Would the V8 out of a Range Rover Classic be a 'Classic' V8... l

[Lionelgee]

Hello All,

Depending on what camp you were from things like the Red motor 253 and the 308 Holden V8 and the 302 Ford Cleveland and the 351 Windsor V8 can be considered to be 'classic' V8 motors. The bigger the capacity the more popular each stable's V8s were. At the time some people were removing the 253/308 Holden motors and replacing them with either small-block of big-block Chevrolet motors.

Keeping in mind the early 1970s options of Holden and Ford V8s how would a Rover V8 out of a Range Rover 'Classic' compare design, reliability and performance wise? I am aware that Range Rover Classic V8 were a small block all-aluminium Buick V8 engine. To date I have not seen or heard of a direct comparison between the Holden, Ford and Range Rover V8s of the day. It was always talk between the Holden and the Ford V8. Yes, Mopar products were around at the time - only very few people talked about them.

Also, were the Rover V8 and the LT95 considered to be a good match; or were there better boxes for reliability and performance in gearboxes for the V8? If so what is considered to be a better match reliability and performance wise for the Range Rover Classic V8.

Kind regards
Lionel

[AK83]

In my experience: I reckon the 3.5 rover V8 was the best motor ever. One of the most bullet proof I've ever had.
Really really early ones could suffer from crank failures(one which I had), and many did suffer from overheating, but not because of the motor, simply due to neglected cooling systems.
Fix the cooling system and never had an overheating issue.

I've had many P6Bs, and SD1s with the 3.5, About 12 all up, and a single solitary RRC(79) .. all of which did many klms in short time frames.

LT95 was a load of rubbish in my experience. Always had some issue. Failed diff, failed diff again, then a weird jumping out of high range issue(where I binned it and replaced with LT77 and LT230).
So I can't say good things about the clunky noisy LT95.

Old Holden sixes .. maybe reliable, but utter garbage in terms of NVH .. THE most horrid engine, up until recently, I've ever had to endure. Ford six were a bit more palatable(in the modern alloy head versions), but my mate killed one with a conrod out the side of the block .. so not entirely 'bulletproof'
Holden v8s .. my experience hasn't been great(via friends/family) on the 308 side. Brother had a HZ and a HQ both 308, both failed .. headgasket on one and some fuelling issue on the other .. flogged off for something "less reliable"(another SD1 .. [bigrolf])
I've had friends with 253s tho .. and I don't ever remember any issues with them .. and the way they used to drive them .. down "Cherry Lane"(back in the day a backwater drag strip 15 mins from the city).

Another engine I had a bit of success with was (funnily enough) the old Lancia 2 lt 4cyl from the 70s'(which I believe was just a Fiat motor). Again many klms in a short time, and only failure was carby got replaced. no issue with electrics, or mechanicals.
Car had to go due only to massive and uneconomical rust issues. Nice to drive, efficient, smooth(when compared to holdens and fords of the era!!).

I had a mate who was into BMW(back in the 80's 90s). They were nice motors, but at every service, the dealer would sting him for some extra work. I used to believe that maybe not so bulletproof, as some would claim and that the stealer was doing their job as in the description!.. but my nephew recently got himself an E30 323 ... and it doesn't sound completely healthy for a 200K klms engine. Not enough experience of them to make a call, but not so impressed.

[Lionelgee]

In my experience: I reckon the 3.5 rover V8 was the best motor ever. One of the most bullet proof I've ever had.
Really really early ones could suffer from crank failures(one which I had), and many did suffer from overheating, but not because of the motor, simply due to neglected cooling systems.
Fix the cooling system and never had an overheating issue.

I've had many P6Bs, and SD1s with the 3.5, About 12 all up, and a single solitary RRC(79) .. all of which did many klms in short time frames.

LT95 was a load of rubbish in my experience. Always had some issue. Failed diff, failed diff again, then a weird jumping out of high range issue(where I binned it and replaced with LT77 and LT230).
So I can't say good things about the clunky noisy LT95.

Old Holden sixes .. maybe reliable, but utter garbage in terms of NVH .. THE most horrid engine, up until recently, I've ever had to endure. Ford six were a bit more palatable(in the modern alloy head versions), but my mate killed one with a conrod out the side of the block .. so not entirely 'bulletproof'
Holden v8s .. my experience hasn't been great(via friends/family) on the 308 side. Brother had a HZ and a HQ both 308, both failed .. headgasket on one and some fuelling issue on the other .. flogged off for something "less reliable"(another SD1 .. [bigrolf])
I've had friends with 253s tho .. and I don't ever remember any issues with them .. and the way they used to drive them .. down "Cherry Lane"(back in the day a backwater drag strip 15 mins from the city).

