ZF 4HP22

Hi Warren

Delighted to hear of such encouraging results from your ZF!

The conversions I've heard about that have got as far as the road apparently all sacrifice the ability to get into 1 on the BW change lever for the ability to reach D. I wonder if there is a little bit of this going on with yours - not quite enough quadrant movement to select both D and 1? I'll admit to being very hazy here. Key unknown for me is whether the detents are on the selector lever or derived from the box! If the latter then I suspect what I've just written is rubbish - you must be going through D in order to reach N! But if the detents are in the quadrant of the selector then this might just be your answer. Set it up so as to select D as the first priority and then see where the other gears fall? Another possible action would be to alter the lever lengths at the selector so that you could vary the movement of the change cable for a given angle of lever movement.

Chris
 
Chris, and Warren,
The detents are both in the box AND on the lever.
This is the problem.
Also the detents in the ZF box are not equi-distant, from P to R is greater than all the others.
The detents in the BW are all equal.

Warren, will your car crank in both P and N?

Jim.
 
Hi Chris, there is a little bit of both going on there. There is plenty of room on the stock P6 selector for all the ZF positions. The ZF has very short throws around N-D-3-2-1, therefore when the ZF lever is in position 1 the P6 selector is sitting about a half-inch forward of the rear of the fascia gate! I had all this set up correctly, but had it apart again during the final push, and although I thought everything went back exactly I acknowledge that I should have gone through a process of adjustment again. It's quite likely that where I think I'm selecting D, the P6 detent is clicking into place nicely, but the ZF selector is not quite home in D. I had a similar problem with P (a relatively long throw from R on the ZF) where it wasn't quite going in properly until I gave the gearlever an extra little smack with the hand.

Presently, P, R and N are all fine, but I will lift the car up this weekend and go another round. I'm very hopeful that that is all it is. The ZF is operating so beautifully between 1, 2 & 3 that it doesn't seem likely that there would be a real problem with 4th gear. Not entirely inconceivable though, considering I reassembled it myself though, but if it's not the cable then I'm picking it's a control problem. This is because if the box was attempting to engage 4th and there was a problem in the gear/clutch train, it'd be an entirely different set of symptoms. Instead, it's totally ignoring the concept of 4th gear, so I'll go with cable adjustment, or at worst, the valve block needs an overhaul. I gambled on putting it back in with only a change of its internal gasket because the received wisdom is that they're usually fine, and it's only a five minute job to remove it once you've drained the sump. I can live with myself if it has to come out again for a bit of attention. But first, cable adjustment!
 
Geordie Jim said:
Warren, will your car crank in both P and N?

Yes, Jim. In fact that first attempt at moving was achieved by starting the engine in N so I didn't have to click through R and N on my way to (what I thought was) D.

As I said above, P, R and N are all fine, but getting everything right involves adjusting the P6 shifter length (adjustable at the bottom of the shaft) and cable adjustment at both ends. It's fiddly, but you just require a bit of patience.
 
WarrenL wrote,...
Jeepers, Ron! FIVE rebuilds? No wonder you were worried about the cost of a ZF overhaul! What is the total mileage covered by those five iterations of your box?

Hi Warren,

The total mileage for the five interations so far is over 290,000 Miles (468,000km). I would imagine that the total cost of those five rebuilds would be at or less than what I would need to pay in order to go down the ZF route for just the purchase and installation.

WarrenL also wrote,...
the P6B's weakest link - its frustratingly low gearing on the open road

I am going to disagree completely on that one Warren I am afraid. At 60mph (100kph), my Rover turns over at just under 2600rpm, not what I would call high rpm by the any stretch of the imagination. If I am not mistaken, the ZF within the Range Rover and Discovery will also see the engine turning over at a similar rpm when in 4th gear.

Ron.
 
Ron,
In theory the V8 P6 should be doing 2434RPM at 60MPH.( 1:1 top gear ratio)
Your nearly 2600RPM is due to torque convertor slip.

