Can a 4.6 engine using its original wiring work in a Defender

[bonkers24seven]

I have a good 4.6 Range Rover and would like to fit the engine to a Defender.

Has anyone managed to do this using the original ECU and wiring.

 

[Simon_CSK]

Which original ECU and wiring? Range Rover or Defender?

[bonkers24seven]

Using the complete Range Rover loom.

[Ed Poore]

I think the general consensus is it's too much work because all the ECUs talk to each other and the BECM will throw a hissy fit. Simplest option appears to be to fit a Megasquirt kit - @FridgeFreezer is your man for advice on that front.

[Simon_CSK]

1 hour ago, Ed Poore said:

I think the general consensus is it's too much work because all the ECUs talk to each other and the BECM will throw a hissy fit. Simplest option appears to be to fit a Megasquirt kit - @FridgeFreezer is your man for advice on that front.

That is my understanding too.

[garrycol]

Or just get the original 4.6 Thor ECU reprogrammed to run in isolation (Tornado Systems) - better than painful Megasquirt - which for a Thor needs to be MS3.

[FridgeFreezer]

1 hour ago, garrycol said:

Or just get the original 4.6 Thor ECU reprogrammed to run in isolation (Tornado Systems) - better than painful Megasquirt - which for a Thor needs to be MS3.

No it doesn't, MS1 is more than eneough to run anything.

[garrycol]

Not if you want the 4.6 knock sensors, the 4.6 O2 sensors, the 4.6 sequential ignition and 4.6 sequential injection.

[FridgeFreezer]

3 hours ago, garrycol said:

Not if you want the 4.6 knock sensors, the 4.6 O2 sensors, the 4.6 sequential ignition and 4.6 sequential injection.

Knock sensing is very much an optional luxury, and very hard to get right without factory levels of R&D - most installs never use it.

O2 sensors are an easy swap for universal ones, although I believe MS1 can happily handle Ti type sensors if that's your bag.

MS1 can do 8-pot wasted-spark no problem, and sequential injection makes so little difference as to be not worth it - most "sequential" systems are only sequential at low RPM for emissions and move to batch fire at higher RPM anyway.

What MS3 does bring is vast complexity that you don't need on a 70-year-old engine design. MS2 would give the mild smoothness improvement of higher resolution timers that you may also notice with MS3.

If you want to play with it for the hell of it by all means fit what you like, but MS3 is total overkill and if you just want the thing up & running there's less to mess up with MS1 or MS2.

[garrycol]

The OP said said he wants to use a 4.6 with original wiring - so that to me means a proper Thor running engine.  Yes MS1 will allow the engine to run but not to its potential.  There are far better options out there than the antiquated MS1.

[Ed Poore]

3 hours ago, garrycol said:

The OP said said he wants to use a 4.6 with original wiring - so that to me means a proper Thor running engine.  Yes MS1 will allow the engine to run but not to its potential.  There are far better options out there than the antiquated MS1.

He asked whether it was possible, not (at least my understanding) that he really must use the original loom. Obviously anything is possible it just depends on how much effort you want to go to.

[Escape]

You can use the original wiring with MS, that's what I'm doing. Replaced the connector with the VS37 for MS and only use the sensors it needs. The only real advantage the standard setup (either GEMS or Bosch) offers is a separate O2 sensor for each bank instead of a common one downstream.

A standard GEMS or Bosch ECU with the security disabled would also work, but likely to be just as expensive and while it might be easier to get it started, you don't have the flexibility MS can offer to tune the engine for your specific use.

Filip 

[FridgeFreezer]

8 hours ago, garrycol said:

Yes MS1 will allow the engine to run but not to its potential.

Got dyno plots to back that up or are we just p***ing in the wind because 3 must be 2 better than 1?

[garrycol]

No, have you - and I mean ones that of a Thor 4.6 complete with knock sensors and O2 sensors feeding into the ECU.  These items allow engines to run at a higher state of tune by keeping advance as high as possible and running as lean as possible - optimises power and torque for running conditions and provides best fuel consumption.

I appreciate you have a love for MS and in particularly MS1 but there are other ways to do things.

ENDAT

 

[Bigj66]

Getting an unlocked ECU to run a stand-alone THOR engine is simple enough but then don’t you end up having to modify the wiring loom to get it all to run? Isn’t this one of the reasons (besides tuning capability) that people opt for the MS kit?

As I understand it it’s not simply a case of putting power to the unlocked ECU is it? On the Tornado website they state that they can provide wiring details but that’s as far as it goes and I can’t find a pin out diagram to see what exactly is involved.

I’ve never come across a comparison between the performance of an unlocked standard ECU against a ‘standard tune’ (for general road use) MS kit but it would be interesting to see.

I think having this sort of information available would allow people to make more informed decisions as no doubt there are pros and cons to each system.
 

[Simon_CSK]

Personally running a P38 with Thor injections system and a lack of injection/computer knowledge causes me concern because I cannot just tinker. I am constantly looking for pointers. One of the biggest problems, and you see it on here regularly, is the immobiliser locking out the ignition. I know I can have that aspect disabled however that then throws up orther issues like having no alarm.

[FridgeFreezer]

10 hours ago, garrycol said:

No, have you - and I mean ones that of a Thor 4.6 complete with knock sensors and O2 sensors feeding into the ECU.  These items allow engines to run at a higher state of tune by keeping advance as high as possible and running as lean as possible - optimises power and torque for running conditions and provides best fuel consumption.

I appreciate you have a love for MS and in particularly MS1 but there are other ways to do things

I'm not the one making claims - show me an MS3 Rover V8 install with functioning knock sensing and I'll be impressed. In theory, yes, an MS3 can achieve a higher/more accurate tune, but on a basic old hector like a Rover V8 it's a lot harder to see where any major gains are going to be made. The Thor lump is absolutely nothing special, it's a tweaked inlet manifold with longer runners, that's it.

Your point about lambda sensors is spurious, TI sensors are NOT wideband, they just switch a fraction faster, so they don't allow you to fine-tune or "run leaner" any better than a Zirconia one - they're still just narrowband.

[Hybrid_From_Hell]

Just to add .

 

I have a number of customers running thors on our ms1 kits perfectly fine and dandy not problems at all 

Whilst the top end is a little bit whizzy its simple enougb to rid most of the overly complex whizzyness and the bottom end is the same as pretty much zny rover v8

 

Have a  mate running a e.t v belt with wildcat heads and  complete thir top end on our ms1 a d if goes like stink 😚🤣🤣🤣🤣