What's in my V8?
Discussion
In the process of rebuilding a 3.5L Rover V8 to fit into an old Landrover
that I'm restoring/modifying, previously had a 2.5 turbo diesel and I'm
looking to give it a bit more go.
To that end I bought what was someone's abandoned project; a rolling chassis
with engine, gearbox, axles etc. as it was a convenient (and cheaper) way of
getting many of the parts I needed, all condition/history unknown etc.
It had no oil in it and I drained 1.5L of water from the sump (I think it
was collected rain as the gearbox is also wet?), I now have it on a stand
with the sump off and it looks fairly decent inside, except for a steel
bush/spacer that fell out of it!
Said bush measures 23mm long, 19mm wide with a 9mm hole through the centre,
now I'm not familiar with these engines but I can't see that it has fallen
off anything (though I need to get deeper into the strip down) so I'm
wondering if anyone can identify/confirm if this is part of the engine or
just a foreign object?
Pics of said foreign object;
and, of course the engine;
Thanks in advance.
that I'm restoring/modifying, previously had a 2.5 turbo diesel and I'm
looking to give it a bit more go.
To that end I bought what was someone's abandoned project; a rolling chassis
with engine, gearbox, axles etc. as it was a convenient (and cheaper) way of
getting many of the parts I needed, all condition/history unknown etc.
It had no oil in it and I drained 1.5L of water from the sump (I think it
was collected rain as the gearbox is also wet?), I now have it on a stand
with the sump off and it looks fairly decent inside, except for a steel
bush/spacer that fell out of it!
Said bush measures 23mm long, 19mm wide with a 9mm hole through the centre,
now I'm not familiar with these engines but I can't see that it has fallen
off anything (though I need to get deeper into the strip down) so I'm
wondering if anyone can identify/confirm if this is part of the engine or
just a foreign object?
Pics of said foreign object;
and, of course the engine;
Thanks in advance.
False alarm, all sorted now.
For anyone interested? - on the bottom of the bearing supports there's a stud that holds the windage tray and oil pickup in place, I removed the nut holding them on and didn't realise this spacer was on the stud to hold it away from the crank - it all looked to be a 1-piece assembly rather than a stud/spacer, so all good now.
Had me worried for a while though as there's no way an object that big could get in there unless it was deliberately put there, not even through the (large) sump drain-hole.
For anyone interested? - on the bottom of the bearing supports there's a stud that holds the windage tray and oil pickup in place, I removed the nut holding them on and didn't realise this spacer was on the stud to hold it away from the crank - it all looked to be a 1-piece assembly rather than a stud/spacer, so all good now.
Had me worried for a while though as there's no way an object that big could get in there unless it was deliberately put there, not even through the (large) sump drain-hole.
Not sure on your aims. But before you spend too much on a low comp 3.5 you might want to see how much a 3.9, 4.0 or 4.6 would be.
A low comp 3.5 strangled on twin carbs and a lazy cam isn't all that much of an upgrade over the diesels. It'll make a nice sound and drink a lot. But you get a lot more "under the curve" performance (aka grunt) with the larger displacements.
A low comp 3.5 strangled on twin carbs and a lazy cam isn't all that much of an upgrade over the diesels. It'll make a nice sound and drink a lot. But you get a lot more "under the curve" performance (aka grunt) with the larger displacements.
Interesting, it is apparently a 9.35:1 cr (stamped on the block) so not the low comp version as fitted to Landrovers. An online search of the serial no. suggests it was originally from a Rover SD1, not sure how much of an improvement that might be?
Aim is to build it into the Landrover that I am restoring, the old diesel engine isn't the original either and it's the old diesel turbo (non TDI) which I understand isn't up to much plus I'm really not a diesel fan so, I was thinking a V8 would give it a decent amount of go. Obviously not after making it quick, just not as asthmatic as your normal old Landrover.
As mentioned above, it came to me as a job lot; rolling LR chassis with a decent bulkhead, gearbox/transfer box, axles, wheels and the V8 fitted with twin SU carbs. I bought this for the running gear and bulkhead as they are all better than what I had.
I have no idea of the condition which is why I'm stripping it (at least partially) to evaluate and it's not complete as in the ancillaries so wouldn't run anyway but it turns over freely and appears to have decent compression though I've not tested that yet.
So far it's just as you see it in the pic above; on a stand, sump removed, no manifolds and as such I can see most of the internals but yet to remove the heads or at least try to get a view of the bores/pistons/valves but I'm concentrating on the LR chassis and running gear at the moment so it will have to wait a while.
Not too bothered about fuel consumption and I do like a nice sounding engine
but is the 3.9/4.0 that much better than the 3.5? specifically for use in an off-roader where low-down grunt is more important than outright power/revs.
I am happy to change stuff like cams and carbs but at this point I'm not too far invested into it and so am flexible as to which way to go.