The ZF box has a top gear ratio of 0.7 : 1.
60 MPH gives a theoretic 1704 RPM. If the convertor locks up this should be achieved.

I think a 900 RPM drop is worth having.

Jim.
 
Ron,
Forgot to say, I'm amazed at your 290K miles.
Must be a very interesting story behind this mileage.
How long has it taken, what kind of use, how many, and what kind of problems.

Jim.
 
Hi Jim,

Where did your rpm figure come from? The workshop manual quotes for the 1:1 ratio as being 38.5kph per 1000 revs, which is 2597rpm at 100kph, or 24mph per 1000revs which is 2500 at 60mph. Tyre size rolling diameter will also influence the rpm seen.

Forgot to say, I'm amazed at your 290K miles.
Must be a very interesting story behind this mileage.
How long has it taken, what kind of use, how many, and what kind of problems.

My father purchased the Rover in 1978 with just under 22,000 Miles on the clock. Sadly he would only add another 17,000 before I started to drive in 1985, all the rest is from me. I won't go into too much detail here as it will take the thread off track. There is quite a lot of detail here....viewtopic.php?f=20&t=4934 and here....viewtopic.php?f=21&t=9726

Ron.
 
Ron that means essentially each rebuild has only been lasting you on average 58000 miles?
Out of interest how long did yours last from new before the first rebuild?
I've read about zf boxes still going strong at similar to your total mileage on certain vehicles.
There is also the hassle/labour of removing/refitting as frequently as that to take into account.
With the sort of mileage I'm planning on doing in my car for example, a good zf box could potentially never need a rebuild as long as I own it.
Jim
 
corazon wrote,...
Ron that means essentially each rebuild has only been lasting you on average 58000 miles?
Out of interest how long did yours last from new before the first rebuild?
I've read about zf boxes still going strong at similar to your total mileage on certain vehicles.
There is also the hassle/labour of removing/refitting as frequently as that to take into account.
With the sort of mileage I'm planning on doing in my car for example, a good zf box could potentially never need a rebuild as long as I own it.
Jim

Hi Jim,

The average is skewed by two rebuilds at very low mileages. The first was at 22,000 Miles (35,000km) just after my Father purchased the car. He had been an aircraft engine mechanic, so was a firm believer in prevention rather than cure. With no knowledge of how the first owner had treated the transmission, he chose a rebuild, which consisted of friction material and gaskets. There was a complete rebuild in 1996 which also saw a partial upgrade with Ford parts. Unfortunately in Feb 1998 whilst having a routine service after not much more than 10,000 Miles (16,000km), another rebuild was required owing to a circlip or something equally innocuous having come adrift, running through the gears on its way down. Lots of metal on the pan floor and the suggestion that the planetary gears etc could shatter saw the box coming out again. :x The friction materials all remained, only the gearset and torque converter etc were replaced. So apart from those, 71,000 Miles (114,000km) has been the longest thus far.

The rebuild in 2009 was brought about by the 4.6 burden which was too much for the partially upgraded box, snapping the front band into two parts along with punching a hole into some part of the front servo. Subsequently the box received a full upgrade with Ford parts including an increase in line pressure so as to have a better chance of coping with the torque from the 4.6. This rebuild as I mentioned above is head and shoulders above all the others, and when driven feels nothing like any BW box (35 or 65) that I have ever experienced.

Ron.
 
SydneyRoverP6B said:
I am going to disagree completely on that one Warren I am afraid. At 60mph (100kph), my Rover turns over at just under 2600rpm, not what I would call high rpm by the any stretch of the imagination. If I am not mistaken, the ZF within the Range Rover and Discovery will also see the engine turning over at a similar rpm when in 4th gear.

