Engine Weight comparisons
Discussion
I've noticed a lot of talk about a chevy LS1 V8 not being that much heavier than a rover V8. Whilst I'm keen to increase power I'm not interested if my car is going to handle like the QE2 due to too much weigth over the front wheels. one post on this forum quoted about 220kg for a LS1. Is this an alloy block engine?
On another site the weight for a Rover V8 was given as 144kg? think that's a 3.5l, but is there much increase in weight of the RV8 as capcity increases?
I'm going a bit old school now but any ideas how heavy an old ford 2.0 pinto would be for comparison? Ideally I don't want anything much heavier than that.
Cheers
On another site the weight for a Rover V8 was given as 144kg? think that's a 3.5l, but is there much increase in weight of the RV8 as capcity increases?
I'm going a bit old school now but any ideas how heavy an old ford 2.0 pinto would be for comparison? Ideally I don't want anything much heavier than that.
Cheers
www.fluke-motorsport.co.uk/weight/engine_trans.html
www.team.net/sol/tech/engine.html
I've found thes sites, second one is where I got weight of Rover V8 from.
Thanks
Jono
www.team.net/sol/tech/engine.html
I've found thes sites, second one is where I got weight of Rover V8 from.
Thanks
Jono
Am tired of the hype surrounding the RV8 engine. Man, I've heard figures as low as 130 Kgs being banded about for its weight. It's a widely used readily available engine- and there's a lot of tuning knowledge out there for it (some of the tuning is questionable).
But lets put things into perspective here:
These are the true weights of a late Disco 4 litre engine, compliant with all the modern emissions and refinement criteria.
Accessory Drive Belt - (1) 0.341kg
Air Cleaner Body 0.977kg
Air Cleaner Element 0.299kg
Air Cleaner Top 0.467kg
Air Flow Meter 0.226kg
Air Hose/Duct - (1) 0.325kg
Alternator 7.196kg
Engine Complete 177.000kg
Engine Management - E.C.U. 0.390kg
Starter Motor 4.060kg
Viscous Coupling 2.942kg
Engine Oil 5.676kg
The above comes to 200 kgs. Now an earlier vehicle will probably NOT have the reduction gear starter motor fitted and so you can expect that to weigh about 8 kgs, the accessory drive won't be poly belt driven but individually driven So that will weigh quite a bit more. The above also does NOT include the flywheel, which on the Rover is very very heavy compared to it's contemporaries. So we're already looking at way over 220 Kgs. The extra capacity over the 3.5 litre will lose some in the crank area, but because the RV8 doesn't have a fully counterweighted crankshaft- not as much as you might imagine. The block has been reinforced since the early days, but I can't see that adding much more then about 5-6 kgs. So these silly figures of around 140Kgs are Science Fiction.
Other points of note are the fact that the valve timing does its own thing about about 4000 rpm due to the flex in the pushrods and rocker shaft location-this has a HUGE effect on top end power, an area where the undervalved Rover V8 struggles already- enlargening the capacity further will just boost low speed torque with little effect on peak power due to the restrictive nature of the cylinder heads- you’ll end up having to go to specially made Wildcat heads to get the top end back unless you’re particularly fond of the feel of a “diesel-esque” torque curve. Now don't get me wrong, the RV8 is a great "working class hero" of an engine- readily available. I TOTALLY understand the emotional reasons behind choosing this legendary stalwart powerplant, or retaining it for a sense of originality- fair play. But when biased folk start to pitch this motor, on function, against the Chevy C5 motor or a twin cam Jag, BMW, or Porsche V8s spending thousands upon thousands and seriously believing all the hype, they're on shaky ground. It's the engine equivalent of chavving up your Vauxhall Corsa with 20,000 pounds instead of buying a thoroughbred. Probably the same kind of people who think that MGBs, Triumphs or other BL stuff were "British Engineering at its best". They were characterful, fun cars, that perhaps can leave some of us with a warm feeling inside- but woefully under developed. It's a shame, because I for one would have loved the opportunity in developing the Rover V8 the way the Chevy C5 or Porsche 911 air cooled flat-6 engine was…..
