paul_mcq
|
| posted on 29/3/04 at 01:20 PM |
|
|
rover engine?
i can get the engine out of a rover vitesse sport. it is a 2ltr turbo nd can it be converted so it can be used? if so does any one no were to get the
bell housing~?
|
|
|
|
|
200mph
|
| posted on 29/3/04 at 01:28 PM |
|
|
personally....i think you're missing the point
really missing the point
Mark
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 29/3/04 at 02:40 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by paul_mcq
i can get the engine out of a rover vitesse sport. it is a 2ltr turbo nd can it be converted so it can be used? if so does any one no were to get the
bell housing~?
Great engine only slightly heavier than a Pinto 2 litre you can get an engine backplate off a 2 litre Sherpa or a 2 litre SD1 and it can be be mated
to an SD1 or later Rover rwd 5 speed gearbox -- only v8 version has decent ratios.
BUT is it an M16 or T16 ? the engine management system on the later T16 is much more complex to use because of the anftitheft system built into the
ECU which is coded to the engine flywheel reluctor ring.
As the car is a Turbo Vitesse Sport it is likely to be a T16, which in ths form produces 192 bhp (varied a little bit according to year) about 20bhp
more than the standard Vitesse Turbo which is a heck of a lot for the Locost chassis -- perhaps too much. Also on the Turbo the turbo units only last
between 70,000 and 13000 miles depenpending on how they are treated, frequent oil changes using sythetic oil and cooling down after a run are
critical to turbo life.
Personally I would choose the ordinary 2litre Lucas hotwire multipoint efi M16 engine used in the 820Sli between 1989 and 1991 it gives a very real
140bhp with bags of torque and not prone to sticking valves like the T16.
|
|
|
JoelP
|
| posted on 29/3/04 at 03:05 PM |
|
|
typical, i spent months finding out about sherpa boxes, paul finds answers within hours!
i sacked the rover idea off due to weight, and the fact i couldnt be arsed finding a gearbox for it. still sat in some field now i guess!
|
|
|
Liam
|
| posted on 30/3/04 at 11:21 PM |
|
|
Imagine a K-series, but a bit bigger, and made of steel. A bit lardy but a very nice engine indeed. I had a 180,000 mile Rover 820 and the engine
was still beautifully sweet all the way up to its 6500 red line. Ought to make a Locost shift some, specially with a turbo.
Liam
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 31/3/04 at 06:48 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Liam
Imagine a K-series, but a bit bigger, and made of steel. A bit lardy but a very nice engine indeed. I had a 180,000 mile Rover 820 and the engine
was still beautifully sweet all the way up to its 6500 red line. Ought to make a Locost shift some, specially with a turbo.
Liam
The one in mine (an 820Sli) was at 180,00 to when I sold it to a traffic cop (confidence !) who kept it for another 2 years..
The engine was super sweet -- much better in all respects than the 2.3 dohc Honda in the 623 that is my current mule -- the Honda unit claims 20
more bhp than the Rover but the Rover 820 felt quicker even though it was heavier car..
The K series is also a great engine but is no where as robust as the T and M.
[Edited on 31/3/04 by britishtrident]
|
|
|
DEAN C.
|
| posted on 31/3/04 at 06:31 PM |
|
|
If you have tried carrying a M or T series you would not bother......
Lovelly engine but bloody heavy!
K series are fine up to 60000 miles after that it's a matter of when,not if the head gasket blows.And they are not easy to cure......
I'd go Zetec or Toyota 4ge or the super Vauxhall single or twin cam engines.
DEAN.......
Once I've finished a project why do I start another?
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 31/3/04 at 06:45 PM |
|
|
Never had head gasket problems on any of my K series --- there isn't a head gasket problem unless you boil one or don't change the
coolant, 99% of any head gasket problems on the 1.4 and 1.6 are caused by minor external water leaks usually from the inlet manifold gasket or outer
corner of the head gasket being ignored -- once you boil a K series iits history.
