Jump to content

RRC VM to V8


SteveG
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hello everyone

Need advice, I'm going to change out the 2.4 diesel and manual gearbox for one of land rovers finest eight valves and auto in an 89 Range Rover classic. I'm going to go for a long/short remanufactured engine with upgraded liners etc., but which one? 4 or 4.6?

As I'm going down this route, do I go for the performance cam and ported and flowed heads?

I need to source an engine and gearbox to exchange, and for ancillaries, inlet manifolds etc. - do the p38 4.0 & 4.6 fit with all the extra out front? If so is there a benefit in sourcing a Thor over GEMS, given that I'm getting a new long engine? Or is it better to go for an earlier 3.5, 3.9 or 4.2?

Finally, what are places like turner etc. ok with for exchange? Does it have to be exact like for like, for example can you exchange a 4.0 for a 4.6?

Thanks in advance for any info.

cheers, Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're planning on spending a lot of money for not a lot of power, sorry to be blunt. G

Should have said, it's to lose weight. I found it cheaper this way than replacing the body with an equivalent carbon tub. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Keep the manual box. Much more fun, faster and better mpg. Autos tend to kill the performance and make it a wafting machine.

Also can't see the point spending big money for a standard engine. Just an engine off eBay and see how it goes. Bigger is generally better and certainly more torque and power.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Steve....

Good to see you back and with a new project as well.....

I'll watch with interest and of course if I can be of assistance, give me a nudge...

Neil

Hi Neil

Thanks for the offer, will do ;). I can't start on it yet, as I've got to free up some room and release some car spending funds by selling this...

e94bf78b1589b422ed8b2739db296fcc_zpsfnhu

cheers, Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Autos 0-60 time are identical for 3.9 Disco/RRC.

Mine hardly wafts, less than 10 seconds to 60, and once you have the torque converter locked up, the MPG difference is minimal. Granted on A-roads it may suffer, but if you think it the right thing to push on hard in a 2.5T barge that rolls around like weeble then you need to think again :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Autos 0-60 time are identical for 3.9 Disco/RRC.

Mine hardly wafts, less than 10 seconds to 60, and once you have the torque converter locked up, the MPG difference is minimal. Granted on A-roads it may suffer, but if you think it the right thing to push on hard in a 2.5T barge that rolls around like weeble then you need to think again :)

0-60mph really isn't a very good metric. Manuals with 5 gears and better gearing WILL be faster and more economical. That's not really up for debate.

RRC is more like 1900-2000kg and yes, perfectly acceptable to throw them about.

scan0003.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair enough, that's your opinion, I think we all realise you enjoy disagreeing with a pointy stick, throwing them around on a dirt track is somewhat different to an A-road.

If the OP's intention is to lose weight, then the Rover V8 is pretty good for that. I think a 1UZ-FE is a bit lighter though, if you were pondering other engine options?

The 4.0 and 4.6 fit well, FridgeFreezer dropped a 4.6 into his 127 ambulance, and all good, and I have a 4.0 in an RRC. I use a remote oil filter to solve the issue with axle and filter position, some PAS hoses need making, but otherwise not a hard job.

I wouldn't buy a 'new' engine, unless you have wads of cash, or are intending on keeping the truck till the day you die. Far better to get an old P38 and hack it up for bits, probably end up costing you nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The CSK is surprisingly compliant on A roads, not much cop off road though! Even the 4 door on air isn't too bad.

With regards manual-v-auto I don't find much in it, CSK is 4.6 manual and 4 door is 4.6 auto, they both seem fairly similar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also can't see the point spending big money for a standard engine. Just an engine off eBay and see how it goes. Bigger is generally better and certainly more torque and power.

This is what I was getting at ^

A lot of money to bling up an rv8.

If you want an rv8 just but a 4.6, don't mess with it and drop it in.

If you want to spend money, buy an LS - for the money you'd spend on what you listed in opening post you could get double the power I dare to say.

G

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the OP's intention is to lose weight, then the Rover V8 is pretty good for that. I think a 1UZ-FE is a bit lighter though, if you were pondering other engine options?

The weight comment was a joke in response to the dumb arse response. ;)

The 4.0 and 4.6 fit well, FridgeFreezer dropped a 4.6 into his 127 ambulance, and all good, and I have a 4.0 in an RRC. I use a remote oil filter to solve the issue with axle and filter position, some PAS hoses need making, but otherwise not a hard job.

Thanks for the info, and the tip on oil filter issue.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess at the end of the day, what is your actual aim and budget?

I like Rover V8's, I have two of them!!!