>> Edited by Marquis_Rex on Monday 22 November 16:26
But lets put things into perspective here:
These are the true weights of a late Disco 4 litre engine, compliant with all the modern emissions and refinement criteria.
Accessory Drive Belt - (1) 0.341kg
Air Cleaner Body 0.977kg
Air Cleaner Element 0.299kg
Air Cleaner Top 0.467kg
Air Flow Meter 0.226kg
Air Hose/Duct - (1) 0.325kg
Alternator 7.196kg
Engine Complete 177.000kg
Engine Management - E.C.U. 0.390kg
Starter Motor 4.060kg
Viscous Coupling 2.942kg
Engine Oil 5.676kg
The above comes to 200 kgs. Now an earlier vehicle will probably NOT have the reduction gear starter motor fitted and so you can expect that to weigh about 8 kgs, the accessory drive won't be poly belt driven but individually driven So that will weigh quite a bit more. The above also does NOT include the flywheel, which on the Rover is very very heavy compared to it's contemporaries. So we're already looking at way over 220 Kgs. The extra capacity over the 3.5 litre will lose some in the crank area, but because the RV8 doesn't have a fully counterweighted crankshaft- not as much as you might imagine. The block has been reinforced since the early days, but I can't see that adding much more then about 5-6 kgs. So these silly figures of around 140Kgs are Science Fiction.
Other points of note are the fact that the valve timing does its own thing about about 4000 rpm due to the flex in the pushrods and rocker shaft location-this has a HUGE effect on top end power, an area where the undervalved Rover V8 struggles already- enlargening the capacity further will just boost low speed torque with little effect on peak power due to the restrictive nature of the cylinder heads- you’ll end up having to go to specially made Wildcat heads to get the top end back unless you’re particularly fond of the feel of a “diesel-esque” torque curve. Now don't get me wrong, the RV8 is a great "working class hero" of an engine- readily available. I TOTALLY understand the emotional reasons behind choosing this legendary stalwart powerplant, or retaining it for a sense of originality- fair play. But when biased folk start to pitch this motor, on function, against the Chevy C5 motor or a twin cam Jag, BMW, or Porsche V8s spending thousands upon thousands and seriously believing all the hype, they're on shaky ground. It's the engine equivalent of chavving up your Vauxhall Corsa with 20,000 pounds instead of buying a thoroughbred. Probably the same kind of people who think that MGBs, Triumphs or other BL stuff were "British Engineering at its best". They were characterful, fun cars, that perhaps can leave some of us with a warm feeling inside- but woefully under developed. It's a shame, because I for one would have loved the opportunity in developing the Rover V8 the way the Chevy C5 or Porsche 911 air cooled flat-6 engine was…..
>> Edited by Marquis_Rex on Monday 22 November 16:26
My SBC with steel block and alloy head weighed 250kgs complete.... that is less headers, starter and flywheel BUT include the crate, stand, alternator, MSD ignition unit and air filter.
Yes a rover is lighter but not by as much as people claim... its the auxileries that really add to the weight.
My BMW V12 long engine only weighs 140kgs.... but all the auxileries like exhaust manifolds, starter, air com pump etc.etc... make the weight up to around 240kgs. it adds up very quickly
Yes a rover is lighter but not by as much as people claim... its the auxileries that really add to the weight.
My BMW V12 long engine only weighs 140kgs.... but all the auxileries like exhaust manifolds, starter, air com pump etc.etc... make the weight up to around 240kgs. it adds up very quickly
Marquis_Rex said:
I for one would have loved the opportunity in developing the Rover V8 the way the Chevy C5 or Porsche 911 air cooled flat-6 engine was…..
>> Edited by Marquis_Rex on Monday 22 November 16:26
I think a clean sheet of paper would be the only way .. others have tried .. good efforts but times change.
Clean sheet of paper would be best
Gassing Station | Engines & Drivetrain | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff