VinceGledhill
|
| posted on 11/8/03 at 02:45 PM |
|
|
Rover V8 Does it fit?
I have seen lots of references to red tops and pinto's and all sorts of different engines.
However, I know from experience that the rover V8 is an absolutely cracking engine. It's light as a pinto and can be tuned to give out lots of
BHP and Torque and the V8 noise is awsome... a true noise to behold.
The book shows a locost fitted with this engine.... why isn't it popular on here?
Regards
Vince Gledhill
Time Served Auto Electrician
Lucas Leeds 1979-1983
|
|
|
|
|
Jon Ison
|
| posted on 11/8/03 at 03:25 PM |
|
|
no reason, plenty have used em, but by modern standards there "old plodders"
all IMO of course.......
just do it.
|
|
|
Metal Hippy
|
| posted on 11/8/03 at 04:01 PM |
|
|
For the engine size they're very underpowered by modern standards...
Cock off or cock on. You choose.
|
|
|
VinceGledhill
|
| posted on 11/8/03 at 04:10 PM |
|
|
Old plodders.....
Checkout http://www.rpiv8.com/engine-3.htm
Then tell me where you can get 350+ HP in an engine weighing at less than a pinto?
Regards
Vince Gledhill
Time Served Auto Electrician
Lucas Leeds 1979-1983
|
|
|
Metal Hippy
|
| posted on 11/8/03 at 04:19 PM |
|
|
You didn't say you were on about the new bigger V8s...
You'd probably need a bigger chassis for one of them.
But coming in to play is the cost thing... You need to chuck no end of money at it to get that sort of bhp. Fine if you've got it of course..
Cock off or cock on. You choose.
|
|
|
andyps
|
| posted on 11/8/03 at 06:01 PM |
|
|
As far as I know the bigger capacity Rover V8 engines use the same block dimensions as the original 3500cc - just different bore and stroke.
Andy
An expert is someone who knows more and more about less and less
|
|
|
VinceGledhill
|
| posted on 12/8/03 at 07:17 AM |
|
|
That's exactly right. They do have the same block. I think that is why they had problems with the original 4.6 cracking the block.
Don't get me wrong, I'm going to use the pinto out of the donor siera that I'm using but I just wanted to know if a Rv8 would fit in
the chassis. I may have a look at a 4.6 from the scrap yard later, and fix the crack in the block. A cracked block 4.6 must be for
"nowt" from a scrap yard.
Regards
Vince Gledhill
Time Served Auto Electrician
Lucas Leeds 1979-1983
|
|
|
Wadders
|
| posted on 12/8/03 at 07:30 AM |
|
|
Can't see any reason why one won't fit, but why would you want 350+ horse in a seven, IMO it misses the point, unless you fancy sprints or
drag racing! And of course the expense wont stop with the engine, you'll need to uprate the brakes,suspension,diff and tyres to cope with the
power, then theres the added costs of insurance and fuel. If you want to go quick, and in more than a straight line, bung a bike engine in.
Al.
Originally posted by VinceGledhill
I have seen lots of references to red tops and pinto's and all sorts of different engines.
However, I know from experience that the rover V8 is an absolutely cracking engine. It's light as a pinto and can be tuned to give out lots of
BHP and Torque and the V8 noise is awsome... a true noise to behold.
The book shows a locost fitted with this engine.... why isn't it popular on here?
|
|
|
ChrisW
|
| posted on 12/8/03 at 10:47 AM |
|
|
Been out in the Luego V8 demonstrator car. It was cerainly very quick but IMHO it's the wrong type of power for a Seven. V8s make me think of
Cobra replicas and such wheras if I think of a Seven and what noise it should make I think more of a turbo or a bike engine. A v8 is all about torque
and being able to cruise effortlessly - but who needs mega torque in a car that weights around 500kgs and who goes long distance in a Seven? More
likely it'll be a back roads blaster than something you'd want to cruise along for hours in.
Then again, I've ignored that and am using a V6 so it shows how much attention I paid to my own ideas!