It's interesting that we all quote different figures here. The fact is, at an indicated 100 kph (almost dead on when verified against my GPS), Brown Rover was always pulling about 3200 rpm (dropping immediately to 3000 the moment I took my foot off the gas). I have checked the rev counter reading against a digital meter and, once again, it was pretty much dead-on accurate (allowing for needle wobble, etc). Wheels and tyres are bog standard P6B, never changed. Way too low geared. Why the difference to your car, Ron? Can some others weigh in here on their cars?

You must admit that whatever your start point, shifting from 1:1 to 0.728:1 is a decent drop - and even the dead standard 3528cc motor has more than enough torque to handle the lower revs. Also you are mistaken, Ron. My experience of several Discovery V8s is approximately 2200 at 100kph, allowing that the drive is being transferred through a transfer case, final drive and Disco-size wheels and tyres. It's easy enough to calculate - once I get my top gear shift sorted I'm expecting about 2200rpm in 4th gear lockup.

SydneyRoverP6B said:
This rebuild as I mentioned above is head and shoulders above all the others, and when driven feels nothing like any BW box (35 or 65) that I have ever experienced.

This is a crucial point, Ron. We're comparing the bog standard 35/65 with the ZF, apples vs. oranges if you like, but you've weighed in with a genetically modified apple. A Monsanto special! With those upgrades it should be good. But you should really try the ZF. Graeme will agree. Drop by any time you're in town.
 
corazon said:
I've read about zf boxes still going strong at similar to your total mileage on certain vehicles.

Jim, my Land Rover ZF was a well-used box and it was still in very good condition inside. Even the known weak points (input shaft, A-clutch, governor support housing) were all fine. In fact, the only discernible wear in the box was the pump input shaft bush, something that's not mentioned by the sources we've uncovered so far (so do make a mental note). For example there was no need to replace any of the friction plates or bearings, and that was on the advice of a transmission specialist in whose interest it was to sell me anything he could. I think a lot of the talk out there on the net is simply uninformed or speculative, and the overall picture I received from impartial gearbox gurus was that a well-treated ZF will last virtually forever. Furthermore, for a complete novice I found it remarkably easy to dismantle and reassemble (valve block excepted: I don't want to go anywhere near that box of black magic).
 
WarrenL wrote,...
It's interesting that we all quote different figures here. The fact is, at an indicated 100 kph (almost dead on when verified against my GPS), Brown Rover was always pulling about 3200 rpm (dropping immediately to 3000 the moment I took my foot off the gas). I have checked the rev counter reading against a digital meter and, once again, it was pretty much dead-on accurate (allowing for needle wobble, etc). Wheels and tyres are bog standard P6B, never changed. Way too low geared. Why the difference to your car, Ron? Can some others weigh in here on their cars?

Hi Warren,

As you have checked the tacho for accuracy, then the only points that I can suggest that would attribute to your engine spinning some 600rpm more than mine at 100kph are, either your tyres are the wrong profile, too low, or at some point the diff ratio has been changed. The much more likely is the former, so what is written on the tyres?

I certainly agree that 3200 rpm is far too high for 100kph, mine will be travelling at something like 123kph at that rpm.

Ron.
 
WarrenL said:
corazon said:
I've read about zf boxes still going strong at similar to your total mileage on certain vehicles.

Jim, my Land Rover ZF was a well-used box and it was still in very good condition inside. Even the known weak points (input shaft, A-clutch, governor support housing) were all fine. In fact, the only discernible wear in the box was the pump input shaft bush, something that's not mentioned by the sources we've uncovered so far (so do make a mental note). For example there was no need to replace any of the friction plates or bearings, and that was on the advice of a transmission specialist in whose interest it was to sell me anything he could. I think a lot of the talk out there on the net is simply uninformed or speculative, and the overall picture I received from impartial gearbox gurus was that a well-treated ZF will last virtually forever. Furthermore, for a complete novice I found it remarkably easy to dismantle and reassemble (valve block excepted: I don't want to go anywhere near that box of black magic).


