Tommy P
|
| posted on 8/1/10 at 11:40 AM |
|
|
type 9 - rover vvt adapter/bell housing
Hi,
Has anyone mated up the rover 1800 vvt engine to the type 9 gearbox? (I'm sure they have).
where would you source the adapter plate or special bell housing from and what sort of money are we talking.
Cheers
Tom
|
|
|
|
|
Humbug
|
| posted on 8/1/10 at 11:46 AM |
|
|
Assuming you are referring to the 1.8 K series then several of us have Type 9s attached to that type of engine. I got my bellhousing from Fisher
Sportscars (in the old Mark Fisher days) but it the engine is a 1.4. GeoffT has a 1.8 VVC so he might be able to help you with a source for specific
parts.
Otherwise, you sometimes see them for sale on www.Blatchat.com (Lotus 7 Club site) from people changing their Caterhams to BEC
Good luck
Simon
|
|
|
Tommy P
|
| posted on 8/1/10 at 11:52 AM |
|
|
Simon
I am talking about the k series from an MG.
cheers
|
|
|
stevec
|
| posted on 8/1/10 at 12:56 PM |
|
|
I did the conversion in the link below. Rover duel mass flywheel and clutch cover with Ford 2.0 Duratec clutch plate. Rover hyd slave cylinder.
Steve.
http://www.locostbuilders.co.uk/photos.php?action=showphoto&photo=K%20series%20conversion1.JPG
|
|
|
GeoffT
|
| posted on 8/1/10 at 01:13 PM |
|
|
Some more info in this thread:-
Link
|
|
|
Tommy P
|
| posted on 8/1/10 at 04:42 PM |
|
|
Yep thats great info.
I decided on (or rather am considering) the 1.8 K series VVt because it can, apparantly be used with all the other bits it comes with, injectors and
ecu etc and will fit under the bonnet of my Caterham easily.
My 1.6 vx is well under powered for me at 100 - 105 bhp so as standard the vvt is 145bhp, so I will notice the difference.
It also seemed to be the cheapest option, with engines starting from about £300.
With the 2.0 l Zetec is a taller unit and would need manifold and 45dcoe's in addition to the bellhousing etc.
The other thing is that 145bhp is enough for my Ital axle for the moment, as I,ve looked into the whole axle/engine change scenario and it's big
bucks and a lot of work.
The 1.8 vvt therefore seems to be the cheapest immediate, budget option.
Unless of course, you know differently.
Cheers
Tom
|
|
|
Tommy P
|
| posted on 8/1/10 at 04:46 PM |
|
|
Steve what bellhousing is that in your photo.
Have you had that plate made to mate the box upto the bellhousing.?
|
|
|
stevec
|
| posted on 8/1/10 at 05:08 PM |
|
|
The bellhousing is the Getrag type, it is half of a gearbox casing. I used it because the crank sensor for my engine is is a hall effect and in a
different position to the inductive ones fitted to some other Kseries engines. You can see the hole for it at the bottom left of the housing. The
steel plate and the aluminum block were made to suit. yours may have the crank sensor under the inlet manifold, if so you may be better off using a
Caterham type bellhousing.
Steve
[Edited on 8/1/10 by stevec]
|
|
|
MikeRJ
|
| posted on 8/1/10 at 08:15 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tommy P
My 1.6 vx is well under powered for me at 100 - 105 bhp
Is that the 16XE engine? You can extract impressive amounts of power from these, so I wouldn't discount tuning it.
|
|
|
Gary 7
|
| posted on 8/1/10 at 08:46 PM |
|
|
Caterham also use a modified inlet manifold,the vvc manifold is in two sections caterham mill 5mm from the gasket face upper section to get it to fit
under the bonnet. I had 3mm milled of both sections to get mine to fit,or lower the engine and lose sump clearance.
|
|
|
Steve Hignett
|
| posted on 8/1/10 at 08:48 PM |
|
|
Hasn't your Caterham already got an engine in it Tom???
Wouldn't it be better to swap the car for a different specced, different engined one instead of an engine swap mate?
(After you and Joe have done the Mallory 6 hr event that is!!!)
|
|
|
Tommy P
|
| posted on 9/1/10 at 12:47 AM |
|
|
Hi Steve, the trouble is it's such a nice car, but not so much power.
