DEAN C.
|
| posted on 10/4/04 at 08:35 AM |
|
|
Just to throw another point in from across the bar!
As much as I pull the the K series down ,I never came across too many problems with the single cam 1100 & 1400 Metro engines,these are a fast ,
revvy little lively motor, and I could see these making good cheap conversions.Good MPG as well in light cars!
Oh yes V8 black sludge problems!I've fully rebuilt quite a few V8's some for our own use (mildly tuned for racing)and some for customers
Range rovers and they are always sludged up and running quietly with no mains left.
All the ones I rebuilt though went on to do good mileages with regular oil changes and flushes, and the engines were spotless inside whenever the
rocker covers came off!
Sorry if I'm agreeing with you Dave!
Your round!!!! 
Mines a GUINNESS!!
Once I've finished a project why do I start another?
|
|
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 10/4/04 at 08:57 AM |
|
|
Rover K series head gasket difficulties are in 2 distinct types -- minor leaks round the outside of the gasket and damage by overheating as result
of leaks from the head gasket , water pump and most comononly the inlet manifold gasket.
The Rover cooling system contains little coolant and airlocks easlily the block is an open deck design with wet liners with this type of block if
this type of design looses water it will blow the gasket -- this is a fact other engines in the past with similar designs suffered the same fate.
However IF the water level is watched and the gasket is changed immediately an external leak develops there is no problem.
The gasket change itself is easy and the head bolts can be reused within reason provided they are checked and cleaned properly (in addition I chase
the threads with a die nut).
Dave Walkers points about the changes in the block design in late 95 after which a common block was used for all versions of the engine are very
valid but a lot of the blame lies in the design of the coolant hoses which changed in 96. The Metro with its simpler hose layout is less prone to
problems than the 200/400.
Somebody else made a good point about Rover raddiators -- they do tend to suffer from fatigue due to the core vibrating combined with the effects of
road salt means that changing around the 90 k mile mark is a pretty good idea.
A lot of of "mechanics" don't strip the engine in the corect order, or understand the tightening procedure the first stage of which
is the most vital also don't attempt to bleed the cooling system as it warms up..
At high milages the BMC A series in 1275 form was probably worse for head gasket problems than the K series but somehow because it just looked like
the smaller A series everybody regarded it as a pillar of reliability.
As I said earlier my family fleet is almost entirely Rover and has been for many years the K series engines aren't as tough as the iron block
Rover engines or as fit and forget as the Honda engine but they are better in many ways than anything else around.
The K series isn't a serial head gasket blower the way the Imp or Stag were, Imp head and block flexed so much the only way to keep an Imp
water tight was to go 998 and fit Wills rings,while the angled head bolt design on the Stag was an invitation to disaster.
[Edited on 10/4/04 by britishtrident]
[Edited on 10/4/04 by britishtrident]
[Edited on 10/4/04 by britishtrident]
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 10/4/04 at 04:49 PM |
|
|
Somewhere in this thread the Pinto and Kent engines have desciribed as models of old fashioned reliability --- sorry but I am old enough to remember
the original 3 bearing Kent engines eating big end bearings in 20k miles, while the kent Crossflow in 1600 form sufffers from bad cyilder bore wear
if revved . The Pinto was hated by fleet managers through out the 70s because of camshaft wear-- just as well for Ford there was no UK competition.
In the 70s and 80s the price of Ford engines from scrapyards was twice or three times that of any volume other make because they were in high demand
and the yards were seeing so few good engine come in.
|
|
|
craig1410
|
| posted on 10/4/04 at 04:58 PM |
|
|
Hi,
Remember Vauxhall OHC engines which had a tendency to go all rattly just before the camshaft snapped. I had a 1.6 GL Cavalier and the engine was great
and would rev to 7k RPM but everyone kept telling me to get rid of it quick as it was coming up to the magic 100k miles mark and the camshaft would
probably break.
Anyone else heard of this problem or was it another localised phenomenon?
Cheers,
Craig.
|
|
|
Simon
|
| posted on 11/4/04 at 12:03 PM |
|
|
Steve,
As you said, "when the AA man was fixing my BMW"
What more do I need to say
ATB
Simon
|
|
|
craig1410
|
| posted on 11/4/04 at 12:44 PM |
|
|
Simon,
Good point! 
Out of interest, here are the reliability results by Manufacturer and whilst not great for Rover, there are a lot worse and BMW's quality
craftsmanship only get's it one place higher than Rover...
 
ReliabilityResults
|
|
|
Spyderman
|
| posted on 11/4/04 at 02:39 PM |
|
|
Problem with those reports on reliability and costs etc, are misleading especially as to regards the long term reliability of an engine. They only
ever research vehicles upto a max of 5 years old. They are only just run in at that stage.
How many people here are using an engine that is under 5 years old?
Maybe a new poll?
At a guess I would suggest that 8 to 10 years old would be more realistic.
I seem to remember many years ago new cars having a lot of teething problems when new, but after the warranty work they became very reliable. We had a
couple of different brands. It was the Japanese cars that brought reliability to the primary years. However few lasted more than 3 - 5 years in those
early days.
It would seem that there are two main camps for reliability. The new car owners that want reliability for the first 3 years and the secand hand owners
who don't much care what happened when new as long as the car lasts a long time.
Surely building a locost car you should fall into the later camp(?), but many of you have new cars also. The logic for assesing a new car would be
completely different to an old one.
Have you ever been influenced by others recommendatons about how their car has never given trouble since they bought it new, only to buy a nail of a
second hand car?
A very simplistic argument I know, but relevant.
Anyway I will stop waffling now!
