Simple Questions

[Yorker]

But there is a matter of getting all the SMOG equipment properly set to meet State requirements. Normally not an issue with a leafer due to age.

True- that depends on the state. In NY for example you'd think it would be difficult because we are a CARB state but as long as it is a pre OBD-II it is a non issue. A friend of mine has a 305 in his 1994 Disco and it has passed NYS inspection with no issues. Depending what state you are in you'd have to do your own research to determine if you could put in a 4.3l or 5.0 or whatever. With Discos and RRCs getting so cheap now I think we'll see more of these swaps though.

I don't know if the LR transmissions would like the 5.0l but then again the output varies greatly depending how they were tuned and how they were driven.

 

[R_Lefebvre]

How easy is it to do these swaps? Engine mounts and bellhousing bolt pattern would seem to be a big concern. Engine management is actually the easy part for me.

I almost think it'd be interesting to swap in a 2.3L 4 banger Duratec from a Ranger. Put a turbo on it and it'll make lots of power. Be a little more efficient, and those are good engines.

I'm sure I'll catch flak for that suggestion, but I like 4 cylinders for their simplicity.

 

[Yorker]

How easy is it to do these swaps? Engine mounts and bellhousing bolt pattern would seem to be a big concern. Engine management is actually the easy part for me.

I almost think it'd be interesting to swap in a 2.3L 4 banger Duratec from a Ranger. Put a turbo on it and it'll make lots of power. Be a little more efficient, and those are good engines.

I'm sure I'll catch flak for that suggestion, but I like 4 cylinders for their simplicity.

Are you in the OVLR club? There is a fellow in there who can swap just about anything. He put a EFI 5.0l in his 101 forward control and made his own adapter to mate it to the LT95. He also put a EFI GM 2.8l V6 in one of his 88's again he built his own adapter etc. Simon is his first name- I forget his last name. Someone here might know it.

 

[Oilburner]

Are you in the OVLR club? There is a fellow in there who can swap just about anything. He put a EFI 5.0l in his 101 forward control and made his own adapter to mate it to the LT95. He also put a EFI GM 2.8l V6 in one of his 88's again he built his own adapter etc. Simon is his first name- I forget his last name. Someone here might know it.

I'm the OVLR past president and I have not heard of this Simon character, and based on what I am hearing we should talk! I think Mr. Lefebvre is an OVLR member, or will be soon enough, I believe we met at the social at the Prescott a few months ago (young guy with the 6BT powered 109, there is only one AFAIK)

Due to the much higher complexity of the DII's body control systems and engine management controls (and the fact that they are interlinked), it would make a clean swap difficult. It would probably be cheaper to simply pop in a brand new 4.0 or 4.6 and keep on trucking, unless you could do all the work yourself and you have a huge shop and you can afford 8 months of downtime. Anything can be done.

 

[Mercedesrover]

Simon is down near Hamilton if I remember right. Can't think of his last name bit he's a Welshman. Does work for a foundry and is a pretty cleaver cast-man. Does his own bell housings for the 2.8 swap. Not my favorite motor but they seem to work well for those guys.

He had is 101/Ford at the Guy Fawkes rally least year. Spun a bearing and we had to stuff a couple new shells in it late on a Saturday night. He drove it home the next day. One cool thing about common engine transplants....We found a set of bearings for that engine at 7:00 on a Saturday night in rural New York State and had the engine running that night. Try that with a Rover engine.

Simon's a cool guy. Drives like the hammer of hell though.

 

[Oilburner]

Simon is down near Hamilton if I remember right. Can't think of his last name bit he's a Welshman. Does work for a foundry and is a pretty cleaver cast-man. Does his own bell housings for the 2.8 swap. Not my favorite motor but they seem to work well for those guys.

He had is 101/Ford at the Guy Fawkes rally least year. Spun a bearing and we had to stuff a couple new shells in it late on a Saturday night. He drove it home the next day. One cool thing about common engine transplants....We found a set of bearings for that engine at 7:00 on a Saturday night in rural New York State and had the engine running that night. Try that with a Rover engine.

Simon's a cool guy. Drives like the hammer of hell though.

Ahh wait a minute - 101 with 1100R16 Xl Michelins? I think I have met him, when he had the Rover V8 in it. He blew a front driveshaft, heavy footed lad!

 

[Alaska Mike]

How easy is it to do these swaps? Engine mounts and bellhousing bolt pattern would seem to be a big concern. Engine management is actually the easy part for me.

I almost think it'd be interesting to swap in a 2.3L 4 banger Duratec from a Ranger. Put a turbo on it and it'll make lots of power. Be a little more efficient, and those are good engines.

