Bull Bar Cowboy

Mike, go easy on the four long bolts on the timing cover that secure the cover to the block water jacket ......... they have a habit of seizing an then shear ........ a little heat and gentle easing forwards/backwards usually does the trick ........ ifs its run 50% coolant all its life then they will be OK. Also you will need a new timing chain & cogs ……. The old OEM chain will be stretched beyond belief ……….

Yes, the Brittany run from Plymouth is OK …………….. just booked up for July (2+Estate Car + outside large cabin) and it was £880 before I started applying my discount schemes and disclosing the colour of my underwear ..... the final agreed figure was more then resonable …............ I guess thats the problem with living on an island, these clowns can charge pretty much what they like. For those you travel a long way to Plymouth, the port and facilities are sh1te ! …….if need to over night then try to stay a little out of Plymouth…….. Lucky its only a 20 minute drive for me……….

When you do the V5 change try to avoid the engine year of manufacture or give as 94, just give the engine number if you can ………………… MOT station probably will go with the vehicle age, so maybe that could be an issue…… You sure its got the right gaskets, heads, & pistons ?

Depends on what heads you use

Now Gordon, don’t you start a fecking argument as well ………….. The following are the DB37 connector pins Red (Signal) pin 22 Yellow (TPS +5V) pin26 Green (TPS Ground) pin 19

Indeed Nige, IIRC nothing on the crown is standard, and either A or B is stamped toward the front on the engine on the piston crown. I think I have only ever come across A grade pistons in a 1988 3.5EFI engine. Often with 3rd party supplied piston they just have the part number and '+' size.

John, The way I understand it is, A , B and then standard and it comes down to the machining tolerance of the final product …….. with A at the top of the tree. Ford 5.0L and 4.6L (oversize bore) modular engine pistons are 94mm bore and can be used with various combos of conrods to construct a fairly bullet proof piston arrangement……… Look up Ford modular engines……………….also IIRC the 2.6L V6 cologne pistons were used in the early days but that might be more 3.5L size……….. Most of these options are not direct drop in replacements and a certain amount of machining will be required ......but if you are re-machining the block anyway, then it suddenly becomes attractive..... However, the favourites were always Cosworth pistons………..

You have quoted 3rd party suppliers. Whilst we all use these folk for some of our parts they do not carry a complete stock, however, I found a number of options on all of the sites…….. I guess you were just being selective again….. Intersetingly I spend quite a lot of money with one of those suppliers............ OEM there are currently six (6) 3948cc pistons available, however, when the assembly line was in place there we eight options 3948cc Piston HC RTC2295S (also available in +20 – RTC229520) which went to STC909 and is now 8510068 3948cc Piston LC RTC2186S (also available in +20 – RTC218620) which is now 8510109 3948cc Piston HC ERR5553 (Standard) ERR5553A (A Grade) ERR5553B (B Grade) 3948cc Piston LC ERR5555 In the above I have highlighted (bold text) statements that are incorrect, although I think you know what you mean, its just stated wrongly…….. There is only one block Suffix B block (this would apply to late 4L & all 4.6L) LCF104860 and the CR is governed by the Piston of which there are currently 4 options. 4554 Piston HC ERR5554 (standard) ERR5554A (A Grade) ERR5554B (B Grade) 4554 Piston LC ERR5556 I think we have done this to death, however, here we go again. The 28cc chambered head was part of the phase II design package and takes into account not only the thickness of the gasket (which is slightly variable) but also the fact that the bowl in piston ERR553 (AB) is of more capacity than that of piston 810068. TBH when you rebuilt your engine you would have been better off using Ford V6 forged pistons………. Or KB pistons http://www.kb-silvolite.com/index.html Yes, you keep repeating this but still come back for more punishment ........... This has been most enjoyable.............

Zim ...... ..... yeah, just torque it up and give it half a turn for luck !

You have not posted any confirmed figures that dispute my estimate............ That is not quite what I posted. The 3.9 as a suffix A engine ceased production line manufacture as the production line was turned over to the Suffix B engine in late 94. As with every manufacturer, small volume builds by pipline forcasting would have been be catered for. Having said that LR are absolute masters of the parts bin. Off course its not a full circle . The rover V8 combustion chamber is an open wedge (dished piston). It is this shape that dictates the speed of the flame front and thus the maximum design ignition advance. Nowhere has 30 thou been quoted. it would seem not only is your grasp of understanding of the written word rather poor, but the ability to undertake simple mathematic calculations also eludes you. My figures are only from one manufacturer and if you care to undertake a little research the figure will be 18 thou best case and 28 thou worst case. This is well documented. The chamber volume went from 36cc to 28c, but this was not purely a result of a gasket change. The piston bowl and the piston cylinder volumes also changed. Interestingly, the original Buick head chamber was still of an open wedge design but 57cc volume and an almost flat top piston. hook line and sinker comes to mind..............

