froggy
|
| posted on 23/1/06 at 07:44 PM |
|
|
impressive! hows the lag though? 
|
|
|
|
|
MrTom
|
| posted on 23/1/06 at 08:02 PM |
|
|
I'd been thinking about doing a v8 locost. You know, Because I'm an American. But I couldn't fit it with T-Tops, so I gave up on
that plan.
I picked up an all aluminium DOHC 4.6 ford v8 for $500US. And I got the car it was installed in for free. It's a shame to just use the engine,
because the car is in such nice shape, but I really have no use for a 4300lb landyacht like that.
I think just about any v8 would throw off the weight balance, the smallest v8 I've found over here for a reasonable price is the Ford DOHC 3.4
in the SHO Taurus. And it's still probably far too heavy to use in a car you want to handle well.
|
|
|
02GF74
|
| posted on 23/1/06 at 08:04 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by smart51
You don't have to have power to have a V8. Rover V8s came is various sizes from 2.5 to 3.9 litres (I think). Some American V8s produce
barely 150 BHP, something a goos 2 litre I4 European engine can manage. Even with a small V8, you get the sound that you're looking for.
River v8 came in 1 size, 3.5 l. Land/Range Rover v8 varied from 3.5 through to 4.6.
It is big lazy relatively light all alloy engine, not particularly powerful but can be tuned up at reasonable cost ; bear in mind there is twice as
many heads etc.
|
|
|
NS Dev
|
| posted on 23/1/06 at 08:20 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MrTom
I'd been thinking about doing a v8 locost. You know, Because I'm an American. But I couldn't fit it with T-Tops, so I gave up on
that plan.
I picked up an all aluminium DOHC 4.6 ford v8 for $500US. And I got the car it was installed in for free. It's a shame to just use the engine,
because the car is in such nice shape, but I really have no use for a 4300lb landyacht like that.
I think just about any v8 would throw off the weight balance, the smallest v8 I've found over here for a reasonable price is the Ford DOHC 3.4
in the SHO Taurus. And it's still probably far too heavy to use in a car you want to handle well.
Despite my earlier post which no-doubt came over as anti-v8, the rover all alloy v8 is pretty light, certainly weight is not the big issue, more bulk
per hp and lack of revs.
Retro RWD is the way forward...........automotive fabrication, car restoration, sheetmetal work, engine conversion
retro car restoration and tuning
|
|
|
NS Dev
|
| posted on 23/1/06 at 08:23 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Johnmor
I am quite keen to find out peoples assessment of this type of engine in a locost as I am fitting an Alfa v6 in a Viento.
The alfa has approx 190 BHP and about 190lbs torque, but , having a over square stroke is very free revving.
I know the Rover has more Torque at low revs, but in standard form has a lot less bhp and is not a free revving as the Alfa.
The engine is through a type 9 and then a 3.62 LSD. I am hoping for long gears as I have driven An Alfa 24v and it revs to over 7000 easy. This allows
the driver to use the higher gears earlier and then it pulls all the way.
The alfa 164 will slip into 3rd at 20mph and then go all the way to over 100mph with continous accelaration.
I dont want a skittish tail happy car just a flexible, strong pulling, howling,country road, smile enducing machine, that all.
Hmmmmmmmmmmm, scottish roads and v6 viento...................rather a nice combination methinks!!!!!
That engine should make for a lovely combination! Don't overgear it though, remember that over 100mph in a 7 is a pretty horrible affair for any
length of time, it's the 40-100mph "sweet spot" that these cars live for!
Retro RWD is the way forward...........automotive fabrication, car restoration, sheetmetal work, engine conversion
retro car restoration and tuning
|
|
|
Johnmor
|
| posted on 23/1/06 at 08:34 PM |
|
|
Your right about the max speed, I hope to have a geared max of about 135mph depending on tyres, so i think that should give a pretty good 3rd and 4th
gear performance, as you say, dont want to go too fast , I just want to get there quick.
Long summer nights and some West coast roads are my main objective.
|
|
|
MrTom
|
| posted on 23/1/06 at 08:36 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by NS Dev
Despite my earlier post which no-doubt came over as anti-v8, the rover all alloy v8 is pretty light, certainly weight is not the big issue, more bulk
per hp and lack of revs.
Well I'm always keen on power to weight ratio, and 280bhp out of a 600lb engine just doesnt seem that impressive. (600lbs is what ford says
their 4.6 crate engine weighs)
But it revs to 6 grand. 6 is pretty good for a v8.
Dont get me wrong, I'm very pro V8. But I'm also pro 'go really fast and be able to turn while you're doing it'
|
|
|
taxi
|
| posted on 23/1/06 at 08:52 PM |
|
|
Absolutely wonderful I would think, nice and lazy up to 3000 rpm and then just magnificent up to red line at 5500 rpm. Plus that noise. Standard
sd1 3.5 engine on su
carbs 150 bhp, 3.5 Vitesse with efi 190bhp.
|
|
|
Simon
|
| posted on 23/1/06 at 09:36 PM |
|
|
Donut,
It's fine, though I "only" have a standard SD1 motor (approx 155bhp) - really do need a 3.14 diff (see my other thread!!).
I've not noticed any squirming, though obviously am taking it easy (ish ) as I've only done a couple of hundred miles.
