Rover 3500 V8 - Information for conversion

[Stock_22]

it would have been bmw not jag, bmw bought rover a few years ago but it has now been sold again.

Yes, they use BMW diesel engines, however as I said, nowdays (as of 2006) they run Jaguar V8s including the supercharged variant found in the Range Rover Sport.

Anyway, getting back to the actual topic of this thread, no, don't use a Rover engine, they are poo in comparison. IUZ is the best option, however the car will not be road registered because of the power to car weight thingo...

edit: but i don't think that rule applies in SA though.

[gianttomato]

The funny thing is you could buy a Camry V6, turn it north south and have a 210 hp late model fuel injected motor before you buy a single tuning part.

[wa5]

as they have all said, dont buy a 3.5..V8.....Buy the 4.4 version out of the Aussie P76 ... these can be made to go hard... although they can have some oil pressure issues...I am pretty sure those that know have overcome this issue....
these engines were originally developed by GM in the 60s before being sold to Rover...
The 4.4 was a P76 only design though still based on the 3.5... Range Rovers had 3.5...3.9 and 4.2... these engines can be stretched to 5.0 litres apparently... try a Range Rover site.....

as to these things being fuel guzzlers... a small V8 pushing a two ton range rover...with constant 4WD .... what else would you expect?..

[Norbie]

these engines were originally developed by GM in the 60s before being sold to Rover...

And there's another reason to abandon this idea. Who wants to waste time with 40 year old technology when 1UZ's are so goddamn cheap and a million times better?

[Radar]

Thank you all for the input, I shall steer away from the rover V8 then and just stick with my idea of a little 1.8L hicomp twincam..

Just a TA22 with flares, fat tyers, and muscle rims... If it had a split system with a nice lumpy idle of a V8, seriously, wouldn't that make the lil celica look and sound tougher than most things on the street especially because its also half the size and weight of most cars with V8's?

[Hurricane]

i have a mate that had a range with a rover v8 4ltr or some thing, its was shit motor wise, so he got a 308 in it and it was heaps better

[Gintrapper]

This motors aren't that bad, but getting old. Morgan used these for quit a long time. Basicly they are Buick engines from the 60's. Sold to Rover because the production costs were to high. There are many aftermarket performance parts available in Britain and Rover made a Fuel Injected version with 192BHP for the SD1 (Van den Plas). They are light but it would be a tight fit in a Ta22.

[Scourge]

I guess the thing people are overlooking is the fact that you can't legally register a TA22 with a 1UZ of LS1 of any other V8 for that matter over about 3.8 litres. Hence the reason for the 3.5...

[Cruiser97_80]

In that case be better off with a 3.8l buick v6 spit cough urrgh

Nah seriously 1 bloke i know had the v8 in a hilux (could never keep it going good with std twin carbs) another bloke std range rover Threw a rod out the side

These are just experiences of m8's of mine so no real comment except go a different power plant hehe.

[allencr]

Some of them worked very well, the rest, inbred cousins, seem to be jinxed!
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repco

Repco Engine in F1

Jack Brabham exploited his existing relationship with Australian automotive components manufacturer Repco. He proposed they design and build a simple, reliable racing engine based on aluminium V8 engine blocks from the defunct American small-block Oldsmobile V8 F85 road car project, and other off the shelf parts.[2] The Repco board agreed to his proposal. A small team developed an F1 engine, fitted with 2-valve per-cylinders SOHC heads. The first advantage of this "Repco 620" V8 was its lightness, which allowed it to be bolted into an existing 1.5 litre Formula One chassis. With no more than 310 bhp (231 kW), the Repco was by far the least powerful of the new 3 litre engines, but unlike the others it was frugal, light and compact.[3] Also unlike the others, it was reliable,...

[WDE_BDY]

In that case be better off with a 3.8l buick v6 spit cough urrgh

Thats exactly what a mate did with his V8 2WD Isuzu MU. After no end of problems with the Rover motor and even swapping in a supposedly fullt rebuilt worked up version, he finally spat the dummy. Ripped the Rover out, bought a wrecked 5 speed Commodore, dropped in the V6 and recerted it for less than the Rover was going to cost to repair. Went better too.

Callum

[clubagreenie]

3.5, 3.9, 3.2 all based on the Buick V8 POS. While they're a light, torquey motor they a; wont ft into a celica easily, are hard to keep in tune unless you run carbs in which case they are a total dog to tune.

The 4.6 (which wasn't a rover motor anyway) is the pick. 4 (or maybe 6) bolt mains. Quite reliable and the earler heads can be fitted (meaning you only need) short motor to build. A few places in the UK do lots of parts for them. There's a mob who built a 4.6 with Eatom into a Defender (the one that looks like a brick on wheels) that'll do 250K's + and 12-13 sec 1/4's

Any of the iron blocks into rangies were frought with problems that you'd get with any large huge power put through a 4WD system. While the engine stays together the g/box and tfr case were never designed to hold it together. But lots of people will stuff 400 HP through it then say "pommie shit wont hold together with my blown 454 in front of it"

The main problems buick had were cooliung. The system and engine internals were redesigned and considering what they paid for it and the longevity it's had (fittes to land rovers, range rovers, SD1 saloon cars, vitesse, van de plas, forward control land rovers, morgans, MGB v8's were converted etc etc)

[willwal98]

Don't forget about TVR, they had quite a few models with a modified Rover V8 up to 5 litres.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TVR

EDIT: Looks like the bowler wildcat used the TVR (modified Rover) block with Land Rover heads.

[Hack]

Alrighty then. Where to start...

I have a 3.5lt from a 1979 Rover sedan in my RA28.
Mods-
Holly 600 Vac sec carby, Edelbrock manifold, cam and Yella Terra roller rockers from TRS (link below), very custom extractors to a 2 inch system, custom sump and engine mounts, Dellow bellhousing & Lightweight allow flywheel (also from TRS) Cut down 3 core Commi radiator.
Approx 100kw, 530Nnm at the wheels

I have a bit of video and its massive, but I can take photos if you need/want.

It was my daily driver for 9 years and I pretty much have to agree with everything said above...

The good -

Does fit very nicely
Is light
Sounds brilliant
Goes like stink.

The bad -

Ecconomy - 18L/100Ks
WILL leak oil
WILL chew cam lobes (Rebuild engine in 99 & have put 3 cams in since from memory...)
WILL snap an axel every 12 months while driving 'nicely' - Fixed with a Borg Warner when I got the engine rebuilt. Is just an open centre but has copped every bit of abuse thrown at it in the last 9 years. Craft Differentials FTW.
Their expensive
Their english.

The main problem seems to be heat. Engine gets too hot and warps = blown head gaskets, miss-aligned heads = chewed cams and the oil pump is built into the timing case, so when it wears, its a thowaway. And too much heat there = stuck open relief valve = no oil pressure at idle = rebuild the pump to get the car started again (after running with stuff all pressure for 20ks...

But the engine never broke on me enough to leave me stranded.

Here 2 links, RPI know their stuff, TRS have a good range and will give you an idea of Aussie $$$.

http://www.rpiv8.com/
http://triumphroverspares.com.au/

Mine is currently sitting in the shed awaiting funds and a complete rebuild. I am not going to spend anymore money on the Rover, seriously, it has to be a UZFE. Ecconomy, power, reliablity, it wins hands down.

Seriously, bribe whoever you have to and go the UZ.

Hack

[MWP]

Ecconomy - 18L/100Ks

Woah, screw that.
Surely it can be tuned for better economy than that?
If not, then youve got the wrong carb(s) for it.

1UZ FTW.