My main problem with the K series some of the shortcuts taken by Rover at the design stage I have seen two with the bottom sprocket and pulley
floating about on end of the crank --there is no keyway only a "D" flat mached on the crank -- as can be imagined this does wonders for
the valve timing.
[Edited on 31/3/04 by britishtrident]
|
|
|
DEAN C.
|
| posted on 1/4/04 at 05:59 PM |
|
|
You're right about K series engines being history once boiled,but I don't have one good thing to say about Rover K series lumps!
Over a two year period I bought almost four hundred different straight or damaged Rovers,in the end I stopped buying anything with a K series in
unless it was virtually free!
But I could sell every good engine or head I could get my hands on.
In the end I just unbolted the heads and sold them on their own after pressure testing and skimming as the comebacks were less frequant.
Having said that I love M and T series engines but they are far to heavy in my opinion for this type of car!
If you can work out how to run a Honda/Rover 1600cc engine(I know it has been done) then this would make a perfect engine,light ,fast revs well and
very reliable!!!It's just getting round the anti clockwise crank rotation that is the problem.
Once I've finished a project why do I start another?
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 1/4/04 at 06:11 PM |
|
|
The Honda 4 cylinder units are super reliable (can't say the same about the v6 2.5 and to a lesser extent the 2.7) -- with the 4 cylinder the
only fault is the distributer ( I keep meaning to buy a spare off ebay). Not crazy about the DOHC 2.3 in my 600 though it lacks sparkle .
For a kit car the anticlockwise rotation is a killer just flipping the diff over isn't really on I wonder if some 4x4 front diff would give the
correct roation, also I have a feeling a 2nd hand gearbox won't take kindly to suddenly having to work counter clockwise
[Edited on 1/4/04 by britishtrident]
|
|
|
JoelP
|
| posted on 1/4/04 at 06:24 PM |
|
|
FWIW, theres an S2000 engine on ebay at the minute. should be a good start.
|
|
|
stephen_gusterson
|
| posted on 1/4/04 at 07:38 PM |
|
|
the K series are FAMED for self destructing
it was even on BBC tv.
I spoke to the AA guy that fixed my beemer and he confirmed it.
Someone I work with also had his gasket blow at 70k.
TOL had a post by a guy that runs a scrappy that verified lots of people want the heads cos they all blow.
In 4 years on groups like this I stil have NEVER EVER found a locoster using that engine..
someone step forward and prove me wrong.........
atb
steve
|
|
|
craig1410
|
| posted on 1/4/04 at 10:51 PM |
|
|
As an owner of a Rover 800 Vitesse Turbo I can vouch for the engine as a very nice powerplant with bags of torque and a free revving nature. However,
I dismissed this as a potential donor engine due to the sheer weight of it. Anything which is heavier than the already lardy Pinto is just not on in a
lightweight car in my opinion. I ended up going for a Rover V8 3.5 litre engine as it is lighter than both the Pinto and the T-series but even it is
about as heavy as I would recommend for a Locost.
The other thing which drives most people mad about the T-series is the notorious head gasket oil leak (passenger's side front corner of
engine/head interface)
I repaired mine myself using the Klinger gasket recommended and had the head skimmed professionally, and cleaned and keyed the block as recommended,
and used new head bolts as recommended, and torqued them down as recommended etc etc.
However, less than 12 months on the head gasket started to leak again which really pisses me off as it cost me about £250 and 3 days to fix it in the
first place.
I use Mobil 1 0w/40 oil and change it every 6k miles along with a brand new unipart filter so the engine is in good nick despite its 130k+ miles.
I've had it since 77k miles and the engine has proved strong except for the oil leak. I had to change the clutch as well but that's not
bad for a 130k mile engine.