Keep on taking the tablets ! maybe I wasnt in the factory the day yours was built .......... you obviously have no idea how a production line works and small volume builds ............ Historically I think you will find that the 4.0L was introduced into he RR in very early 95 and IIRC the whole V8 assembly line at that time was turned over to the production of the 4L / 4.6L suffix B engines. As has already been said, there are some quite strange engine builds from that period. I never said scrap parts ……… these parts would have been laid aside for small volume production. I cant find the figures, but I would suspect that the V8 disco probably only accounted for maybe 1% of the total production (less than 3 – 4K per year based on your figures). Certainly, in the UK you can pick up a V8 disco very cheaply indeed, but there are not too many around from that era. When the 300Tdi was introduced to that model in 94 it became a best seller. My suspicion is that they kept the small production of the 3.9 in the disco to differentiate between model types, which is something that LR have always done …….. i.e a low spec RR had the 4.0L as against the disco having a 3.9………… With all that has been said and done, you have managed very well to divert attention away from the misinformation and lack of understanding that you posted regarding CR's and the effect of head gaskets vs chamber volumes..........even now you fail to understand that the V8 disco was a small volume model in comparison the 300Tdi model..........maybe the queens English is not your first language............

It would help if you didn’t have selective reading & understanding……… Like I said…. It ceased production and the interim motors were made from old stock parts as it was very small volume……….I think most on here know about long nosed cranks and the dizzy t/case.

You seemed to have missed this sentence in my last post TBH. judging by your performance on the lambda thread and your performance here I will be surprised if you are around for very much longer ......... its been nice knowing you......

Again you have failed miserably to find my angry side ……………. The post you have just made is the equivalent of a poor politician The 3.9 ceased production in 94. It was replace by the revised suffix B engine that is known as the 4.0L ……… same displacement, stroke & bore as the older 3.9 but mechanically quite different. Where did I say 10 bolt engines were not made after 94 ……… FFS the 4.0L/4.6L were 10 bolt engines and introduced in the 94MY ………. 14 BOLT ceased production as of early 94…..old stock engines were used in discos up to the introduction of the series II 4.0L which used the later engine. How many 98 RR's have you found with 3.9 engines ? There is a big difference between ceased manufacture and the use of old stock in a low volume model, which the V8 disco was. Also there are a number of strange build engines from around that era which used parts common to both suffix A & Suffix B……………

Wrong on many counts .......... you need to understand the changes between pre 94 & post 94 engines. 3.9 ceased manufacture in the 94MY and became known as the 4.0L engine for very good reason. The 4.6L was never manufacturered as a Suffix A engine................ Judging by your posting times and the fact that you have a reference to the P76 4.4 engine in your signature, I must assume that you are a colonial…….. You are assuming that the change from the 36cc to the 28cc chamber was just to allow for the use of a composite gasket ? It must be understood that the 4.0L / 4.6L engines introduced with this head as part of a package of changes, never used the tin gaskets. The most common noted changes are, crossbolted block, larger crankshaft journals, offset gudgeon pin, larger gudgeon pin, longer conrods, longer crank, hooded valve seals, captive camshaft, and improved oil pump. It should also be understood that the pistons were a completely new design, being very much shorter, lighter, and stronger due to having a thicker crown (although they were still made by Hepolite and cast as opposed to quality forged ! ). A thicker crown also means that you can get a better bowl shape (see below) The changes were mainly aimed at reducing vibration by altering the angle of the conrod. The head chamber is only one small part of the total chamber volume, which comprises of the, head chamber volume, gasket volume, piston deck volume, piston chamber volume, and piston cylinder volume (the void to the compression ring). The newer 4.0L pistons had changed the piston volume (IIRC the older pistons were 11.19cc the newer pistons were 13.23cc) , the piston cylinder volume and finally the gasket volume. All the changes resulted in the 8cc difference in head chamber volume. The Rover V8 permutations are huge, but the most common question we get is, “What do I lose by fitting a composite gasket on a 3.9” (by 3.9 we assume that it is pre 94MY …… post that date would be 4.0L) . the answer is about 0.6:1 (based on a 9.35:1 engine) Most folk will use after market composite gaskets because they are manufactured for 14 bolt heads whereas LR only produce an OEM 10 bolt gasket pattern. The manufacturer I use to supply my gaskets gives the following information, Rover 3.5 tin gaskets .. Bore 88.9mm ….. compressed thickness 0.5mm (20 thou) Rover 3.9 tin gaskets .. Bore 65.5mm……compressed thickness 0.45mm (18 thou) Rover 3.5 composite ....Bore 92.96mm … Compressed thickness 1.0mm (40 thou) Rover 3.9 composite …Bore 95.0mm……Compressed thickness 1.2mm (46 thou) IIRC the Rover OEM 10 bolt gaskets are also 1.2mm compressed. I suppose the other question would be, what do I gain buy putting a post 94 head on a pre 94 block …… the answer is an increase in compression of about 1.2:1 (based on a 9.35:1 engine). Nobody in their right mind would even think about fitting pre 94 heads on a post 94 engine ! I trust that this satisfies your challenge ……………. What you see above is the abridged version , you can have the full half hour discussion if you want………