Re: ZF 4HP22
by eightofthem on Sun Jun 09, 2013 10:16 am

You have hit the nail on the head Warren, how far do you go!.
There will be worn components inside both boxes, but as you say how far.
Each clutch pack can be viewed and inspected individually,if you spread out a full overhaul kit on the bench, and then look at the internals sat together next to it,you would think NO WAY!.
Each clutch pack has a few rubber seals, and actuators or pistons to remove and inspect, as well as the frictions and steels.
Once you have the case empty,and all the internals on the bench, you can decide how to go, I would recommend a full seal kit at the very least, the rest you can either swap over or renew as you go.
Starting from F clutch they start off relatively easy to strip, then go a bit harder,then finish up easy at the front with A and B as you have already found out.
Looking at B clutch you are only one more item to remove from it to achieve a full strip.
Regarding the needle roller bearings and thrust washers, in all the boxes I have seen, I have not yet had to replace any.
The bearing or bushings I was referring to are located where shafts run through ie
Oil pump bush
A clutch bush
B clutch bush ( you can look at this one now as you have it in bits )
The centre support has two steel clad rings that run inside the centre which are attached in turn to the sun gear shaft.
These have the same wear effect as the link you posted about the A clutch above, they wear out the soft alloy centre support where they run, again as you have a donor these are interchangeable.
You are lucky to have two boxes that you can use, I would suggest that you leave the RR box as is until you get the feel of what you are looking for and at with the Beemer ie how it comes apart and how it goes back together, so you will have a known reference with the RR box if you get stuck.
If you do intend to look at all the clutches in turn and remove the actuators or pistons then you will need to improvise make or buy a spring compressor, to be able to remove said pistons. ( I made mine, but they are available to buy ).
That is the only thing you will need if you intend to fully strip.
Taking it all apart is straightforward enough as long as you do it methodically and just look at each component in turn one at a time.
Putting it all back together again is where you will need some help, and as I said before, just ask, I have plenty of pictures if you are stuck.
Now where the hell did I put that ????


Trouble is so much information can sometimes overwhelm things somewhat, and they get lost in the depths.
It s only when you incorporate readings with actual hands on knowledge that it starts to make sense.
Almost everything that is needed with these boxes is here in this thread somewhere, it just needs to be understood by whoever is reading it.
 
WarrenL wrote,...
This is a crucial point, Ron. We're comparing the bog standard 35/65 with the ZF, apples vs. oranges if you like, but you've weighed in with a genetically modified apple. A Monsanto special! With those upgrades it should be good. But you should really try the ZF. Graeme will agree. Drop by any time you're in town.

That is a very kind offer Warren, must admit I would like to see for myself what the ZF feels like in your Rover.

With my Rover though, if I ever did decide to go down the ZF path, which I will admit is extremely unlikely, I'd need to souce the 22 but then go with all 24 internals, so more cost. Reason being is that the torque delivery of the 4.6 exceeds the maximum torque handling capacity of the 22.

Ron.
 
Allow me a chance to sort the teething troubles before you book your ticket, Ron! I've got to solve the 4th gear upshift and then I think there will be a bit of fine-tuning of the TV/kickdown cable and shifter adjustment. But seriously, if you're ever over this way you will be most welcome to take Brown Rover for a strop and tell me what you think.

As for tyre size, they're the full profile 185/14 as originally fitted, and revs at 100kph are the same as Graeme's car and White Rover (owned by a non-Forum friend).

As for the costs of the project, the donor boxes and parts have proved to be well down the list. The biggest single sum of money went into the custom cross-member (for which we are working on a cheaper deal should anybody else go down the ZF path), with the Dakota Digital speedo kit coming second. The gearbox itself was small change - about $400 for both donor boxes and $180 for the overhaul kit. All up, my total project cost is homing in on about NZ$3000, or about £1500. It's broken me for the time being (single income family, two children), but compare that with having the car delivered to a transmission specialist and picked up again when the 35 was all fixed...
 
WarrenL wrote,...
As for tyre size, they're the full profile 185/14 as originally fitted, and revs at 100kph are the same as Graeme's car and White Rover (owned by a non-Forum friend).