Anyway, as I said, this is a very good engine for a heavier car but not for a Locost. It would be fast but would handle like a dog due to being too
nose heavy. Either go for the all-alloy Rover V8 or a smaller (1.6 or 1.8 litre) light alloy multivalve engine like the K-series. I've heard all
the scare stories about the k-series too but just think how many of them are out there and are running just fine. Bad news always travels farther and
faster than good news after all...
If I hadn't gone for the Rover V8 it would have been a non-VVC 1.8 litre K-Series lump. The non-VVC has more ultimate tuning potential and is
much less expensive and much less complex than the VVC. Don't be put off by scare stories as the K-Series is very common in many of the
Locost/Westfield/Caterham cars and is also used in the Lotus Elise.
Hope this helps,
Craig.
|
|
|
stephen_gusterson
|
| posted on 1/4/04 at 11:17 PM |
|
|
but lotus westfield etc use new engines.....
the gasget probs at 60k plus is a REAL problem KNOWN in the industry.
The 1.8 used by land rover had the gasket redesigned to reduce failures
Just ask any parked up AA or RAC man what he thinks about K series engines........
http://forum.parkers.co.uk/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=9569
http://www.mgfcar.de/hgf/
http://www.myfreelander.com/kengineprobs4.htm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/watchdog/reports/transport7.shtml
http://www.carmechanicsmag.co.uk/cgi-bin/help.cgi?i=0308&m=Rover&q=04
http://www.pressuregroups.net/uk/viewtopic.php?t=59
http://www.shame.4mg.com/
proved my point?
atb
steve
|
|
|
Liam
|
| posted on 2/4/04 at 12:21 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by craig1410
Anyway, as I said, this is a very good engine for a heavier car but not for a Locost. It would be fast but would handle like a dog due to being too
nose heavy.
Not an attack on yourself or anything, it just brings up a pet-hate of mine - the way some people will thoroughly slag of the use of slightly
'gravitationally challenged' engines as if it's some kind of great heresy, throwing around words like understeering, barge, dog,
etc, without really thinking about it.
It's all relative. It wont be a Superlight or a BEC (not neccesarily a bad thing imho), but even with something like a cologne v6,
you're still looking at a 6-700 kg rear-drive sports car with the engine comfortably behind the front axle. Get it as far back as you can, and
with a couple of occupants and some fuel, you are pretty damned close to a 'perfect' 50:50 distribution. Plug some weights and CofG
positions in a spreadsheet and see what you get. As soon as anyone gets into a BEC it'll have a fair rear bias.
I doubt anyone refers to their TVR as an obese bitch of a barge with terminal understeer, do they?
I'll bet the turbo rover engine weighs about the same as the good old pinto-based cossie turbo, and Hicost's car seems to handle fine.
OK rant over, sorry.
Oh and oi! trident - whilst I'm being argumentative, I wont hear a bad word said about the Honda 2.7. Best engine ever made, got it?
Liam
|
|
|
craig1410
|
| posted on 2/4/04 at 12:27 AM |
|
|
Steve,
I'm not disputing that they do have a problem with head gaskets on the K-series but I believe that the problem has been blown out of all
proportion by the poor handling of the issue by Rover and the publicity given to it by Watchdog. Also, Landrover have a fix which can be retrofitted
to any K-series engine just to be safe. I also understand that this problem only really affects the 1.8 litre engine and that the 1.6 and the
excellent 1.4 litre (103 BHP) engines don't suffer or at least not nearly so badly.
I just took a look at the Warranty Direct website which gathers information on warranty claims for most of the car makers and they list the following
reliability stats for the Rover 400 (from 1992 onwards)
Reliability Index 64 (Average is 112 and low is better)
Average Age 6.43 years
Average Mileage 50557 miles
Time off the Road 2.15 hours
Average Repair Cost £198.49
Air Conditioning - 0%
Axle & Suspension 13.33%
Braking System 13.33%
Cooling and Heating System 6.67%
Electrical 33.33%
Engine 13.33%
Fuel System - 0%
Transmission 20.00%
You can check this for yourself here
Note that engine failures are less of a problem than either electrical or transmission problems and also note that average repair cost is low which
would not be the case if everyone had to get a new engine every 60k miles. Yes I know the average mileage is only 50557 here but there will be roughly
as many above this average as below so the "typical" 60k failure should be adequately covered.
