BHP query

Hi All,

I have recently had the engine in my Range Rover upgraded from a 4.0 to a

4.6 as the 4.0 completely died.

On advising the insurance company of this they started to ask about BHP increases and basically I haven't got a clue.

What I need to know is :

What is the BHP of a petrol 4.0 V8 engine (car is R reg)

What is the BHP of a petrol 4.6 V8 engine (this is a new Land Rover engine and the mechanic off the top of his head thinks its 225 BHP)

The mechanic has given me figures of 140 kilowatts for the 4.0 and 165.5 kilowatts for the 4.6 but I have no idea how this relates to BHP.

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance

Roger

Reply to
Roger Hembury
Loading thread data ...

Roger Hi,

4.0 V8 is 186 bhp @ 4750 4.6 V8 is 221 bhp @ 4750.

Above figures are for the 1995 model year vehicles and taken from the LR Expedition book, second edition, official LR publication.

late model RaRo V8 engines with the BOSCH injection had slightly more power.

Take care Pantelis

Reply to
Pantelis Giamarellos

/chomp/

formatting link
is your friend here:

Converting from kW to (international) rated horsepower, 140 kW comes out as 187.75 hp, 165.5 kW as 221.94 hp.

Checking in my book of cross-conversions suggests that these figures are accurate.

Reply to
Andrew Robert Breen

Alternatively, Google's calculator can do this: e.g.

formatting link
Tom

Reply to
Tom Gilmour

In news:djnqur$5l9t$ snipped-for-privacy@central.aber.ac.uk, Andrew Robert Breen blithered:

IIRC there's 740 W to an horse. So add 1/3 to your kWs and you'll not be far wrong.

Reply to
GbH

746 actually JD
Reply to
JD

During stardate Thu, 27 Oct 2005 06:28:51 +1000, JD uttered the imortal words:

H'mmm ... is that the same at sea level? Which raises another interesting question of calculating BHP of boat propellers, as they are below sea level so does that introduce a negative into the math?

How high is a horse? And how low before it becomes a pony, which raises the issue of how many W's to the hand? Sorl very bizzar this measurement malarky.

whhooops.. this cans nearly empty!

hic!#?!'

Lee D

-- "I'm all in favor of keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands of fools. Let's start with typewriters."

- Frank Lloyd Wright (1868-1959)

formatting link
'76 101 Camper '64 88" IIa V8 Auto '97 Disco ES Auto LPG'd '01 Laguna

Reply to
Lee_D

Perhaps boats should be measured in seahorses. Which i imagine have a lot less watts to em :)

Reply to
Tom Woods

thats a splendid idea. i rekcon there would be about 1250 seahorses to a kilowatt (depends what breed of seahorse. some are tiny some are reasonably big, but none are particularly powerful!!). so if i were to have a 3.5 horsepower dinghy, it would be 2.6 kiolwatts, or 3.2 kilo-seahorse.

Sam.

Reply to
Samuel

My local fisherman sells Sea-Horse to the Kilo.... Found out it takes a lot of money for one S-HP and it has a terrible taste. Kind regards, Erik-Jan. P.S. a friemd of mine just bought a Milner converted LR 109 with a Perkins 3.9 L. Diesel. What actually is a "Milner Conversion"? Just the engine ?

Reply to
Erik-Jan Geniets

On or around Thu, 27 Oct 2005 03:42:47 +0200, Erik-Jan Geniets enlightened us thusly:

's a good way of breaking the transmission. Half-shafts, mostly.

typical comments from the days when this was common: "Got this 4.3l perkins in the land rover, and it's great - I can go up in 4th towing the trailer"

followed after a bit by "me half-shaft's broke - bloody land rover keeps breaking"

not surprising, if you transmit about twice the torque through it that it was designed for...

Reply to
Austin Shackles

I must add at this point (in defence of perkins) that they make some excellent boat anchors and landfill materials ;-) Badger.

Reply to
Badger

Ah, so my approximation is better than I thought.

Reply to
GbH

On or around Thu, 27 Oct 2005 08:33:29 +0000 (UTC), "Badger" enlightened us thusly:

Actually, they make good truck or tractor engines. 's just that for example the 4203 or 4236 are not good land rover engines.

I once heard of a rangie with a 6354 in it. Ludicrous.

>
Reply to
Austin Shackles

On or around Thu, 27 Oct 2005 10:00:33 -0000, "GbH" enlightened us thusly:

750 (3/4) is good for ballpark conversions, as dividing by 3 and multiplying by 4 (or tother way about) is not hard to do as mental arithmetic.
Reply to
Austin Shackles

I drove a rangie with a 4236turbo once, it was appalling. Way too nose heavy, no top end whatsoever and rough and noisy. It would, however, pull whatever you wanted it to, at speeds of up to 50mph, halfshafts permitting. Also drove a landy 109 with a 4203, absolutely pathetic, no power no speed and a lot of hassle! Landy 109 with a 4182turbo wasn't too bad a match though, with rangie diffs and 235 tyres. Badger.

Reply to
Badger

In news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com, Austin Shackles blithered:

Multiply by 7 and divide by 4 gets you the VAT!

Reply to
GbH

You need a new accountant...

Reply to
Tim Hobbs

In news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com, Tim Hobbs blithered:

No really OK 10x but what's a decimal point twixt one and ones tax assessor?

Reply to
GbH

Divide the gross figure by 1.175 will get you the VAT content.

Richard

Reply to
beamendsltd

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.