Sound on a closed throttle is fab
ATB
Simon
[Edited on 23/1/06 by Simon]
|
|
|
donut
|
| posted on 23/1/06 at 10:10 PM |
|
|
Simon, have you got an LSD fitted or is that one of the reasons for the diff change?
Also how's the insurance?
[Edited on 23/1/06 by donut]
Andy
When I die, I want to go peacefully like my Grandfather did, in his sleep -- not screaming, like the passengers in his car.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/andywest1/
|
|
|
Simon
|
| posted on 23/1/06 at 10:31 PM |
|
|
Andy,
No, no LSD though may think about it in the future, main reason for change is 1st gear is useless, and could probably get away with just using 3rd,
4th and 5th.
At the moment 70mph is 3375 rpm, with 3.14 diff it would be about 2600 rpm and with a 2.83 - just under 2500.
Will aid my fuel consumption too!!!!!!
ATB
Simon
[Edited on 23/1/06 by Simon]
|
|
|
omega 24 v6
|
| posted on 23/1/06 at 10:33 PM |
|
|
What about the beatifully engineered V8 RS4 (i think thats what it was called) engine that was on show at autosport. There was one in a metallic grey
seven which was documented as 770bhp per ton. Awesome piece of kit.
|
|
|
froggy
|
| posted on 23/1/06 at 10:57 PM |
|
|
not really any bad responses so far about the old lump then?
the common opinion is you need to run a 3.15 diff with 15" wheels to use all five gears normally and try and find a post 94 engine if possible
to get it to rev over 5000rpm regularly without wearing the bottom end out and perhaps a ten gallon tank to soften the blow of single figure mpg a
lot of rover powered cars capri escort etc can get 20 ish mpg without driving like a nun,my old avenger with efi did about that but around 12mpg
footdown but that was 1000kg easily . most se7ens with the rover in are around the 700-750kg mark .
|
|
|
Volvorsport
|
| posted on 23/1/06 at 10:57 PM |
|
|
the other way of looking at it - is that your tyres can only produce grip with the weight(force) that is applied to them .
so lots of torque , multiplied by ratios at low rpm , will always spin tyres.
and in a light car , the problem is worsened in that tyres for this weight of car , cost loads .
hmm , i might have to think about my own gearing !!
www.dbsmotorsport.co.uk
getting dirty under a bus
|
|
|
Simon
|
| posted on 23/1/06 at 11:01 PM |
|
|
I'm using 17" wheels, but a 40 profile tyre so not that different to rolling radius of Sierra.
ATB
Simon
|
|
|
froggy
|
| posted on 23/1/06 at 11:29 PM |
|
|
with those wheels a 3.15 will be cock on for a stock engine. gearing should be exactly the same as the v8 sd1 which had a 3.08 diff and 15" on
60 series tyres
|
|
|
Simon
|
| posted on 23/1/06 at 11:45 PM |
|
|
Yeah, and if I can get it to rev to 6000, I'll only need one gear (2nd) to get to 62mph - should do wonders for time!!
ATB
Simon
|
|
|
jonno
|
| posted on 24/1/06 at 12:15 AM |
|
|
he he look at this http://boardroom.wscc.co.uk/cgi-bin/ikonboard.cgi?s=1436fb26292c7397d83c5af767dd0b83;act=ST;f=8;t=36538
|
|
|
carcentric
|
| posted on 24/1/06 at 01:12 AM |
|
|
Ford "Sixty" engine . . . mmmmmmm
My childhood dream was a Lotus 7 with a Ford 60 V8 - they're known over here as "flathead" engines (pre-OHV). They're not
very big or heavy (despite being all iron), but they have a GREAT sound!
Did any cars in the UK use a similar 1950s engine?
M D "Doc" Nugent
http://www.carcentric.com
|
|
|
Simon
|
| posted on 24/1/06 at 09:01 PM |
|
|
Only thing that would have been close was the Ford V8 Pilot, apart from Jag, RR Aston and a couple of expensive low volume (though more modern engines
compared to flathead), cars here had (for the most part) puny 850cc (51 cu.in.) to 1300 engines (and about 25 bhp)
ATB
Simon
|
|
|
steve m
|
| posted on 24/1/06 at 09:09 PM |
|
|
My car wheel spins in every gear (in the wet)
bloody undriveable in the wet
[Edited on 24/1/06 by steve m]
|
|
|
MikeR
|
| posted on 24/1/06 at 09:12 PM |
|
|
do you take it to church often? Sounds like it needs it with all that sin!
|
|
|
steve m
|
| posted on 24/1/06 at 09:19 PM |
|
|
fixed
|
|
|
mattes
|
| posted on 2/4/06 at 10:28 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by smart51
You don't have to have power to have a V8. Rover V8s came is various sizes from 2.5 to 3.9 litres (I think). Some American V8s produce
barely 150 BHP, something a goos 2 litre I4 European engine can manage. Even with a small V8, you get the sound that you're looking for.
Right on. I have a Westfield that began life as a SEiGHT. GREAT SOUND, Good Torque, adequate power -- at least I thought so until I put the car on a
dyno and saw only 140 hp at the rear wheels! I eventually broke the engine and replaced it with a Honda S2000. Much faster now -- though only about
75 lbs. lighter. Power aside, the biggest effect of the engine swap resulted from my stiffening the Westfield frame forward of the firewall when
doing the job. YMMV.
Hans
|
|
|