Back to the point - V8s do fit into the Viento chassis as that was what it was designed for!
Chris
[Edited on 12/8/03 by ChrisW]
My gaff my rules
|
|
|
VinceGledhill
|
| posted on 12/8/03 at 10:59 AM |
|
|
Good points well made guys. Drag racing, no that's not for me. Nor is cruising long distances. May make another cobra when the kids have
flown the nest but a blaster is what I'm after. God I'm a poet and didn't know it...
So the bike engine I'd never considered. I must go and see MK's demonstrator with a bike engine fitted. I'm still fitting the
2.0 pinto from the donor though.... just to get an SVA test etc.
Thanks for all your input guys.
Regards
Vince Gledhill
Time Served Auto Electrician
Lucas Leeds 1979-1983
|
|
|
Stu16v
|
| posted on 12/8/03 at 11:08 AM |
|
|
Vince, as you probably know, the V8 option is offered in Westfields too, and IIRC the car held the record for the fastest production car 0-60 a few
years ago. But even though the engine is lighter than a Pinto, by the time you add all the necessary ancillarys, and a gearbox that can cope with the
power, the total car weight is always well in excess of a four potter.
That extra weight, which is also further foward %age wise in the chassis, does tend to affect the handling for the worse too.
The other thing to note is that the V8 engine offers HUGE torque in both directions, not only when accelerating, but slowing down too. In a car as
light as a Locost, without techinques such as heel/toeing, sitting in the middle of the road facing the way you have just come is a distinct
possibility.....
But there again, you will have a luvverly soundtrack, and the option of taking off in ANY gear you want too.....
Dont just build it.....make it!
|
|
|
blueshift
|
| posted on 12/8/03 at 11:52 AM |
|
|
We're planning to put a rover v8 in ours. apparently it will fit in a mcsorley 7+4 chassis, craig1401 and simon are doing this too.
I don't think it'll fit in a standard chassis.
as for the weights, afaik a wet v8 with ancillaries and lt77 manual gearbox weighs 175kg. I think this compares quite favourably with a pinto -
correct me if I'm wrong.
|
|
|
VinceGledhill
|
| posted on 12/8/03 at 12:01 PM |
|
|
Interesting what you say about a gearbox that can handle all that power. I think .... although I could be wrong..... that the torque will destroy
things when it has a resistance to it.
In other words.... a gearbox or whatever the mechanical weakest point is.... would give way to lots of torque if it was being resisted. In other
words.... loads of torque through a big car (SD1.... Range Rover etc) then you need a good torque handling gearbox and back axle.... etc etc...
However, in a locost the resistance isn't there so I'm sure you could put a ford Sierra gearbox behind it (providing you could get it to
fit etc) and the running gear etc because the light car doesn't have the same inertia or lack of it, IYSWIM.
Like I say above, I will still be fitting the 2.0 pinto into the car (not even started the chassis yet) for SVA.... and it may scare me enough anyway.
I certainly don't want an un-tractable car.
Regards
Vince Gledhill
Time Served Auto Electrician
Lucas Leeds 1979-1983
|
|
|
blueshift
|
| posted on 12/8/03 at 12:14 PM |
|
|
A nice idea, but it doesn't work like that. The engine determines the torque, you will get the same amount of torque transmitted through the
drivetrain in a locost - you'll just accelerate faster due to lower weight.
This is mitigated slightly by a couple of things - you can't put down huge torque at the wheels because of the weight (they'd spin) and
the torque at the gearbox will be sliiiiiightly reduced by the fact the engine is spinning up faster and has to accelerate the flywheel and so forth
as well.
However, in high gears you'd see pretty much the same amount of torque coming into the gearbox as in any other car, so it'll still go pop
if it can't handle it.
A guy who works with v8s and rover gearboxes has assured me that an LT77 (SD1 5-speed manual) in good condition is good for up to 300bhp and 300lbft.
|
|
|
VinceGledhill
|
| posted on 12/8/03 at 01:15 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by blueshift
A nice idea, but it doesn't work like that. The engine determines the torque,
Yes the engine determines the torque but if there's less or no resistance the box won't give.