Another engine I had a bit of success with was (funnily enough) the old Lancia 2 lt 4cyl from the 70s'(which I believe was just a Fiat motor). Again many klms in a short time, and only failure was carby got replaced. no issue with electrics, or mechanicals.
Car had to go due only to massive and uneconomical rust issues. Nice to drive, efficient, smooth(when compared to holdens and fords of the era!!).

I had a mate who was into BMW(back in the 80's 90s). They were nice motors, but at every service, the dealer would sting him for some extra work. I used to believe that maybe not so bulletproof, as some would claim and that the stealer was doing their job as in the description!.. but my nephew recently got himself an E30 323 ... and it doesn't sound completely healthy for a 200K klms engine. Not enough experience of them to make a call, but not so impressed.

Hello Arthur,

Thank you for your detailed reply and for sharing your experiences. I appreciate it. Were there any issues fitting the LT77 or the LT230 to the classic's V8?

I was thinking overnight how at the time vehicles like Jaguars and Mercedes also came out with V8 engines. It is just that in my rural/regional New South Wales public high school European cars did not come into the discussion about V8s.

Kind regards
Lionel

[loanrangie]

The 3.5 goes all the way back to 1959 ( in Buick form ) so well and truly a classic motor, under powered compared to the other American V8's of the era but did ok in various Rover/MG/Morgan/TVR guises.
I had a hi comp 3.5 in my old 85 RRC and even mated to a TF727 it was a reasonable performer and sounded great with its 2.5" single exhaust system.

[Homestar]

Hello Arthur,

Thank you for your detailed reply and for sharing your experiences. I appreciate it. Were there any issues fitting the LT77 or the LT230 to the classic's V8?

I was thinking overnight how at the time vehicles like Jaguars and Mercedes also came out with V8 engines. It is just that in my rural/regional New South Wales public high school European cars did not come into the discussion about V8s.

Kind regards
Lionel

The LT77 with LT230 TC came standard in the RRC in the 80's - my 86 had this combo. The LT77 is a very weak gearbox in comparison to the LT95 - which is more of a truck box - crude but works ok. Given the LT95 was used in the Perenties - with some mods to the TC, they were quite a good box, but not very refined. I've had no issues with the unit in my 101 apart from when the PO put gear oil in it which shagged the oil pump - it's always been hard to select first in cold weather but no issues apart from that.

As for the 3.5 V* - it was a very good engine as previously noted. They sound great too and I think this is to do with the firing order as I've found they all sound heaps better than a Holden or Ford V8 - that said, the Rover V8 doesn't have all that pesky power getting in the way of the great sound though... [biggrin]

If you don't need to go very fast or care too much about fuel, a 3.5 with LT95 is a good combo IMO.

[Lionelgee]

Hello All,

I also remembered yesterday, that after I left school one of my mates had a Purvis Eureka fitted with a V8 out of a Leyland P76. I never got the chance to have a ride in it. The car was not kept for very long.

Kind regards
Lionel

[Lionelgee]

Hello All,

Pardon my ignorance towards Range Rover V8s - were the Range Rover Classic 3.5 V8 without ECUs, PCMs and similar computer electronics to run them?

Kind regards
Lionel

[loanrangie]

Hello All,

Pardon my ignorance towards Range Rover V8s - were the Range Rover Classic 3.5 V8 without ECUs, PCMs and similar computer electronics to run them?

Kind regards
Lionel

Twin stromberg carbs up until late 85 then the old flapper lucas EFI.

[AK83]

I never had issues with the LT77, and I ended up doing about 200K klms with it.
My RRC ended up with about 660K klms on it, I got it at about 148K .. so it had done some work for me. The motor was original ... needed a ton of work, but still got me to Darwin and back without major issues. as the bearing were probably shot to pieces, it leaked out of the front main seal if revved too hard(very rare).
In the 300K klms with the LT95, I had two diff problems and the final straw of it jumping out of high range .. but as is common knowledge like homestar said, the LT77 had limited reliability.

Jags didn't have v8s until the mid or late 90s(I think) .. Daimler had a small v8 in the 60's, but not Jag. Merc had v8's for years.