But unless you have money to burn or waste, I see little point buying a recon unit, when there are so many used examples available for such little money.

As for adding a cam, no probably not. But again depends on your goals. Most cams will move the power curve to the right, so more power, but most likely more revvy. And with a 4 speed auto, that probably isn't the ideal setup. But depends what sort of cam and what other supporting mods.

Same with the heads....

If you want to mod, you'll need to look at the entire setup, such as long tube exhaust manifolds, free flowing exhaust. Some kind of ECU tuning and so on. Waste of money fitting ported heads and a high lift cam to only strangle it with a compromised EFI setup and ECU and poor performing exhaust.

Also looking forward, the VM Range Rover's are pretty rare and may be sought after in years to come. The 2.4 might not have performed very well, but the 2.5 version would tiddle all over any Tdi and really upset a 3.5 Range Rover.

And regarding cost again. If you are prepared to spend thousands on an RV8, you really should look at other engine options. A stock 5.7 LS1 V8 makes more money than a £12,000 Rover V8 is likely too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether you go auto or manual is purely an issue for the OP.

As mentioned - go for the biggest engine you can - that means a 4.6 - will cost about the same to build a bigger engine as a smaller engine.

Having just gone through the process of building a 4.6 the costs go on and on and on.

As mentioned if I had my time again I would try to find a good used engine and go that route - much cheaper and easier - the risk is of course that there may be issues but in a worst case scenario it will still be cheaper than building an engine from scratch. Make sure you get an engine with all ancillaries as these work out expensive to source individually.

Have you thought about putting in a 300TDI in rather than the V8.

Garry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Garry for the response. That's the issue, finding an engine that is sound. I don't want to go through the effort and expense of fitting an engine, only to have an issue soon after. The benefit of getting a block with the liners done by turner, for example, solves the main reliability issue with the Gems and Thor engines.

cheers, Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Garry for the response. That's the issue, finding an engine that is sound. I don't want to go through the effort and expense of fitting an engine, only to have an issue soon after. The benefit of getting a block with the liners done by turner, for example, solves the main reliability issue with the Gems and Thor engines.

cheers, Steve

But that is quite a cost addition though. And sadly there is no guarantee that a new engine won't have issues. And to be completely fair there must be 1000's and 1000's and 1000's of RV8's that have had no issues at all ever.

It is of course your choice. But have you tried pricing it up? I would think a head and cam recon 4.6 must be in the region of £4000-6000+

With good used engines going for £200-800 complete with all the bits. That is a big cost difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But that is quite a cost addition though....

Jeez, you don't give up do you. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to work out that getting a new short/long engine is going to be more expensive and before posting I'd got quotes from two places and looked at several places for options, hence the questions in my initial post. I've also looked at prices of RR classics and P38 over the past week as suitable donor cars.

In addition, I have an ok level of experience with LR V8's having owned three 4.6 RR's, a 4.0 90 and a 3.9 hybrid. The third RR had just over 200K when I sold it on in 2010.

I don't have any experience of fitting the later gems or Thor engine in a classic, or buying a remanufactured V8 - hence the q's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Buy a running car, that way you know then engine is at least going to run for a while.

Yeah, I think that's the best option, although unless there is an obvious issue like head gasket failure, a short test drive can't be trusted to show up an issue, especially if an owner has decided to get rid once they spotted excessive coolant loss without it getting to the daily top up stage.

Also the price of p38's seem to have gone up now compared to a few years ago, and with them not suffering from rust so much, it's only likely to be lots of electrical issues or an accident that has taken them off the road. So unless it's one of these most of the cheaper V8's are likely to have engine issues.

I'll phone up turners and see what the options are on exchange, then I'll know what possible donor options are.

cheers, Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are still cheap V8 D2's to be had with low miles. Don't be shy about running any car you test drive up to operating temp, there's no reason why a dodgy cooling system couldn't be caught on a test drive. Golden rule is the car should be cold when you arrive and hot when you leave ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

It's sometimes not always easy to spot issues with the engine on test drive. I bought a P38 4.6 Thor off a chap on here, told me is was fine just gearbox issues. I left it running for 45 mins after it arrived, no overheating at all or low Coolent but top hose started to bulge slightly after it was running for ages. That could have been missed on a short test drive. I'm thinking head gasket or slipped liner on that one? Also have a few V8 engines if your interested, one 3.9 V8 and a gems 4.6 V8 and also the one I just mentioned but wouldn't sell that as a complete running engine due to the issue I just said about. Could it be a good base unit for your build though?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We use cookies to ensure you get the best experience. By using our website you agree to our Cookie Policy