But automotively we are like oil and water eh To me Landrover + Chevy prducts makes me think it will just spontaneously combust going down the road. I HATE GM products so much it's not funny. I Hate the 6.2L N/A diesel just a little more eh used quite a few of them in work trucksa and frankly I've never felt a motor with less power that get's that bad of milage... and I drive a 22RE powered truck on 33's with 4.10 gears so...


Cheers

Dave

 

[David Harris]

but as many say I would REALLY watch those Rover axles.

The axle as a stock unit is a little stronger than a stock Dana 44, which was in the front of full size trucks with engines like the 6.2 and the 454, so I think it will be fine as long as the diff carriers are upgraded. Shafts would be great too. The frame is super strong on a Land Rover too. Four wheel discs as standard.
The 6.2 motor actually weighs no more than a Toyota 2F or 1HZ motor. In a Rover, the 6.2 is only a net gain of about 225 lbs over a 300 Tdi, all else being equal. The Perentie military Rovers, and some civilian ones in Aussie ran the 715 lb. Isuzu in them from stock on the same Rover axles and brakes without any problems, so the units are well proven to hold up under such weights.

The 6.2 was underpowered somewhat in full size GM trucks, but it was made for a trade off between economy and work ability, so that's no surprise. Regardless, it's quite a bit more powerful than the stock Rover V8, so we're ahead of the game anyway in this case.