Restrictors

Technical questions and answers
Post Reply
Larosto
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 2:56 pm
Location: Germany, N

Restrictors

Post by Larosto »

Hello,

does anybody know more about the restrictors which were fitted in the manifold? When cleaning the carborettors I saw that they were removed.
I know, they should decrease engine power. But what`s about fuel consumption? Is it getting worse ? What about the torque of the engine? Is it getting better? Would it make sense to refit restrictors? Should the needle in the carb be the same with or without restrictors, or should another be fitted ?
Who has expirience?

regards

Horst
User avatar
gary_in_nz
Posts: 138
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 7:57 am
Location: Gisborne, New Zealand
Contact:

restrictors

Post by gary_in_nz »

hi,

I'm planning on removing mine some time over the next couple of weeks, and will let you know how the fuel consumption goes. At the moment i get around 22L per 100km/s around 230-240kms per tank of 50L.

gary
"If it ain't v8, take it back"
User avatar
gary_in_nz
Posts: 138
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 7:57 am
Location: Gisborne, New Zealand
Contact:

Restrictors

Post by gary_in_nz »

Just found some spare time today and removed my carb and went to remove the restrictor plate and it does not want to budge after being hammered/chiselled. I didnt think it would be that hard or are these press fitted in the manifold??

Is there any special technique to this or is it a 'keep beating' until they do want to pop out.

Do let me know where I am going wrong!!!

thanks,
gary
"If it ain't v8, take it back"
User avatar
gary_in_nz
Posts: 138
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 7:57 am
Location: Gisborne, New Zealand
Contact:

hey

Post by gary_in_nz »

hi,

finnally got the restrictors out, my oh my now we have some grunt, it pulls like a school boy now!!

I should have removed them along time ago.

Fuel consumption my increase a little but thats because it reaches higher RPM faster than with them in.

Torque decreases a little, due to, there is not as much of a rush of air going through the small holes like at lower rpm, but this gives you more power up in the higher RPM range. Torque is not really an issue any way with a V8 as they have much more torque than most other road going motors.

The abillity to use the engine as a brake also decreases.

I highly recomend leaving the restrictors out, with the gains in power its more than worth it to use a little more gas (as these already get there fair share of fossil fuels anyway) and these motors have still a lot of torque, especially with the LandRover gearing.


Well thats what i have noticed from 2 days driving without my restrictor plates in.

Cheers,
Gary
"If it ain't v8, take it back"
Larosto
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 2:56 pm
Location: Germany, N

Post by Larosto »

Thanks for all the answers. Seems to be better if the restrictors are not refitted. I`ve got abook with some tests: ARange Rover with 135 hp compression ratio 8,13:1 does 22liters per 100 km, when running about 120 km/h. A Stage One does 16 liters per 100 km, with the same engine but restrictors fitted. The test says, that a Stage One reaches it`max.torque at 2000 rpm, a Range at 2500 rpm.
I must think it over.

Horst
User avatar
Larry
Posts: 205
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 3:18 pm
Location: Derby, UK

Post by Larry »

I had the restrictors out on mine. Made a massive difference.

I was told that LR put them in due to the suspension and brake setup on Stage 1's not being up to too high performance (probably very true!). There probably is a lot of sense in assuming that the engineers who designed them knew more about it that you.

I worked on the basis that I can judge when I'm pushing a vehicle too hard and pull back a little, and the bit about brakes and suspension counts less off road anyway.

Mine were drilled through, then tapped. A puller then used to heave them out.
User avatar
jonnyboy
Posts: 371
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 12:32 pm
Location: Edinburgh, UK
Contact:

Post by jonnyboy »

Big hammer and a chisel took mine out!

I actually removed them before I got the vehicle on the road so have never driven with them in place. Plus I have a pair of SU's on now so not the best for comparison.

Jon
Last edited by jonnyboy on Wed Feb 28, 2007 9:10 am, edited 1 time in total.

Jon - M1CQO

109" Stage 1 V8 Station Wagon - Now gone!
My Website
Kiwistage1V8
Posts: 130
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 4:07 am
Location: New Zealand

Post by Kiwistage1V8 »

restrictors? :wink:

Edelbrock performer, and 465 holley!
Stop Global Whining.
User avatar
jonnyboy
Posts: 371
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 12:32 pm
Location: Edinburgh, UK
Contact:

Post by jonnyboy »

Kiwistage1V8 wrote:restrictors? :wink:

Edelbrock performer, and 465 holley!
I wouldnt burden my V8 with a 4 barrel carb, just wait until I get my megasquirt and Independent Throttle Bodies fitted :P


Image

Jon - M1CQO

109" Stage 1 V8 Station Wagon - Now gone!
My Website
Kiwistage1V8
Posts: 130
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 4:07 am
Location: New Zealand

Post by Kiwistage1V8 »

*drool*

:lol:
Stop Global Whining.
User avatar
Basil
Posts: 137
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 1:12 pm
Location: Fife

Post by Basil »

jonnyboy wrote:
Kiwistage1V8 wrote:restrictors? :wink:

Edelbrock performer, and 465 holley!
I wouldnt burden my V8 with a 4 barrel carb, just wait until I get my megasquirt and Independent Throttle Bodies fitted :P


Image
I have fallen in love :D :D :D
Landrover, If it don't leak oil, it's ran out.

Stage1 station wagon, 3.9 V8, galv chassis, parabolic's, lpg
User avatar
jonnyboy
Posts: 371
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 12:32 pm
Location: Edinburgh, UK
Contact:

Post by jonnyboy »

Thought about fitting 4 webbers for a while

Image

Jon - M1CQO

109" Stage 1 V8 Station Wagon - Now gone!
My Website
Post Reply