If you do a search on Google for "k series" engine reliability you will find more good than bad articles and one I found which is a good
introduction to tuning the k-series is here
Nope, sorry Steve we'll have to agree to differ on this one because in my opinion the 1.6 or 1.8 litre k-series is a good engine choice for a
"seven" despite the scare-mongering which has gone on in recent years.
Cheers,
Craig.
|
|
|
craig1410
|
| posted on 2/4/04 at 12:35 AM |
|
|
Liam,
No, you have a valid point and no offence is taken. As I said I am fitting a Rover V8 which isn't exactly light either!
However, the T-series has a range of issues which make it less than ideal IMHO such as the weight, height, complexity of electronics, cooling
requirements, oil leak, RWD transmission availability, turbo needs replaced every 70k-100k. And this is coming from a guy who drives one every day and
loves it!! Great in a motorway cruiser but not so great in a cramped engine bay of a lightweight rollerskate.
Cheers,
Craig.
|
|
|
Liam
|
| posted on 2/4/04 at 01:15 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by craig1410
As I said I am fitting a Rover V8 which isn't exactly light either!
But at least it has a suitable, if slightly over-indulgent, number of cylinders and the correct vee arrangement! Sterling choice (huh huh - sterling
- Rover - huh huh).
Yeah - agreed about the T's height etc etc. Mounts in awkward places too - hmmm, a bit like the engine I'm using funnily. You'd
think they came out the same car.
Liam
|
|
|
mackie
|
| posted on 2/4/04 at 09:29 AM |
|
|
I just sold my 1.4 K series Rover 400 at 60k, never had any major engine probs in the 40,000 miles i had it for. It had it's inlet manifold
gasket and waterpump replaced (important as discussed earlier!) and was generally fine, although I have to say it was a bit noisy.
I now have a Puma with the 1.7 Zetec-SE in it and that's a bloody fantastic engine.
It would be great in a locost but I'd imagine that a std 1.8 Zetec would be almost as good and cheaper, you just don't get the VCT
super-flat torque curve.
|
|
|
stephen_gusterson
|
| posted on 2/4/04 at 10:27 AM |
|
|
I drove a 214 once for a week and I loved the engine.
however there is a lot of info about dodgy gaskets, much of which well pre dates watchdog.
I found the post by a scrappy whos business was to sell on engines (in the TOL group) that they were almost impossible to find in good condition very
telling.
still waiting for soemone to tell me they have used a K in a locost.
My workmates failed car was a 1.4......
atb
steve
|
|
|
Liam
|
| posted on 2/4/04 at 01:32 PM |
|
|
Forgot to mention...
Last summer I had the fun 'mission' of taking a 1.4 K-series (got one with 5000 miles from a 25 for £550) to Germany with a bunch of tools
and rescuing a stranded 214 that a friend-of-a-friend had destroyed out there (and been quoted billions by a german rover dealer to replace the
engine).
Turns out the radiator had gotten so corroded that we could scrape out half the fins with our fingers. Was running a bit hot, did the head gasket and
cracked the head. Supports the claims that they are rather sensitive to temperature, even a 1.4.
Still after we replaced the engine it was a pleasure to experience, and of course like any true professionals we tested our work on the Nurburgring.
Was much nicer than the 1.4 golf we drove out in (although the build quality of the rest of the car definately wasn't).
I imagine in well looked after enthusiasts car (elise, locost, etc) a K would be a fine bet. But why are no Locosters actually using them then?