I've debated the sell it as is, then get some track based beast, but keep coming back to keeping it.
Age does stupid things to ya. Like looking for comfort - Just a thought - wonder what an automatic box would be like in a 7 type car!!! and perhaps
a padded arm rest or two, softer springs, aircon...........
|
|
|
Steve Hignett
|
| posted on 9/1/10 at 09:17 AM |
|
|
I think it would make it look/feel more like an MX5 with a charger...
If only there were such a thing...............
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 9/1/10 at 12:06 PM |
|
|
The VVC really isn't different from any K series below cylinder head level. Using a the flywheel from a 1.4 k series allows the use of
a 7.5 Ford clutch plate and also gives a handy reduction in rotational inertia.
Personally I am not a big fan of the 1.8 engine but if fitting one I would hunt out the 160 version (156 hp).
You could also consider the non-vvc 1.8 turbo K series engine which is rated at 160ps and has a low pressure turbo which could be upgraded.
[I] “ What use our work, Bennet, if we cannot care for those we love? .”
― From BBC TV/Amazon's Ripper Street.
[/I]
|
|
|
Tommy P
|
| posted on 9/1/10 at 03:50 PM |
|
|
Hi Geoff
Just thought I would ask you about your engine/gearbox set up.
I've gone ahead and bought a 1.8 VVC to do the conversion. I already have the type 9 box in the car. Just wondered how I would know what type of
box it is, as you say in your reply post in the link, that yours is a long shaft. Did you need to move the box at all, as I'm just wondering if
I will be able to leave mine where it is in the car and not have to alter the propshaft etc.
Any other info would be gratefully received
Cheers
Tom
|
|
|
GeoffT
|
| posted on 9/1/10 at 06:27 PM |
|
|
Tommy,
I just left the gearbox in it's original position and fabricated new engine mounts to suit the k-series. If you look in my photo archive
under 'k upgrade' I think you'll find some pics of the mounts there.
You'll find that the oil filter on the k is in a bit of an awkward position, and can limit your options a bit when you position the engine, not
sure how that will work out with your chassis.
The easiest way to check for a longshaft (i.e. long INPUT shaft) type 9 box is to see how far the input shaft protrudes in front of the bellhousing
mounting face - if it's a standard box it's pretty much level (maybe protruding a few mm's) but the longshaft will project forward
much further, something over 1" probably. You can't use a shortshaft box as the input shaft wont reach the k's spigot bearing.
Which has just reminded me that you need to change the spigot bearing to suit the diameter of the Ford shaft. I used a Sierra one but had to fit an
external shim for it to fit in the k's crankshaft, I think pukka ones are available though, maybe someone will help out here.
What are your plans for an ECU?
|
|
|
welderman
|
| posted on 9/1/10 at 06:45 PM |
|
|
some nice comments there Tom, looks like im going to have to make more room at work for a Cateringvan,  .
You can do the prep mate, i will leave you to it.
Thank's, Joe 
I don't stalk people
http://www.locostbuilders.co.uk/forum/23/viewthread.php?tid=172301
Back on with the Fisher Fury R1
|
|
|
Tommy P
|
| posted on 9/1/10 at 06:55 PM |
|
|
Nice one Joe, I'll speak to you soon and then clutter up your place a bit more.
Geoff, I have the original ECU that was in the car A Rover 200 BRM. I also got the wiring loom and the key fob.
Wiring definitely not my forte' so I will be looking for help there.
Cheers
Tom
|
|
|
GeoffT
|
| posted on 9/1/10 at 07:09 PM |
|
|
Something which has just occurred to me is that I think Simon (Humbug) mentioned that he used a shaft extension piece to extend the input shaft by the
required amount. Worth a u2u to him to check if that's the case and where he got it, or maybe he's still watching this thread.
This would obviously be a whole lot easier than using a longshaft box, but these are stronger and have better ratios. Not so easy to find nowadays
though...
|
|
|
Gary 7
|
| posted on 9/1/10 at 07:57 PM |
|
|
QED sell a spigot bearing and bush thats what i used.
|
|
|
Tommy P
|
| posted on 9/1/10 at 08:01 PM |
|
|
Cheers
There's always a solution to most problems, so I'm sure it will be ok.
|
|
|