no attack ............... if you use a 14 bolt head with a composite gasket then you lose appox 0.6:1CR .......... that was my original statement that you refuted.

Just a quick mental calc of increased cylinder volume with the gasket compressed thickness would indicate that your calculations are fundamentally flawed .......... V= 3.142 x 47sq x 0.508 (the gasket thickness is on average 20 thou above that of the tin gasket) V = 3525 cubic mm V = 3.5 cc This equates to a 6% change ………..a little under 0.6:1 with a 9.35:1 CR

The 2 stroke chain saw option will lead you into all sorts of issues. These engines tend to work best at permanent full chat and are very high revving. Tuned pipe exhaust would be interesting ............... My choice would be a 4 stroke motor from a law mower, either Briggs & Stratton or Tecumseh ........... the smaller motors IIRC are 38cc / 42cc and have a pretty good level of low down torque. Some of the higher end motors are electric start.

This one ? http://forums.lr4x4.com/index.php?showtopic=7040&st=0&p=72403&hl="hard%20standing"&fromsearch=1entry72403 or this one from Tony ? http://forums.lr4x4.com/index.php?showtopic=38254&hl=garden&st=0

Never buy a lecky’s house …………….. I did notice that there were a pair of fecking great YELLOW/GREEN wires sticking out at the back of the engine which were LIVE feeds …………. I thought I was bad using Brown for earth …………

You worry too much ...............We will fix that on Thurday morning with a S19 download............... Easy ............3 Relays, a couple of fuses, 3 live feeds and a couple of ignition lives and its sorted .......... you do the best you can and I will sort it on Thursday.......... dont forget to do the MAP pipe from the plenum to the ECU From what I checked and saw last week I think it will all be OK ...................Especially as the wiring to the 37 way D is now correct. I intend to get there late Thursday morning and have it running by mid afternoon ........

Maybe adds nothing to the cooling but the lubrication is a whole load better.............. I ran an Ashcroft rebuilt LT77S with the temperature switch fitted (different side housing) and even being pushed hard with the V8 it never got hot enough to operate the switch ............. that gearbox always ran well on SMX-S........ I am not so sure heat is an issue with the manual boxes .......... probably its a lot more to do with lubrication.. Also, I think the heat felt around the tunnel maybe misleading as to the box oil temperature …….. a lot of the heat is ‘soak’ from the engine.

Don’t be stupid ........... Al doesn’t have any friends apart from moglite and the gimp suit ………

There is no difference between the heads of a 3.5, 3.9, & 4.2 ……. Engine capacity is governed by the bore size and stroke (only the 3.5 uses a smaller bore) and the OEM CR is governed by the piston dish. However, you can increase the CR dramatically by machining the heads by up to 40 thou, decking the block by a predetermined amount and using aftermarket cast pistons. Visually it would be very hard to distinguish a 3.9 from a 4.2 ……. Apart from the engine number as all RR 4.2 engines started with the prefix 40D ……… the only other 4.2 engine (often called a 4.3) was in the TVR Griffith and that had a 47A prefix. You will loose about 0.6:1 CR by using 14 bolt heads with composite gaskets. The exact CR difference will depend upon the gasket manufacturer and the compressed thickness, but 0.6:1 is most you will lose. Also with the 10 bolt heads you get the benefit of slightly shorter guides and hooded valve seals on both inlet & exhaust. However, any good machine shop can modify the tops of the earlier guides (14 bolt heads) to accommodate the newer type seals. As has already been said, all the heads since 1976 with the introduction of the SD1 have the larger inlet valves ……… there are other very minor differences but these are mainly cosmetic. Be aware that there are still many earlier heads appearing for sale on ebay etc……… Owing to a design defect it is best to leave out the outer row of bolts on the 14 bolt heads, or just nip them tight if fitted……….. better still, use ARP studs. Christ …. I need to get out more ……………

Errr ....... NO ......... I don’t need to plagiarise Anybody that has rebuilt a few engines using vastly varied cams will be aware of this issue from experience Who is RPI .......... I am sure that Chris found out the same way as I did ........... the only person that knew anything worth knowing about RV8's in that organisation was Holly .......... I assume he is still there.............