Of the roughly dozen v8 rovers vehicles I had, only one my of my early P6 engines snapped a main bearing cap. Apparently this could be a common issues on hard worked early v8's(about pre 74 .. maybe).
I think later ones had either 4 bolt mains or cross bolted .. or something. Not too sure, maybe a RV8 expert could enlighten. But back in the day(about 30 something years ago now), only this one P6 let me down in this major manner.

All other RV8 issues were Lucas' infamous 100% unreliability record, I had them all I reckon .. all sorted and the v8s went on for many klms unperturbed(with correctly supplied electrical energy! [biggrin]).

Two particular incidents stuck out to me as to the almost indestructible nature of the earlier RV8s .. both cooling system issues.
My RRC one day on a long drive decided it was time to red red hot. The early RRC had a gauge that showed a black band and then a red band at about the top 1/4 of its range. It just suddenly started to run in the red range. I'm about 3000klm from home and began chasing my tail trying to figure out what happened. I ended up pulling the thermostat. there were no leaks, and more importantly no loss of coolant(nor any excess pressure) .. just that the usually non functional(ie. just sat in the normal black range of the gauge) .. started sitting in the red range. In the end, and to get me home, I used an old carton to prop up the bonnet by a few inches to allow more air into the engine bay .. and needle back in the black .. and got home. But still zero luck working out why it suddenly ran in the red. Not being able to figure it out for two or so years, one day the actual reason got revealed .. it was the otherwise ok looking radiator disintegrating into dust if touched! replaced rad .. back in the black, so to speak. For many thousands of klms and 2 years, the rad wasn't really working as it was supposed too, but never caused any issues to engine like say a blown coolant system in any way.
Awesome!

So a little while later, now with a SD1 in the garage too, one day it decided to lighten it's already lightweight allow motor by not only dropping all its coolant, but also some of the metal in one of the core plugs. No way to hold any coolant, middle of the night and had to get home for work the next day. As this particular SD1 was a bit of a scrap heap / project to play with, I didn't care if it totally blew itself to smithereens .. it cost basically nothing up to this point anyhow.
So a half hour drive, had it's temp gauge far into the red. This model had a gauge temp numbers on it ... it ran 130°C for about 20 odd minutes through empty suburbs. It got to the point that it was running so hot, it lost prety much all power up one final hill before the easier flat part to home, only my moment got it up and over .. from there it was all very light footedness(it literally had maybe 1Hp to move it along). Fluked it home, got onto the driveway turned it off, but it now refused to die! It ran on for a good few minutes on it's own fumes, chugging and choking and spluttering and then finally chuffed and stopped. I thought .. DEAD!
After a few minutes, and having some spares(for the RRC, I think) .. I decided to replace the rusted out holed one. Engine was nice and hot, so should be easier to do it too. Yep.. easy peasy stuff, added coolant but still leaked out its sides .. pulled it out and put in another .. same deal .. but left it at that. I had the RRC to get around so no biggie. But! .. next day started the new half dead SD1 .. started with no problem at all. Ran for about a year .. ran fairly nicely too .. as if this running with no coolant issue may have only been a dream or something.
About a year later, brother wanted to get a car, and decided on a (then quite new) VQ Statesman v8. The deal was they'd give 2K trade in, and knowing what had happened to the SD1 .. it was a no brainer .. that was going to be the trade in [biggrin]
Then, having owned the Statesman for a while, by a miraculous coincidence I saw the old SD1 parked in Brighton, and slammed brakes on and pulled up to catch up with the driver. Nice young man, who really liked the way it drove. I asked any issues .. other than stupid electrical problems(thanks Lucas!) .. nothing. I told him .. you can thank me for that, I always look after my project cars! [bigrolf]

If you talked to "old timers" years ago, they all hated rovers and triumphs and jags and stuff .. as too fragile and temperamental and prone to overheating .. etc. Maybe so, and I had overheating issues .. as said always due to some coolant issues. Always sorted when fixed up properly.

[Lionelgee]

Hello All,

Naive Range Rover 3.5 V8 person writing here - so be warned.

From my experience with Series Land Rovers I know that Holden V8s can be fitted to the Series IIIs - even better if it was originally fitted with a six cylinder petrol motor.

Does the same apply to fitting a Range Rover V8 3.5 motor to a Series III? As in the physical fit between the chassis rails of a Series III? I am not concerned with standard firewalls or floors spacings.

Kind regards
Lionel

[101RRS]

Does the same apply to fitting a Range Rover V8 3.5 motor to a Series III? As in the physical fit between the chassis rails of a Series III? I am not concerned with standard firewalls or floors spacings.