Terry
Spyderman
|
|
|
craig1410
|
| posted on 11/4/04 at 05:01 PM |
|
|
Terry,
I would have agreed with you but then I took a look at the website and extracted this:
ALFA ROMEO 3.41
AUDI 4.71
BMW 5.13
CITROEN 4.51
FIAT 4.02
FORD 4.57
HONDA 5.36
HYUNDAI 5.32
JEEP 4.69
LANDROVER 4.61
MAZDA 5.77
MERCEDES 4.91
MITSUBISHI 5.75
NISSAN 5.6
PEUGEOT 4.54
RENAULT 4.16
ROVER 4.98
SAAB 5.05
SUBARU 3.9
TOYOTA 5.87
VAUXHALL 4.46
VOLKSWAGEN 4.48
VOLVO 5.24
These are the average ages of vehicles for each manufacturer covered by Warranty Direct. They say they cover any car up to 12 years old but will only
begin coverage for a car up to 10 years old at the start of the policy. It's quite an interesting website.
Cheers,
Craig.
|
|
|
craig1410
|
| posted on 11/4/04 at 05:09 PM |
|
|
and here are average mileages.
ALFA ROMEO 39689
AUDI 61166
BMW 55812
CITROEN 49580
FIAT 35987
FORD 48253
HONDA 51652
HYUNDAI 53493
JEEP 53926
LANDROVER 51532
MAZDA 47798
MERCEDES 53899
MITSUBISHI 46237
NISSAN 52069
PEUGEOT 49216
RENAULT 43400
ROVER 45405
SAAB 59927
SUBARU 37018
TOYOTA 50953
VAUXHALL 50645
VOLKSWAGEN 48083
VOLVO 57427
Remember these are "averages" and there will be just as many above as below (more or less anyway). Also, I think this company only handles
cover OUTSIDE of the manufacturers warranty which might explain the slightly higher average age for those manufacturer who tend to give longer
warranties themselves.
Cheers,
Craig.
|
|
|
DEAN C.
|
| posted on 11/4/04 at 08:14 PM |
|
|
I think you've just proved Fatboy Dave right!!! Do you take these statistics around with you in a carrier bag,under your anorak..
I really didn't think anyone took any notice of crappy polls!!!
Anyone can juggle figures !!If they're not doing it to sell cars it's to sell magazines or even the information itself!!
Once I've finished a project why do I start another?
|
|
|
craig1410
|
| posted on 11/4/04 at 08:32 PM |
|
|
Dean,
You've lost me there mate...
These figures are from the website of a well respected warranty provider who make money or lose money based on the accuracy of such data. If, however,
they were misreporting the reliability to the detriment of the manufacturers then I'm sure the likes of BMW would throw a dozen lawyers their
way to sort it out.
I'm not naive enough to believe any old figures which someone gives me but unless you want to continue to base your decisions on rumour and
speculation then you have to start somewhere and in many cases it is well worth paying good money for reliable data. I came across this website when
researching the reliability of small cars as my wife was about to purchase one and above all I wanted a reliable one as I'm fed up fixing them
when they go wrong. BBC's Top Gear also reference this site from their own and I have a great deal of respect for their judgement as well
(especially before they all split and formed 5th gear)
At the end of the day I'd rather bet my life on the accuracy of data like this than some random AA man or some mechanic's pal I met at the
pub!!
The website is here if you want to make up your own mind.
Cheers,
Craig.
|
|
|
stressy
|
| posted on 14/4/04 at 07:54 AM |
|
|
Pinto out, K series in.....
To add another to the list of the brave, I have just ordered a k series engine which will replace my current pinto installation.
Reason for change......weight, economy, noise, tunibility and yes, before you all start laughing, reliability.
I did a fair bit of research before making my choice of engine and obviously was informed about the evil that is the head gasket problem.
My conclusion agrees with some earlier suggested points about airlocks in the cooling system. Knowing two people who have had 'k's blow (1
was a smashed sump, the other was a head gasket) this cooling issue stacks up. I have contacted a number sources who between them have fitted well
into 4 figures worth of k series engines and they all agree on this.
I guess i should menion here that my family have had three k series cars ok and i know of around 30 or so people who still have them with no
problems.( for the statisticians out there thats a 2.9% engine failure rate).
I even spoke to a maindealer who told me the k can be a nightmare to bleed and he imagined many people end up running with airlocks and a proportion
of those experience problems.
In essense if you dont get a good coolant bleed on filling and end up with an airlock, the engine may run fine but a little hot in the head (which is
where the air usually ends up), give it some time and bang...
So all being well i will collect the k next week and begin the "swap", could be fun.
As a result of the swap i will be selling the components of my pinto installation, these will be avaliable as soon as i remove them.
the engine is a 2l injection pinto running on twin 40 dellorto carbs, for which i actually have a serice pack ready to be used(£70 new), vulcan
non-vacuum distributor etc, vulcan low line sump. The carbs are on a short and slightly offset alloy manifold and have a twin cable linkage.
The engine has done 2000miles since the carbs and alike were installed. The sump and the distributor ,as well as most the engine ancillaries, were new
at that time.
Ideally the carbs, manifold and dizzy make a good package as you gan put them on and go (might be worth usng the service kit first as one gasket needs
replacing) and the sump is a tidy bit of kit.
I am quite happy to remove any parts people want and sell them individually if hte price is ok..
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 14/4/04 at 02:06 PM |
|
|
One other thing to watch out for that could cause the outer silicone seal of the gasket to blow is the valve in the the coolant tank cap sticking ---
I have never seen this on a K series but I have on the 820 which uses the same type of cap.
|
|
|