Liam
|
|
|
Noodle
|
| posted on 2/4/04 at 01:52 PM |
|
|
I think I've probably said this before, but my friend was using a 1.4K in his sprint car. He turbocharged it, used Luminition management and on
a standard head gasket ran 340bhp. That lasted a whole season before he sold up.
He was tasked at Rover with sorting out the problems. He reckoned drill 3 x 5mm holes in the theromostat and it just doesn't happen.
He blamed almost all problems on Rover dealers and their servicing who are (generally speaking) muppets (in the pejorative rather than cute sense)
He's left Rover now after 18 years and makes starter motors for Indy cars and anything else specialist
www.ArkRacing.co.uk
Their website will be updated just as soon as I get round to writing it. (Easter hols here I come!)
Cheers,
Neil.
Your sort make me sick
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 2/4/04 at 05:32 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by stephen_gusterson
the gasget probs at 60k plus is a REAL
steve
Never had a "gasget problem"
I work on Rover engines all the time Here is the real truth about the K series
(1) Boil a K series and a good mechanic has a 1 in 3 chance of getting it water tight again, an average one that dosen't follow the manual
procedure exactly when stripping as well as rebuilding a 1 in 6 chance. (much the same is true of any wet liner all alloy unit -- such as some
Renault engines)
(2) After 4 years or so the engine is prone to very minor water drips in 2 places, (a) from the corner of the inlet manifold gasket near the water
take off, (a) from the from of the outer rim of the gasket at front of the head at the timing belt end. Also the coolant MUST be changed every 2
years.
(3) If you have minor colant leaks and neglect to check the coolant and over a period of months the engine will get to stage where airlocks and
boils -- boils very quickly the K series has a very small coolant capacity.
(4) The 1.8 is much more prone to minor leaks causing problems than the the 1.1, 1.4 or 1.6.
(5) The KV6 is a dead loss the early cars in particular blew gaskets and the procedure for head gasket replacement is so complex I wouldn't even
attempt it.
Keep an eye the water level and fix minor leaks and there is no gasket problem.
The reason why it isn't used in bigger numbers in kit cars is more to do with installation cost than anything else, the anti-theft system is
more complex than most and is built into the ecu.
My family all run various Rovers most of them bought "pre registered, three of them have K16 1.4 or 1.6 engines the mileage on these 3 cars
currently adds up to about 180,000 miles half of that on one car, inlet gasket have been change one car twice to stop minor water leaks, the head
gasket on the 214 was changed with out hitch when it started to drip coolant near the cam belt end. The gasket change on it own is very easy about 3
hours, but Rover procedures must be followed to the letter when both stripping and rebuilding.
[Edited on 2/4/04 by britishtrident]
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 2/4/04 at 05:41 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Noodle
snip
He was tasked at Rover with sorting out the problems. He reckoned drill 3 x 5mm holes in the theromostat and it just doesn't happen.
He blamed almost all problems on Rover dealers and their servicing who are (generally speaking) muppets (in the pejorative rather than cute sense)
snip
Cheers,
Neil.
We used to drill a single 1/8" in the thermostats on Imps to stop airlocks -- worked a treat.
Agree about comments on Rover dealers, In the days of BAE and BMW ownership the suits took away the dealerships of most of the old familty owned
BMC/Triumph dealers and took on here today gone tomorrow get rich quick outfits.
[Edited on 2/4/04 by britishtrident]
|
|
|
stephen_gusterson
|
| posted on 2/4/04 at 06:41 PM |
|
|
and I have never had a spell checker
prob is that most cars over 6 or so years old dont get regular servicing. So by the time you get a 70k 10 year old one, its not had any consistent
servicing regime, and the damage is done.
the guy at work's car started using about a pint of water a week. told him it was the gasket. 2 months later he took it to garage, and it was
confirmed.
car has now done 105k - same engine.
atb
steve
[Edited on 2/4/04 by stephen_gusterson]
|
|
|