Kind regards
Lionel

The Series 111, Stage 1 came standard with the 3.5 engine.

[JDNSW]

1. Series 3 came with the V8 as an option from 1979, mated to the LT95. While v8s have been successfully fitted with the standard series gearbox, the box is likely to have a short life unless the right foot is used with care.

2. The LT95 was designed from scratch for the V8, specifically for the 101, but also for the first Rangerover. (the specification of a powered trailer for the 101 gave the third output point for the powered trailer, used for the third axle on the Perentie 6x6 and the civilian Landrover 110 6x6.)

While not fitted with a v8, but with an Isuzu, the lt95 in my 110 is now approaching 700,000km, and has had no issues since several problems around 100,000km except for an oil pimp leak a couple of hundred thousand kilometres back, repaired when the (oily) clutch was replaced.

[Lionelgee]

Hello John & 101RRS,

Thank you for filling me in on the V8 in the Stage 1s being the 3.5 V8. I knew they came out with either the Isuzu diesel or V8. I did not know that their V8 was the 3.5.

Was the chassis the same dimensions between the Series III and the Series III Stage I? Namely a 109. To fit the V8 into a standard Series III that was originally fitted six cylinder petrol does the positioning of the engine mounts need to change for the V8?

Kind regards
Lionel

[JDNSW]

Chassis is the same dimensions, but the front crossmember is repositioned from memory, and I don't know about engine mounts. Steering setup is different, presumably because of the space occupied by the box and linkage, although I do not believe it has been changed on at least some of the aftermarket V8 installations.

[cjc_td5]

Hello All,

Naive Range Rover 3.5 V8 person writing here - so be warned.

From my experience with Series Land Rovers I know that Holden V8s can be fitted to the Series IIIs - even better if it was originally fitted with a six cylinder petrol motor.

Does the same apply to fitting a Range Rover V8 3.5 motor to a Series III? As in the physical fit between the chassis rails of a Series III? I am not concerned with standard firewalls or floors spacings.

Kind regards
LionelA rover v8 will fit in a series landy but the engine needs to be moved forwards to clear the footwells. The straight 4 & 6 engines fit between the footwells. The v8 was moved forward in the stage 1 which is why the crossmember and radiator were moved forward (with longer bonnet).

[Lionelgee]

A rover v8 will fit in a series landy but the engine needs to be moved forwards to clear the footwells. The straight 4 & 6 engines fit between the footwells. The v8 was moved forward in the stage 1 which is why the crossmember and radiator were moved forward (with longer bonnet).

Hello CJC and John,

So if the footwells were not locked into the manufacturer's location could the 3.5 V8 be positioned to use the Series III six cylinder engine mounting points? Would using the Series III engine mounting/crossmember position have flow-on effects? For example, with the positioning of the radiator for the 3.5 V8 if the radiator mounts for a Series III six cylinder motor chassis were not modified? Or the positioning of the steering box and steering relay?

Kind regards
Lionel

[PerthDisco]

Enormously popular in ski boats with Ali block raw water cooled.

[Slunnie]

Chassis is the same dimensions, but the front crossmember is repositioned from memory, and I don't know about engine mounts. Steering setup is different, presumably because of the space occupied by the box and linkage, although I do not believe it has been changed on at least some of the aftermarket V8 installations.

The other big problem is all of the cross members are different and don't provide the space for the LT95 or the propshafts unless you cut them out. The engine mounts are also totally different. The front 2/3 of the chassis is very different despite it being the same chassis width. I suspect thats why many will have fit the V8 to the series gearbox. My opinion, which is based on experience, is that you're better off with a Stage 1 V8 chassis although it is possible to put the V8 into a 6 cyl chassis. I understand the Series3 6cyl firewall is the same as that used on the Stage 1 also.

These are the 4cyl mounts.

http://www.slunnie.com/coppermine/albums/Ute2Resurection1/Ute0034.jpg

And the V8 mounts

Drivers side V8
http://www.slunnie.com/coppermine/albums/userpics/10001/P1010003.JPG

Passengers side V8

http://www.slunnie.com/coppermine/albums/userpics/10001/P1010004.JPG

[Lionelgee]

The other big problem is all of the cross members are different and don't provide the space for the LT95 or the propshafts unless you cut them out. The engine mounts are also totally different. The front 2/3 of the chassis is very different despite it being the same chassis width. I suspect thats why many will have fit the V8 to the series gearbox. My opinion, which is based on experience, is that you're better off with a Stage 1 V8 chassis although it is possible to put the V8 into a 6 cyl chassis. I understand the Series3 6cyl firewall is the same as that used on the Stage 1 also.




Hello Slunnie,

Thank you for the detailed information. A great thank you for posting the photographs - which I deleted to save space in this message. I am in the lucky position of having the choice between either a six cylinder or a four cylinder chassis to choose from. My initial leanings were towards using the six cylinder chassis. Your message confirmed this and the lack of modification I have seen in my Series III that has been converted to a Holden 202 which was originally fitted with a 2.6 litre six cylinder motor. There are no discernible modifications to the chassis or the radiator mounts. It does come with a set of specialist alloy engine mounts though. No changes to the firewall or tunnel. It must have been a proprietary conversion kit. The previous owner told me the car was converted by a professional mechanical workshop either in Maryborough or Gympie.

I have also been whiling away some time reading this.... Accessed 20th September 2022 from, Street Rod Manual | Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts (https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/infrastructure-transport-vehicles/vehicles/vehicle-design-regulation/rvs/bulletins/street-rod-manual). Especially the bit about chassis and boxing at the moment.

Kind regards
Lionel

[Rick Fischer]

Hi guys

Something got lost in the thread [bigsad]

Rover V8 is/was also the basis for the P76 4.2 and the REPCO Formula 5000 motor.

Only recently gave away my rover V8 tuning and development manual (my SUs tuning manual, and A series mini engines) to a youngish mechanic who was trying to learn about MGs, BMC A and B series engines and Rover V8s the hard way ('twas in a Morgan)

The Rover V8 tuning manual described how to take a basic 3.5 through stages up to a Formula 5000 injected race engine with coiled snakes exhaust pipes. [biggrin]

By the time my 83 RRC left me he had a stroked 4.2, ported and polished heads, ex Jag 1 3/4" SUs, upgraded cam and could "chirp" all four going from 1st to 2nd. That, and my earlier 1310 Cooper S still rate as my favourite cars.

Cheers

Rick F

[Lionelgee]

Hi guys

Something got lost in the thread [bigsad]

Rover V8 is/was also the basis for the P76 4.2 and the REPCO Formula 5000 motor.

Only recently gave away my rover V8 tuning and development manual (my SUs tuning manual, and A series mini engines) to a youngish mechanic who was trying to learn about MGs, BMC A and B series engines and Rover V8s the hard way ('twas in a Morgan)

The Rover V8 tuning manual described how to take a basic 3.5 through stages up to a Formula 5000 injected race engine with coiled snakes exhaust pipes. [biggrin]

By the time my 83 RRC left me he had a stroked 4.2, ex Jag 1 3/4" SUs, upgraded cam and could "chirp" all four going from 1st to 2nd. That, and my earlier 1310 Cooper S still rate as my favourite cars.

Cheers

Rick F

Hello Rick,

Thank you for the information about the V8 Rover tuning manual. When the P76 came out the Principal at the Primary School I was a student at bought one. Not long after the P76 in general developed a less than sterling reputation. Then once I finished high school two mates each bought a P76 and I actually got to have a ride in them. I thought they were a nice car. There ends my knowledge of P76s. Can you recall the full details of the V8 Rover tuning manual - such as full title, year of publication and publisher? Could you post the details up please? I wrote the last bit just in case you were reading along and went "yes I can remember the details".

Kind regards
Lionel

[ozscott]

While the 202 red motor (and to some extent the blue motors) were a little asthmatic, they were solid enough. They did not rev freely like the little 149 and 161's that were like little sewing machine motors but there were ways of liberating a lot of reliable fun from all of those (and the 186). I had a few motors in the straight 6 years but my favourite was a 202 bored 40 thou over and worked big time - from a new cast Yella Terra head made in Aus, to 3/4 inch Sig Erson roller rockers, stallite valve seats, phosphorus/bronze guides, larger (but not crazy large) valves, billeted Pro-cam from the US, full balance (even the harmonic balancer copped a balance), hand ported and polished at home, steel timing gear instead of the silly blue motor fibre, shot peened con rods and higher compression forged pistons, then even with the stock Strasbourg Vara-jet carb the thing absolutely went. And revved cleanly time and time again to 6,000 without valve bounce. I had a mate with a new 5 series BMW straight 6 and both motors were quite similar in character. Let us just say it nailed stock 253, 308 V8's as well as VL 3.0 Turbos (stock) with both a 4 speed M21 and the 3 speed auto that I had in there at various times and was a great highway cruiser. So I think with some work the Holden straight 6 (the 3.0 of course was Nissan) was a gem and mine used to put up decent miles even with the output so high.

As for Rover V8 - I think the 3500 was the best but the 3.9 distributor motor was close in terms of reliability but had a fair bit more grunt. The 4.6 of course can be made to work well in terms of reliability (and some went to 300,000 - 400,000 wihtout issue but most it seems not) as can the 4.0. My pick would be however a well re-conditioned 4.6 any day provided the block was sound, with the thicker webbing (which they usually were) and top hatted pistons and ARP head studs.

Cheers

[Rick Fischer]

Hi

Unfortunately, the author and full title no longer in my head. Book is around what would pass for A4 size these days at least 1/2 inch thick plus covers with as I recall a worked V8 with 8 trumpets and snakes on the cover. Is an English book, and I do recall the author was a name familiar to me in mid 80s.

No further help I am afraid.

Cheers Rick F

[scarry]

As for Rover V8 - I think the 3500 was the best but the 3.9 distributor motor was close in terms of reliability but had a fair bit more grunt. The 4.6 of course can be made to work well in terms of reliability (and some went to 300,000 - 400,000 wihtout issue but most it seems not) as can the 4.0. My pick would be however a well re-conditioned 4.6 any day provided the block was sound, with the thicker webbing (which they usually were) and top hatted pistons and ARP head studs.

Cheers

One of my Brothers has a D1,3.5 V8,done just under 400,000Km.Does all the work on it himself,weaping heads the only issue,not a very difficult repair.
Cams slightly worn,but not bad enough to cause any issue.Had it since it was a year old.

The Isuzu 4BD1 was probably one of the most reliable and long lasting engines ever fitted to an LR.

[ozscott]

One of my Brothers has a D1,3.5 V8,done just under 400,000Km.Does all the work on it himself,weaping heads the only issue,not a very difficult repair.
Cams slightly worn,but not bad enough to cause any issue.Had it since it was a year old.

The Isuzu 4BD1 was probably one of the most reliable and long lasting engines ever fitted to an LR.Nice mate. Yep purely when considering how things came from the factory then tbe early castings were best and thicker webbing on the 3500 also helped to make them the most reliable petrol motor Land Rover (have ever) fitted. Cheers

[Lionelgee]

Hi

Unfortunately, the author and full title no longer in my head. Book is around what would pass for A4 size these days at least 1/2 inch thick plus covers with as I recall a worked V8 with 8 trumpets and snakes on the cover. Is an English book, and I do recall the author was a name familiar to me in mid 80s.

No further help I am afraid.

Cheers Rick F

Hello Rick,

Does this ring any bells.... Tuning and Modifying the Rover V8 Engine by Daniel R. Lloyd and Nathan J. Lloyd from Lloyd Special Developments in the UK?

Or

How to Power Tune Rover V8 Engines by Des Hammill.

As a bit of a postscript - I have looked into the Lloyd's who are the authors of the first book I found a bit more. They have their own performance and development company. I am not sure whether their book may be a bit like the Land Rover Series restoration book I bought years ago. It was sponsored by Britpart and for some strange reason nearly every single part that you could use to improve the efficiency and performance of your vehicle was available from .... Britpart!

Kind regards
Lionel

[350RRC]

One of my Brothers has a D1,3.5 V8,done just under 400,000Km.Does all the work on it himself,weaping heads the only issue,not a very difficult repair.
Cams slightly worn,but not bad enough to cause any issue.Had it since it was a year old.

The Isuzu 4BD1 was probably one of the most reliable and long lasting engines ever fitted to an LR.

A 4BD1 is very capable of doing 1M kms before needing a rebuild.

I know of one 3.5 that came close to that, even after it was sunk in a dam in a 2 door early in it's life up to the roof.

The 350 in my pos has done 700K kms since its last rebuild.....nearly all on lpg. Has gas heads.

If the definition of a 'classic V8' is based on longevity and strength a cast iron motor (350, Ford Windsor, etc) is streets ahead.

There are none of the alloy oil pump issues, heads warping with water loss issues, etc that 3.5's suffer from............. let alone the liner slipping issues that 3.9 and 4.6 LR donks can incur and other quirky stuff.

Just depends what the definition of 'classic' is.

