Thread: Cost to rebuild an S3 2.6L motor??

Old Dog, unless you are fanatical about a 100 point totally original restoration, I would not bother with a 2.6 Rover 6 cyl. particularly as you have a Fairey overdrive. You should install a bigger, more powerful engine, that does not rev. as hard as the Rover, which had to rev. to get anywhere with low output and slow gearing. My first choice is a Chrysler Hemi 6, only 1/4" ,waterpump flange to clutch housing face, longer than a red Holden. Second choice, a 12 port blue Holden. Third choice, a red Holden. All of these are physically smaller and lighter than the Rover, are cheap to rebuild, and, in the case of the Hemi 6, more power than the LR could use. I worked at Leyland Truck & Bus when we were LR/RR distributors and we all recognised theRover 6 as a dog, installed by Rover to meet the marketing requirement for a 6 cyl. engine. The LR four cyl. petrol engine made a better vehicle.

G'day OldDog

Brian is right about the 2.6 ltre motor, was lovely in the Rover 100/105R but detuned woefull, it might be worth while retro fitting a 4cyl 2.25, just as quick on road, and cheaper to run 15/17 mpg

They only need the 4cyl bellhousing fitted instead of the 6 cyl bellhousing, and the chassis engine mount position changed everything else is basicaly the same and you will have the benifit of the larger 3" front brakes and booster The difference in the bellhousings are the 6 Cyl B/H has the upper bolts at 11am--1pm with a bolt hole on the started casting, while the 4 Cyl B/H has the upper bolt at 12 O'clock and no starter casting bolt

I was originally going to fit up a blue 202 which i've rebuilt but went cold on the idea. I've modified a lot of stuff over the years and usually it ends in tears or becomes totally unreliable etc. Plus the fact that in NSW you have to get it engineered is another put off. The 2.25 sounds like a good idea, and they'd have to be easy to get as there were so many made. Is it only the bellhousing and engine mounts that need to be changed?

Bulkhead, transmission tunnel are different as well, but you would be able to leave them in - mount the engine further back, which is probably what Uncle Ho was implying. Probably a few other minor differences you would have to modify, such as the radiator shroud, but there would not be much

G'day OldDog
Yup ! John's right, the firewall extends further back into the cab,and the gearchange lever is back a little to the 4cyl, that is why the 4 cyl engine mounts would need to be located rearwards, the radiator hoses would need to be changed, but the 4cyl ones may do, the radiator shroud might need modding, all else shoud be the same, and there shoud be little problem rego wise as it is still a Landrover motor , and it is smaller in both cylinders and capacity so might not need a mod plate.

If you go the Holden route just remember that the Series 3 G'box does not like high torque shock loadings as the holden torque curve is very different to the Landrover.


cheers.

Guys I have never seen 6 Cylinder 2.6 litre and good in the same sentence I completely devoted my self to these things in the early 80s they cost me a fortune and were NEVER reliable.
If you want to use a Rover motor a good 2.25 litre will beat a 2.6 any day.
The F engine was great in the car but never well suited to the Land Rover due to excessive back pressure on the rear cylinder ( read burnt exhaust valves )
If the valves dont burn out the head gasket will blow, Avoid it if you can

Originally Posted by djam1

Guys I have never seen 6 Cylinder 2.6 litre and good in the same sentence ....(snip)

I've never had anything to do with them, but you are right - they certainly have a bad press. And unlike the 2.25 they do not stand neglect and abuse. In a way it is a bit surprising as the four cylinder F-Head in the Series 1 was quite reliable, at least in my experience.

Perhaps the comparison of the 2.6 and the 2.25 reflects the fact that the 2.25 was designed from the ground up as an offroad engine where the 2.6 was designed as a road engine for saloon cars and later adapted to offroad use. It is the sort of history that makes you worry about the change to a Transit engine in the Defender.
John

This is good stuff, certainly takes an interesting turn as i hadn't even considered the 2.25! So with the engine mounts being moved further back, is that the actual engine mounts welded to the frame you refer to? Will the gearbox mount stay in the same spot? If so then i wouldn't have to get new tailshafts etc. It might be wiser for me to try and pick up a wrecked series 3 with a good engine, that shouldn't be hard to find, and i'd have all the bits to do the conversion.