Look at it like this.... Torqu... = force x Distance.
If you had a bolt that you were trying to shift.... with a torque wrench.... Now tightening it (to say 100 Lbs Ft for argument sake) then the bolt
would snap. However, if you use the same force going in the oposite direction and the bolt moves.... and starts to undo.... you can't ever get
the 100 Lbs/Ft onto it because it is giving way.
Just like the car fitted with a torquey engine.... if it's light and either spins the wheels or acclerates quickly then the torque felt at the
gearbox won't be as much.... just in the same way as the bolt being undone or tightened above.
Put it this way. I would be willing to put one into my car with a ford gearbox without worying about it.
Regards
Vince Gledhill
Time Served Auto Electrician
Lucas Leeds 1979-1983
|
|
|
Stu16v
|
| posted on 12/8/03 at 02:16 PM |
|
|
My personal opinion is that you WILL kill a Type9 gearbox with a V8. They are on the limit with a 16v Vauxhall engine....
AFAIK the RV8 is slightly lighter than the Pinto, but the LT77 gearbox is heavier than a Type 9, you will have two exhaust systems as opposed to one,
you will need a far bigger rad (and a lot more coolant), and possibly an oil cooler, IIRC the RV8 holds more oil, etc, etc. Westy V8's are
always the heaviest of the bunch. Oh yes, and you will need a bigger fuel tank....
Dont just build it.....make it!
|
|
|
blueshift
|
| posted on 12/8/03 at 03:41 PM |
|
|
The problem with the bolt analogy is that the bolt has no appreciable inertia. if it was some kind of improbably huge bolt, or welded to a flywheel or
something, and you applied something capable of producing sufficiently high speed rotation (air wrench say), then it would snap if you set the wrench
higher than the breaking point of the bolt.
Accelerating a car, I don't think a locost is so stunningly light that then engine is unable to put near its maximum amount of torque through
the gearbox (to do this the car would have to be so light that the engine was approaching the point where it was revving up and down as fast as it
would without load)
if you consider the case of a steep hill and fifth gear or what have you, you could concieve of a situation where the engine was at full throttle at
peak torque, and the car wouldn't be accelerating. at that point you would be wasting no power spinning up the flywheel and the gearbox would
have to handle it all.
Admittedly that would be a pretty steep hill for a 300bhp locost.. but your gearbox is going to be seeing the majority of the torque the engine is
capable of producing in normal circumstances.
|
|
|
Jon Ison
|
| posted on 12/8/03 at 09:23 PM |
|
|
350bhp from an engine weighing less than a pinto ??
NOS or turbo bike ?? that set up will weigh less than the rover gearbox never mind the engine bit.
Cost ? probably about the same.
Tourque, i can get over slack hill on the way to Matlock in top at (don't look plod) 100mph+, anyone who knows the hill will testify its long n
bloody steep.
just put that in B4 we get into the all revs n no balls debate. iknow bike engines arn't for all but think they get bad press regards
drivability.
like the V8 rumble though.
[Edited on 12/8/03 by Jon Ison]
|
|
|
blueshift
|
| posted on 12/8/03 at 09:51 PM |
|
|
I saw a 400bhp Rover V8 on ebay a little while back for 3500 quid. Don't think it was turbo/supercharged or NOSed. bored and stroked, aggressive
cam, racing heads I expect.
|
|
|
VinceGledhill
|
| posted on 12/8/03 at 10:45 PM |
|
|
Nice thread guys. I'll save this until I get it on the road and am boored with the pinto....
BTW anyone want to buy 4 unmarked doors from a sierra? Can't believe the body work on my donor.... seems a shame.... Now where did I put my
angle grinder...
Regards
Vince Gledhill
Time Served Auto Electrician
Lucas Leeds 1979-1983
|
|
|
fastavatar.jpg){kind=avatar}