Aim is to build it into the Landrover that I am restoring, the old diesel engine isn't the original either and it's the old diesel turbo (non TDI) which I understand isn't up to much plus I'm really not a diesel fan so, I was thinking a V8 would give it a decent amount of go. Obviously not after making it quick, just not as asthmatic as your normal old Landrover.
As mentioned above, it came to me as a job lot; rolling LR chassis with a decent bulkhead, gearbox/transfer box, axles, wheels and the V8 fitted with twin SU carbs. I bought this for the running gear and bulkhead as they are all better than what I had.
I have no idea of the condition which is why I'm stripping it (at least partially) to evaluate and it's not complete as in the ancillaries so wouldn't run anyway but it turns over freely and appears to have decent compression though I've not tested that yet.
So far it's just as you see it in the pic above; on a stand, sump removed, no manifolds and as such I can see most of the internals but yet to remove the heads or at least try to get a view of the bores/pistons/valves but I'm concentrating on the LR chassis and running gear at the moment so it will have to wait a while.
Not too bothered about fuel consumption and I do like a nice sounding engine
but is the 3.9/4.0 that much better than the 3.5? specifically for use in an off-roader where low-down grunt is more important than outright power/revs.I am happy to change stuff like cams and carbs but at this point I'm not too far invested into it and so am flexible as to which way to go.
I partially rebuilt a 3.5 in to a Series III a while back. The 3.9/4.0 can have liner/head issues not usually found in the 3.5.
I replaced the cam and timing chain with an upgrade and put an Edelbrock on it as I couldn't find any SU carbs. It came with some Stombergs in poor condition. I followed the advice of RPi Engineering.
It was decent enough for off roading with lots of low down grunt.
My engine number suggested Discovery, but it was also 9.35:1.
I replaced the cam and timing chain with an upgrade and put an Edelbrock on it as I couldn't find any SU carbs. It came with some Stombergs in poor condition. I followed the advice of RPi Engineering.
It was decent enough for off roading with lots of low down grunt.
My engine number suggested Discovery, but it was also 9.35:1.
Sounds interesting, I was thinking the cam might be worn anyway (I understand it's a weak point?) and I know there are various upgrades that can improve things, especially if the old cam is worn and I'll almost certainly be having the heads off to check/refurb the valves etc. whether it's worth then increasing the CR by changing the pistons, I don't know?
Mine has the SUs, again not sure of condition etc. (look OK on the outside) and I don't know what the best carb setup is but I thought the SU setup was generally considered a good option? (I had a Spitfire 1500 with twin SUs many years ago and it seemed a good setup).
I quite like the look of the Weber 4-barrel setup though it's quite pricey with the manifold (not sure if it's basically like the Edelbrock?) but I don't know how well it performs.
Mine has the SUs, again not sure of condition etc. (look OK on the outside) and I don't know what the best carb setup is but I thought the SU setup was generally considered a good option? (I had a Spitfire 1500 with twin SUs many years ago and it seemed a good setup).
I quite like the look of the Weber 4-barrel setup though it's quite pricey with the manifold (not sure if it's basically like the Edelbrock?) but I don't know how well it performs.
The Edelbrock is pretty similar to a weber - it didn't like side slopes that much - it used to overfuel. Holleys are better for this I am led to believe.
I took the heads off - there was a minor lip on the bores, but as compression was good, I left the pistons and bores alone. I replaced the cam, which was shagged and the timing gear which was at least half a turn loose along with new lifters, pushrods and composite gaskets along with all oil seals.
At least being a Defender type, you will have access to full width radiator to help with cooling. I would advise an oil cooler too.
I took the heads off - there was a minor lip on the bores, but as compression was good, I left the pistons and bores alone. I replaced the cam, which was shagged and the timing gear which was at least half a turn loose along with new lifters, pushrods and composite gaskets along with all oil seals.
At least being a Defender type, you will have access to full width radiator to help with cooling. I would advise an oil cooler too.
Thanks, already has a large radiator with twin electric fans though it all looks tired so I may replace it with something newer/better and an oil cooler sounds a good idea. I had heard that they tend to run quite hot, I suppose a slow-moving, heavy, un-aerodynamic vehicle works it hard and doesn't give much opportunity for high airflow through the rad?
Interesting about the 4-barrel carb overfuelling on slopes, I wonder if the SUs are better in those circumstances?
If the heads come off then the valves will come out and, at the very least be re-seated, new seals etc. after all it is (according to my research) between 36 and 47 years old and I've no idea if it's ever had anything done to it.
Interesting about the 4-barrel carb overfuelling on slopes, I wonder if the SUs are better in those circumstances?
If the heads come off then the valves will come out and, at the very least be re-seated, new seals etc. after all it is (according to my research) between 36 and 47 years old and I've no idea if it's ever had anything done to it.
Gassing Station | Engines & Drivetrain | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff