| Author | Message | ||
     Aaron Goldman New User Username: the420g Post Number: 2 Registered: 4-2013 |
Hello all, I have been offered a brand new 1994 (non turbo) motor for reasonable money. Does anybody know whether there is any interchangeability with an engine this late, and the earlier motor? (ie will an earlier inlet manifold fit, are the engine mounts the same etc) Any input would be appreciated | ||
| Lluís Gimeno-Fabra Grand Master Username: lluís Post Number: 301 Registered: 8-2007 |
Hi, the 1994 is the new model engine, with the plastic cover. Nothing will fit, not the EMS, not the inlet etc... | ||
| James Feller Grand Master Username: james_feller Post Number: 330 Registered: 5-2008 |
Aaron, Lluis has hit the proverbial for you, it cannot be just dropped into any MY car and away you go. In saying that the basic V8 config is not your problem. The 6.75 V8 engine has been pretty much the same from inception in 70' SY cars onwards, some internal strengthening and revisions in the 20,000 SZ series cars 87'MY. By 1994-95MY the engine received a completely new induction system to name just one of a multitude of changes and improvements. 'Evolution rather than revolution' I think is what RR used to say about its ageing but magnificent V8.... Retrofitting a 94' MY SZ engine into an older SZ vehicle I'm sure can be done but its all the engine mgmt, ancillaries, exhausts systems, gearboxs etc etc.... that I would imagine would be a huge cost to make compatible. Look Im sure it could be done if you so desired and didn't care that the car and engine/drivetrain were not matched in the factory, most things can these days, seen any of those "Custom Rides" shows....its amazing what shops can do. However you would be left with a bit of mongrel car though IMHO. J | ||
| Bob uk Unregistered guest Posted From: 94.197.122.85 |
Is the engine brand new or a reconditioned engine and if recon who built the engine. Depending on how much. The engine could be resold because there is a world market out there. I always recommend that engine numbers should match. Non matching numbers are becoming a bigger devaluer of historic cars. The historic car market has sort of grown up and players in the market are very much more clued up. Historic cars start at 25 years and older. I think that to fit this engine in say a 1985 SZ would be a nightmare. I have done similar and half way through something as innocent as a crank pulley hits you round the back of head. Rover V8 do that. Every one thinks they are all the same which is incorrect. The grooves were in the wrong place so I fitted the original which didn't have the correct damper for that crank. I spent ages finding the correct one which was very expensive because that version was only made in small numbers for ambulances. (Message approved by david_gore) | ||
| James Feller Grand Master Username: james_feller Post Number: 331 Registered: 5-2008 |
Well put Bob, I once had a 1977 Triumph Stag that did not have its original 3.0 Triumph V8. Instead it had a retrofitted 4.4 Rover V8. Sure it went much better, was lighter and sounded as good as the original Triumph unit but it just wasn't ridgy didge. I had a great deal of fun with that car, it was a beauty in BRG, such a good looking car but was a nightmare to sell in the end due to its non original powerplant.... The irony was most people liked the fact it did not have the original V8 and instead had 'perhaps the V8 it should have had in it when produced' if BL were thinking clearly at the time. It was a gorgeous car that was very reliable but it was a 'mongrel' nonetheless. Aaron, an engine like you have been offered is worth a vast amount of money to the right person or mechanical shop, five figures to be sure!!!! last time I chatted with people in the 'know' an engine rebuild for the RR v8 was a minimum 30K!! I would strongly recommend you don't try to break the engine or make it fit into a car it was not destined for. Im sure there must be interested parties for the unit in situ. Good luck J | ||
| Bob uk Unregistered guest Posted From: 94.197.122.84 |
The Stag was a flawed gem. The car was designed before the saloon version. The engine had a water pump driven like a dizzy off the Carmack shaft. It didn't run fast enough. The heads were badly cast with bad cores and obstructions. The timing chains wore fast. Apart from the above serious faults it was a boat anchor. It was down on power and not free revving. when rover and triumph joined together the stag was at prototype stage so the rover engine was considered, but triumph engineers insisted that the market demanded a exotic ohc V8. Also that in time the power would be much better. What happened was the warranty claims meant time and money being spent sorting out the mess instead of making the engine perform. On way of course is to reduce the output which is what they did by measuring the power differently to cover it up. Result 135bhp if you dared to thrash it. so when a 200bhp rover is fitted the difference is amazing, and one can drive it to Monaco with out it steaming all the way fingers crossed. Local to me is a lovely stag red with a black vinyl hard top and 3.9 fuel injected ex range rover engine and 5 speed gbox. That is the car the stag should have been. If only the boss had actually bosses the engineers then sense would have prevailed and blmc would have stopped duplicating engine sizes the buying public wanted reliable cars that were stylish. Flawed gem. (Message approved by david_gore) |