I'm sure I'll catch flak for that suggestion, but I like 4 cylinders for their simplicity.

You'll get no argument from me about 4 bangers, as I am planning a 2.5L swap in my Series. I would check the Novak site on their thoughts on 4 bangers and fuel efficiency before you decide, though.

 

[Yorker]

Ahh wait a minute - 101 with 1100R16 Xl Michelins? I think I have met him, when he had the Rover V8 in it. He blew a front driveshaft, heavy footed lad!

Yep heavy footed indeed! hehe... He spun the bearings in his 5.0l at Howard Smith's Guy Fawkes Rally. When I asked him how it happened he said something about a problem with the lose nut behind the wheel or something to that effect.



He then had to change said bearings in the driveway in order to get home. I think Jim helped him with that?

 

[Yorker]

Jim is this simon's 101? I can't remember:[edit] nope it has NY plates- duh...

here is a pic of him hooking ip a cable to his 88:

here was what he sent me about the 101 swap:

Hi Matt, The conversion for the mustang engine in the 101 was considerably more difficult than the 2.8 in the 88. The physical room in the engine bay in the 101 is incredibly tight, any extra room was by design used in the cab itself. Also the starter motor on the Ford engine bolts to the T5 transmission so a converter plate is also needed to bolt into the main adapter plate inorder to have the starter gear mesh with the ring gear. Then due to the chassis rail on the drivers side sitting just underneath the spark plug holes, the exhaust manifolds don't fit yet if 1960's manifolds from the Ford 298 are available then these will fit with minor adjustment. Now the Ford 302 waterpump sits much lower on the engine than the Rover V8's and because the cooling fan is driven from the waterpump shaft the radiator should also be lowered so as to maximize the cooling capacity of the hotter running 302. On 101's fitted with the knoken winch it would be detrimental to the pto shaft to move the gearbox down 1" although the engine mount brackets would also have to be lanced off and rewelded if the gearbox was lowered, this would give enough clearance for the stock gear shift link bar to be used. However I left all the mounts stock and made up a new link bar which still binds on the roof of the engine cover when the dog is sat on it ( 50 lbs) an alternative to this would be to modify the engine cover by raising it up 1". Finally because the gear shift lever pivots on top of the front of the engine,a bracket ( or 3/8" aluminum plate) must be fixed to the front engine casing ,strong enough to withstand the abuse of rapid and forceful gearchanges whilst off road driving. And further more if that isn't enough to put a guy off, as far as Rover gearboxes go unless an LT95 was the recipient of the Ford 302 HO I wouldn't waste my time! 225hp can be a destructive force. Hope this was of some help, let me know. Simon.

this is where he works iirc:

Future Patterns & Prototypes, (519) 448-4605. 167 Industrial St.George ON

 

[R_Lefebvre]

I'm the OVLR past president and I have not heard of this Simon character, and based on what I am hearing we should talk! I think Mr. Lefebvre is an OVLR member, or will be soon enough, I believe we met at the social at the Prescott a few months ago (young guy with the 6BT powered 109, there is only one AFAIK)

Due to the much higher complexity of the DII's body control systems and engine management controls (and the fact that they are interlinked), it would make a clean swap difficult. It would probably be cheaper to simply pop in a brand new 4.0 or 4.6 and keep on trucking, unless you could do all the work yourself and you have a huge shop and you can afford 8 months of downtime. Anything can be done.

No, I don't think we've met. At least, I wasn't at a Prescott social. I did attend the first meeting in Belleville last Sunday, not sure if you were one of the guys there.

Oh, it would never about being simple or cheap. More about being more reliable and possibly better fuel efficiency.

It's true that pushing a small 4 banger harder might not result in lower fuel consumption, it largely depends on HOW hard you push. The Otto cycle (unlike the Diesel cycle) is actually more efficient at higher loads. However, when you cross the point where you need to be driving around in closed loop operation running 13:1 AF and retarding spark to avoid detonation, then it really starts being inefficient. So, the key is to not overdo it.

I had a WRX with a 2.0L 8:1 compression ratio turbo engine. It used to get the same mileage at 100mph as it did at 60 because it was running 7psi boost from the turbo, but still closed loop operation. Once you go open loop however, the party is over.

 

[Alaska Mike]

It's true that pushing a small 4 banger harder might not result in lower fuel consumption, it largely depends on HOW hard you push. The Otto cycle (unlike the Diesel cycle) is actually more efficient at higher loads. However, when you cross the point where you need to be driving around in closed loop operation running 13:1 AF and retarding spark to avoid detonation, then it really starts being inefficient. So, the key is to not overdo it.

I think the aerodynamics and weight of the Rover come into play, as does where in the RPM range max torque and HP are achieved.