That is very odd Warren :shock: Both your Rover and Graeme's in that case don't agree with the workshop manual in terms of engine rpm and road speed, whereas mine and another local Rover that I have driven only recently, both do.

and
As for the costs of the project, the donor boxes and parts have proved to be well down the list. The biggest single sum of money went into the custom cross-member (for which we are working on a cheaper deal should anybody else go down the ZF path), with the Dakota Digital speedo kit coming second. The gearbox itself was small change - about $400 for both donor boxes and $180 for the overhaul kit. All up, my total project cost is homing in on about NZ$3000, or about £1500. It's broken me for the time being (single income family, two children), but compare that with having the car delivered to a transmission specialist and picked up again when the 35 was all fixed...

The most recent rebuild that my transmission had in 2009 cost me less than $1000 for everything (less than 600 Pounds), all the labour, parts etc plus removal and refit into the car.

Certainly here in Australia, the cost of doing a BW and a ZF are poles apart, the latter will set you back considerably more.

Ron.
 
SydneyRoverP6B said:
The most recent rebuild that my transmission had in 2009 cost me less than $1000 for everything (less than 600 Pounds), all the labour, parts etc plus removal and refit into the car.

My turn to interject a shock smiley - :shock:

That'd barely buy you a fluid change and filter from a transmission specialist here.
 
I just missed out on a hybrid built zf4hp22 tonight, with the desirable parts :(
I'm very into the idea now though, and have decided to source the best jag box I can find and change the bellhousing to a range rover etc item..
Can the jag convertor be used?
My setup will differ slightly to yours Warren as I'm planning mating it with a B&M ratchet console shifter for occasional manual quick shifting :wink:
Jim
 
Hi Jim,

You have to obtain the crank adapter, flex plates and spacers from the Land Rover:

DSC08883_zps0513057c.jpg~original


At this point, you've probably got the Land Rover torque converter in your hands as well, so try and strike a deal. I couldn't tell you anything about the Jag torque converter - Andy (eightofthem) is the best man to weigh in at this point - but I'd make a guess that it has the wrong characteristics (stall speed etc) for the Rover V8 and you'd want to check that it actually does bolt to the LR spacer/small flex plate as shown in my pic above.

As for the box itself, I don't think it matters much which gear/clutch train is used, but the Jag valve body will be set up differently to the LR one. This will mostly affect your change points, the Jag being a higher revving engine than the Rover.

Based on my experience so far, and assuming you have both Jag and LR boxes at hand, the ideal combination would use:

- Land Rover case. It has the hole for the LR inhibitor switch, which can be connected straight to the existing P6 cabling. The BMW box doesn't have a hole or inhibitor switch; I don't know how the Jag is set up.
- Either gear train (there are minor differences between the clutches in the LR and BMW boxes; but no showstoppers).
- Jag tailhousing, output shaft and output yoke/flange.
- Land Rover valve body and governor.
- Jag shift cable (but of course this depends on what you want to end up with on your console).
- Either pump and housing.
- Land Rover bellhousing, torque converter and spacers.
- Land Rover flex plate (allows you to complete the conversion without so much as laying a finger on your starter motor).

Caution: because I had to make it all up as I went along, I ended up with a BMW tailhousing and a Jag yoke, which needed to be shortened by a few millimetres to make it sit properly in the BMW output seal. This leads me to suspect that the Jaguar tailhousing is slightly different to the BMW , although they look the same in the pics I've seen (you will be able to confirm this). If so, be prepared for the possibility that the P6 propshaft ends up a few millimetres too long to fit. With the BMW tailhousing and slightly shortened Jag yoke, the P6 propshaft fitted back in perfectly without modification. A half-inch less room would mean that the propshaft splines are fully retracted, which will be a problem. I'll be very happy if you prove me wrong though, because the Jag box is otherwise a better donor than the BMW. It comes with the right yoke!
 
Back
Top