I had a 2 door with a 4.4 race motor........just awesome sound, etc, but I wouldn't consider it as a reliable daily drive, comparing it with the 74 with the 350.

I like strong, mass produced US stuff (designed to be reconditioned) combined with Pommy design (chassis, body, suspension) from before or around 1970 ish.

Maybe it's all throwaway after that.

DL

[scarry]

Gotta remember as well those old engines were very low stressed.

Look at the power and torque rating of a 3.5L petrol engine today,or a diesel equivalent of the 4DB1

These newer engines are not only highly stressed,they also have to comply to emission standards,EGR’s,DPF’s,cats,on it goes.


A mate rebuilds truck engines,has for years.
Years ago many went for over 1M Km before a rebuild,now they are lucky to get 7 to 800,000 out of them,usually less.
It’s the emissions stuff that is killing them.

[ozscott]

Gotta remember as well those old engines were very low stressed.

Look at the power and torque rating of a 3.5L petrol engine today,or a diesel equivalent of the 4DB1

These newer engines are not only highly stressed,they also have to comply to emission standards,EGR’s,DPF’s,cats,on it goes.


A mate rebuilds truck engines,has for years.
Years ago many went for over 1M Km before a rebuild,now they are lucky to get 7 to 800,000 out of them,usually less.
It’s the emissions stuff that is killing them.Yep and as part of that the critical state of mixture to ensure not only the best burn for emissions but best fuel economy. Makes them run hotter and a slight deviation to too lean is always close by. Cheers

[Rick Fischer]

Hello all

Did ask the guy to whom I gave book, is:

Tuning Rover V8 Engines by David Hardcastle c 1993

ISBN 0 85429 933 5

Is "Haynes" book

Cheers
Rick F





Hi

Unfortunately, the author and full title no longer in my head. Book is around what would pass for A4 size these days at least 1/2 inch thick plus covers with as I recall a worked V8 with 8 trumpets and snakes on the cover. Is an English book, and I do recall the author was a name familiar to me in mid 80s.

No further help I am afraid.

Cheers Rick F

[Lionelgee]

Hello all

Did ask the guy to whom I gave book, is:

Tuning Rover V8 Engines by David Hardcastle c 1993

ISBN 0 85429 933 5

Is "Haynes" book

Cheers
Rick F

Hello Rick,

Thank you very much for taking the trouble of tracking down the book's new owner and grabbing the title, author, publisher and ISBN details. I greatly appreciate it.

I tracked it down on Amazon with the matching details.

Kind regards
Lionel

[Lionelgee]

Hello All,

One round trip of 994 kilometres broken up with an overnight stay later and I have a Range Rover 3.5 litre V8 with an LT95 gearbox attached sitting at home.

I just received a notification from eBay that I was the winning bidder on a copy of the Tune Rover V8 engine book that Rick described. It is apparently in "near new" condition and less than half the price that other retailers were selling it for.

After a bit of degreaser and some scrubbing I found the engine number. Next step is to match the engine number against the year of manufacture and the model so I can identify the correct parts catalogues and workshop manuals.

The next step is to identify what the cut off wires are and where they are meant to connect to!

Kind regards
Lionel

[350RRC]

Hello All,

One round trip of 994 kilometres broken up with an overnight stay later and I have a Range Rover 3.5 litre V8 with an LT95 gearbox attached sitting at home.

I just received a notification from eBay that I was the winning bidder on a copy of the Tune Rover V8 engine book that Rick described. It is apparently in "near new" condition and less than half the price that other retailers were selling it for.

After a bit of degreaser and some scrubbing I found the engine number. Next step is to match the engine number against the year of manufacture and the model so I can identify the correct parts catalogues and workshop manuals.

The next step is to identify what the cut off wires are and where they are meant to connect to!

Kind regards
Lionel

Try these colour codes Lionel.

Lucas wire colour codes for Land Rover (http://www.expeditionlandrover.info/Lucaswirecode.htm)

They didn't change for decades. I used them to completely rewire the engine bay in my pos with wire from a complete 1981 ish RRC loom.

I just did it like that so all the wires were original colour and gauge.

The insulation on my 1974 wire was only really degraded from heat in the engine bay. If you can get hold of a whole loom from a similar vehicle you're going to put this 3.5 into you'll have plenty to work with and it'll be the correct colour and gauge for purpose.

