Whats the 4HP22 max power rating?
- Thread starter Viggen
- Start date
The blocks seem to hold up better with less dropped liner issues. Some trains of thought go with the molds for the block castings were worn out and allowed sloppier tolerances in the end of production blocks like the 03-04.
Another consideration is production volume. This is what I heard from a person who went through a factory training:ArmyRover said:
the early 3.5V8 blocks used to sit on the factory floor for weeks between casting and machining for liners.
This time dwindled to hours for the last run of 4.6s (vastly increased in quantity with their introduction in 03-04 D2s) - they didn't even have a chance to cool off, let alone relieve internal stresses.
The cooling system in D2 remained unchanged, which made the D2 4.6 run hotter than 4.0, and than 4.6 in the P38A. That, coupled with larger tolerances from the factory, did in the liners and head gaskets (besides the oil pump issues).
PM, the 4.6 gems p38 runs hotter than the 4.6 bosch p38 which runs hotter than the 4.6 D2. As I recall anyway, its been a while since i looked at the rave...
the liner issue is more to do with the manufacturing than the temp.
the liner issue is more to do with the manufacturing than the temp.
The temp consideration I got from Paul Schram and a local indy shop - both say there are fewer issues with dropped liners and blown head gaskets with P38s than with D2s. It could be attributed to slightly higher level of maintenance P38s used to get, though.
Well, there are a few P38 (95-98) 4.6 complete motors, tested and run with less than 90k miles on them available for a pretty good price. Am I absolutely required to run the HP24 on the back of the 4.6 though? I really dont want to screw with wiring or have to get the special stand alone controller from Ashcrofts to run the damn thing. If the bellhousings are the same and the flexplates are the same, the 3.9 converter could work unless the bellhousings are interchangable and I could run a larger 4.6 converter on the HP22 (one running on the upgraded internals for strength).
Viggen said:
If it were me, I would just get an HP22 upgraded to 24 internals. By the time you get a rebuilt 24 and go through all the trouble of getting it to work in your truck, you could do the Ashcroft, or even convert to a GM 4L80E and 4.8 with Marks Adapters, which is what I may do.
p m said:
I am not buying that at all. If that's true I think we would see 4.0L p38 trucks running significantly lower operating temps than their 4.6L counterparts. As far as no cooling system changes to D2 when it got the 4.6L engine, that isn't true either. Halfway through 02 they changed the front covers to delete engine oil coolers altogether and changed to a different fan clutch and began using a "D1 style" engine fan instead of the p38 style fan they had been using since 99.
As far as casting differences in the blocks, yes I totally believe that. I put a new 4.6 in a Range Rover a couple of years ago and before installing the heads I compared it side by side to the short block that had been removed from the truck. The original engine block was full of casting flash, the oil drainback holes in the valley looked terrible, etc. The new 4.6 shortblock (from AB) was far and away a better finished part, it had been cleaned up carefully before assembly, sharp edges were chamfered, I could not find any of the jagged casting marks that were everywhere on the other block, even the stamping on the crank looked better. Oh and by the way, that truck was a 2000 or 2001 model, so if the casting quality deteriorated leading up to the blocks they put in the 03/04 D2s then yes I could totally believe it had something to do with the high failure rates- but very late 02 P38 should have plenty of issues as well.
http://www.freddiestransmissions.com/aliastel said:
no affiliation and have never done business with them, all i know is hearsay.
Viggen said:
We 2 P38(1997) 4.6's sitting here. One is getting a full rebuild and waiting to go into a truck. The 1988 RRC has the other 4.6 in it, in front of an HP22. Its cam'd up and provides more than enough torque to snap aftermarket axles. This RRC originally came with a 3.9, was converted using the 3.9 sensors, and a 14cux ECU. I am swapping the front cover and whatnot over to a serpertine belt setup here in a few weeks. Both engines are/will be distributor drive.
If there is an upgrade for the HP22, I would definitely look into that. I can sorta feel the tranny not up to the full task as time goes on. Its been running great for 7 years now, but I think its wearing out.
You can get a diesel for $2.5k, plus another $1k in misc parts. That is, if you are doing the work.p m said:
I know the 24 was computer controlled and I have no interest whatsoever in making that one work. Im trying to remove as much electronics as possible. The plus with keeping the 22 is that nothing will change. No mount locations will need to be found and no linkages will need to be adjusted. The Marks kit does allow you to adapt the 230 to a GM trans but then you need to come up with the mounts and adjustment to the linkage to transfer case.
You think that the upgraded one could handle 200-210hp and 240-260 lb ft?
You think that the upgraded one could handle 200-210hp and 240-260 lb ft?
I know this is an ancient thread but I just want to add a note here: the 1988-1992 E32 M70 V12 BMW (aka: 750i/750iL) made 300hp stock and used the HP22. Also, Dinan Engineering made a twin-turbo version that made >400hp and ~500lb-ft. This turbo car was warrantied to 50K miles.
The tranny can be made to survive. I recommend controlling the lockup.
The tranny can be made to survive. I recommend controlling the lockup.
For the Rover realm, it is more of a question of longevity than survival. Sure it may hang behind that piss-poor V12 and outlast the warranty period.I know this is an ancient thread but I just want to add a note here: the 1988-1992 E32 M70 V12 BMW (aka: 750i/750iL) made 300hp stock and used the HP22. Also, Dinan Engineering made a twin-turbo version that made >400hp and ~500lb-ft. This turbo car was warrantied to 50K miles.
The tranny can be made to survive. I recommend controlling the lockup.
Hey, hey, hey! That is a fabulous and radically under-appreciated engine
I put >300k miles on that 750iL (with 4HP24) and the engine didn't quit; the tranny did. It would actually make a great transplant engine for a RRC or d1
all aluminum, light weight, 300hp/330lbft.. smooooooth and easy to repair (after a few cheap and easy upgrades).Not to get sidetracked :-D
I now have a tally of two 4HP22s going tits up in 95 Classics, both behind 3.9s, one - at 220kmi, another - 370kmi. 32% more torque than a 3.9, in a vehicle that's 12% heavier... What could go wrong?