Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Andy B]

.....
No, original power outputs were:

3.5 as fitted to the P5B and P6B were 160bhp
 ....

I knew I'be picked up on that. I quoted a gross figure from Rover P5 & P5B The complete story although I knew there was a somewhat lower figure fitted to something with 4 wheel drive. I'd have guessed at the Land Rover      

[Marks DTM Calib]

I have tuned a few.....still got one in bits in the garage destined for 'a project'

Done a LOT of studying of them so sadly know them inside out!

Do you know that in the three years that Buick produced the engien they made more units then the entire Rover production cycle!

[Martin_1962]

90bhp in the 109

[Andy B]

.....
Do you know that in the three years that Buick produced the engien they made more units then the entire Rover production cycle!

Didn't Rover use a completely different casting technique though?  :-/

[Marks DTM Calib]

.....
Do you know that in the three years that Buick produced the engien they made more units then the entire Rover production cycle!

Didn't Rover use a completely different casting technique though?  :-/

They used a different casting technology for the block, added four extra bolts to each head to break up the head gasket seal (not fixed until 1995!), screwed up the inlet breathing (exhaust was not much better) and made the block weaker (improved with the SD1 designs).

[Andy B]

.... (exhaust was not much better)  ....

I don't know about other Rovers etc, but I saw under the bonnet of a MGBGT V8 & the manifold is practically a 90 deg elbow from the head so that it clears the front chassis legs.
As for  the carbs, they're mounted that far back, to clear the underside of the bonnet, that the fuel must've litterally poured into the manifold. Any atomisation would have been long gone.

[Marks DTM Calib]

The manifolds are not to bad but, the 90 or even 180 degree bends off teh SU's were a bloody nightmare!

[Vamps]

They still sounded nice though................
I had a P6B auto, lovely car, not the fastest or best mpg but a nice lazey car to drive around in. Had to sell it when I became a mature student 12 years ago. This is a car I would swop the Mig for

[Andy B]

The manifolds are not to bad but, the 90 or even 180 degree bends off teh SU's were a bloody nightmare!

They looked it

[Marks DTM Calib]

And just think of the heatsoak!

[Andy B]

EFi does have  some advatages I suppose!      

[Marks DTM Calib]

EFi does have  some advatages I suppose!      

EFi is always better than carbs......no venturi = no inlet restriction!

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

what was  the Rover prototype that used the V8 in 1967, a
year before proper production.
I remember it as a kid .It was a very futuristic looking car fo its time.
Does anyone recall.

[Kevin Wood]

The manifolds are not to bad but, the 90 or even 180 degree bends off teh SU's were a bloody nightmare!

They looked it

A typical bit of BL "we've got these carbs in the parts bin and you'll ruddy well use them" design by beancounter.

Ow yes, not aware of any V8 TVR engine that ever achieved anywhere near the claimed output power!

Did you see the article a couple of years ago when Dave Walker fitted an Emerald to one (can't remember if it was the AJP8 or the straight 6)?

Anyway, he got a load more power out of it and mapped it properly   so it didn't pop and fart all the time, did wonders for the torque at low revs and driveability. Ended up with a much better car. Typical - go to the lengths of designing your own engine and then don't bother to map it accurately.

Still, if they didn't run as rough as a bear's @rse they'd lose their appeal to most of their target audience.

Kevin

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

what was  the Rover prototype that used the V8 in 1967, a
year before proper production.
I remember it as a kid .It was a very futuristic looking car fo its time.
Does anyone recall.

Yes, just found picutres of it. Mid engine to boot. P6BS. Anyone remember this one?