Land Rover v8 and TVR V8 - Whats the differance?

[ZetecPower]

Are the Rover V8's you get in the land rover and range rover any differant the the rover V8's in the TVR? Ive heard theres some change in heads and cams and whatnot or is it easy as sliding a landie v8 straight in?

btw im not thinking of doing so (because i dont own a TVR) i was just curious to what the differances are

[trackcar]

.. about 30 years and a plastic cover to you chief ..

[eesbad]

A comparison...

3.9 Landy - your 3.9 litres gets you 180bhp
390SE Wedge - its 3.9 litres kicks out 275bhp (as quoted)

A wee bit 'fettled' you might say...

[Boosted LS1]

On the few wedges I've worked on the bottom ends were standard landrover guff. TVR put the investment into porting the heads rather nicely along with a cam change.

[rev-erend]

TVR attempted to get more power out of the RV8 as cheaply as possible.

Fair play to them ..

That keeps the price of the end product down too.

There is always more power but the more you obtain the most those additional horses cost.

When they finally looked at new head castings - they quickly found out the head was the most expensive bit - the bottom end and a new V8 engine design was not actually much more £££ - hence the AJP V8.

[Dave81]

eesbad said:

A comparison...

3.9 Landy - your 3.9 litres gets you 180bhp
390SE Wedge - its 3.9 litres kicks out 275bhp (as quoted)

A wee bit 'fettled' you might say...

Out of interest why did TVR go from the quoted 275 for the wedges down to 240 for the 4ltr Chims and Griffs (i know they were all overestimated), just seems a bit weird to me???

[eesbad]

Dave81 said:

Out of interest why did TVR go from the quoted 275 for the wedges down to 240 for the 4ltr Chims and Griffs (i know they were all overestimated), just seems a bit weird to me???

Because TVR reckoned that only Wedge owners could handle the extra power...

Seriously though! I think it's generally accepted that the 390SE's (bar a handful of the early Andy Rouse engined versions) were actually putting out nearer 240bhp.

Edited by eesbad on Thursday 31st July 14:05

[rev-erend]

eesbad said:

Dave81 said:

Out of interest why did TVR go from the quoted 275 for the wedges down to 240 for the 4ltr Chims and Griffs (i know they were all overestimated), just seems a bit weird to me???

Because TVR reckoned that only Wedge owners could handle the extra power...

Seriously though! I think it's generally accepted that the 390SE's (bar a handful of the early Andy Rouse engined versions) were actually putting out nearer 240bhp.

Edited by eesbad on Thursday 31st July 14:05

I think it went from a hand assembled engine with high quality components (cosworth pistons) to something cheaper to produce..

[RIP_puffsorted2]

Dave81 said:

eesbad said:

A comparison...

3.9 Landy - your 3.9 litres gets you 180bhp
390SE Wedge - its 3.9 litres kicks out 275bhp (as quoted)

A wee bit 'fettled' you might say...

Out of interest why did TVR go from the quoted 275 for the wedges down to 240 for the 4ltr Chims and Griffs (i know they were all overestimated), just seems a bit weird to me???

nice big lumpy cam in the wedges, little more city boy friendly one in the Chim and Griff

[aerospoke]

390SE had Big valve heads. 400 Chims have standard LR heads.

Cheers Jens

[falcemob]

BHP in a Range Rover is not as important as in a TVR. The RR lump will have different cams to give it more torque and less top end bhp.

[Pupp]

RIP_puffsorted2 said:

nice big lumpy cam in the wedges...

Which is??

[Boosted LS1]

^ 218 has been fitted to some.

[rigga]

That was fitted to my Griff by a previous owner when the original wore out,searches iv edone seemed not to rate the spec of the 218..... having never driven another tvr ive no idea what the difference is.

[RetroWheels]

trackcar said:

.. about 30 years and a plastic cover to you chief ..

Yes.. but what do i do about my old 78's ???

[Boosted LS1]

rigga said:

That was fitted to my Griff by a previous owner when the original wore out,searches iv edone seemed not to rate the spec of the 218..... having never driven another tvr ive no idea what the difference is.

There is a variation of the 218 from V8D called a hybrid 218. I plotted about 30 cams through my pc and it looked really good so we bought one

[rigga]

yes ive seen the hybrid version mentioned,and seems to be a worthwhile choice.....mine though i would guess is the standard 218 was fitted by tower view racing from the paperwork i have....... note to self, must ring them and check some time.

[grahamw48]

My 400SE Wedge (Chim HC engine) is fitted with a 218/220 cam.
The car feels little different to how my Series 2 390SE did, except being hotwire...no nice pops and bangs on the over-run.

Uses less oil, and perhaps a bit more 'economical'...haha.

I'm sure there is a great deal of variation between individual cars, and a R/R session would probably add quite a few horses to most...must get down there.

[900T-R]

rev-erend said:

I think it went from a hand assembled engine with high quality components (cosworth pistons) to something cheaper to produce..

By the end of their development span, the Wedges were looking a bit expensive and the numbers sold weren't great. Then TVR went back to a simple, straightforward, retro curvy car in the shape of the S which became a hit and brought TVR back to the brink, and they worked from there. The original Griff 4.3 was £27K - what was a SEAC, £45,000-odd?

IMHO the five-oh was a blatant attempt to get as much wallop as possible for the lowest cost, and compromised (it would have made an excellent Rangie engine with a milder cam and porting ) as a result.

[trackcar]

RetroWheels said:

trackcar said:

.. about 30 years and a plastic cover to you chief ..

Yes.. but what do i do about my old 78's ???

at last someone with a sense of humour