I soldered all the joints 20 + years ago and have had zero problems.

cheers, DL

[Lionelgee]

Hello All,

I bought the V8 Rover Tuning books when I thought the engine was described in the advertisement - a 3.5 litre V8. After I got the engine home I found the engine number and searched online. I found out that the engine was a Rover motor that was fitted to a Morgan Plus 8 and it was a 3.9 litre motor. How much of the content of the V8 Rover tuning books for the 3.5 litre transfer across and be pertinent for the 3.9 litre motor?

A number of people have assured me that I am better off with the 3.9 litre motor. Apart from the extra 400 ml capacity what are the benefits of the 3.9 litre motor over the original 3.5 litre version?

Kind regards
Lionel

[loanrangie]

Hello All,

I bought the V8 Rover Tuning books when I thought the engine was described in the advertisement - a 3.5 litre V8. After I got the engine home I found the engine number and searched online. I found out that the engine was a Rover motor that was fitted to a Morgan Plus 8 and it was a 3.9 litre motor. How much of the content of the V8 Rover tuning books for the 3.5 litre transfer across and be pertinent for the 3.9 litre motor?

A number of people have assured me that I am better off with the 3.9 litre motor. Apart from the extra 400 ml capacity what are the benefits of the 3.9 litre motor over the original 3.5 litre version?

Kind regards
Lionel

Its like 95% the same engine.

[Lionelgee]

Its like 95% the same engine.

Hello Loan Rangie,

Well that is not too bad then. Just have to work out the 5 percent that does not apply to my engine. Hmmm.... I wonder what 5 percent that is though? Tee-hee!

Kind regards
Lionel

[V8Ian]

Cam, carburation and compression I'd suggest, Lionel.

[Lionelgee]

Cam, carburation and compression I'd suggest, Lionel.

Hello Ian,

Just done a bit more digging and I found a 3.5 litre to 3.9 litre V8 conversion kit from Rimmer Brothers. The kit contains surprisingly little conversion... As they describe ...

Re-sleeve the block using the liners supplied and fit 3.9 litre pistons. The existing 3.5 litre crank is retained.
Kit includes all components listed in Full and Short Engine Rebuild Kits, plus a set of 8 standard size, 3.9 litre, 9.35:1CR pistons and cylinder liners. (Accessed 22nd May 2023 from, Rover V8 3.5 to 3.9 Conversion Rebuild Kits | Rimmer Bros (https://rimmerbros.com/Item--i-GRID800002)). My engine is already a 3.9 litre so it does not need the kit. Still very interesting how little needs to be changed.

Kind regards
Lionel

[Lionelgee]

Hello All,

At last I think I may be able to date what year my Rover V8 3.9 Litre was made in! The engine number is 47A07767B This is identified by the V8 Forum as:


Factory 3.9 Litre Engines
47A00001 Morgan +8 9.35:1 CR EFI
Accessed 4th of October 2022 from Rover V8 Engine Numbers (Rover V8 Engine Numbers (http://www.v8forum.co.uk/engineno2.htm))


While this and other websites identify the engine number as belonging to a Morgan Plus 8, they fail to state when the 3.9 litre motors replaced the previous 3.5 litre motors fitted in Morgans. Tonight I found a Wikipedia article that suggests that, "In 1990 a 3.9 L version of the engine was fitted and that used the Lucas 14CUX fuel injection system. All Rover/LR Plus 8 versions between 1976 (Sd1) and GEMS are very easy to upgrade to much greater power" (accessed 22nd of May 2023 from, Morgan Plus 8 - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgan_Plus_8)). Okay, so Wikipedia may not be renown for being the most reliable of sources. However, it is the best information that I have to date. I did contact the Morgan head office and exchanged emails with them. If I wanted to pinpoint what exact Morgan Plus 8 that engine number was fitted to and when the engine or car was made, I would have to pay them 180 UK Pounds for the privilege. Umm - I think I will stick with Wikipedia thank you!

So, my engine may have been manufactured from 1990.

Further validation that the engine may have been fitted to a Morgan Plus 8 is provided by Rover V8 Engine Numbers (https://rimmerbros.com/c/Rover-V8-Engine-Numbers) However, they too like the Rover V8 Engine Numbers site, fail to provide a year of manufacture.

Kind regards
Lionel

[V8Ian]

Lionel, not all 3.9s are born equal.
Even Land Rover offered high and low compression versions.
Quite possibly Morgan offered an even higher compression version. Easily done with different pistons (most likely) and/or shaving the head.
A more aggressive cam grind will also produce more power.