240 V8 Project anyone?

[Familyman 90]

Originally Posted by Laird Scooby

The Rover V8 produces ~160bhp and ~210lbft of torque. The B23E was ~136bhp and 137lbft.

That means the Rover V8 is ~25% more powerful and ~50% more torque plus you get that V8 soundtrack. Much better than a B23E!

Depends very much the year of the engine, the tune, and the original application. In the Land Rover it was as little as 110-115 BHP depending on market, in the P6 V8 it was about 136BHP (Rover claimed something like 152, but enough of these engines have ended up on enough dyno's to know that was utter hokum), the carb'd versions of the SD1 were 136-155 BHP depending on model and year.

No standard carb model produced more than 155 ponies, and most well below that. The power didn't get hiked beyond 155 until the arrival of fuel injection.

It was never as quick as rose tinted legend would have us think, and the more humble 3.0 Ford Essex unit produced more power and, in most applications, faster cars.

The engine in this one appears to be P6 im origin, so would gave started life with not a lot of power. Clearly the original carbs have gone (the sticker indicates Holley carbs, but who really knows?) and its not a difficult job to uprate the camshaft, but it began its life as a fairly humble unit.

They're not that torquey for their capacity, and don't even sound very nice compared to big bore V8's. Aside from in the 70's when there wasn't much else about, there isn't really a great deal to recommend the Rover V8 other than its relatively modest weight,

[Laird Scooby]

Originally Posted by Familyman 90

Depends very much the year of the engine, the tune, and the original application. In the Land Rover it was as little as 110-115 BHP depending on market, in the P6 V8 it was about 136BHP (Rover claimed something like 152, but enough of these engines have ended up on enough dyno's to know that was utter hokum), the carb'd versions of the SD1 were 136-155 BHP depending on model and year.

No standard carb model produced more than 155 ponies, and most well below that. The power didn't get hiked beyond 155 until the arrival of fuel injection.

It was never as quick as rose tinted legend would have us think, and the more humble 3.0 Ford Essex unit produced more power and, in most applications, faster cars.

The engine in this one appears to be P6 im origin, so would gave started life with not a lot of power. Clearly the original carbs have gone (the sticker indicates Holley carbs, but who really knows?) and its not a difficult job to uprate the camshaft, but it began its life as a fairly humble unit.

They're not that torquey for their capacity, and don't even sound very nice compared to big bore V8's. Aside from in the 70's when there wasn't much else about, there isn't really a great deal to recommend the Rover V8 other than its relatively modest weight,

The P6B (and P5B before it) were 160bhp and could easily make more even on twin SUs - one my brother owned was tuned at Abingdon at 182bhp. I've also owned 7 SD1s, 5 of which were V8s and once properly set-up were not only quick but economical too - i averaged 28mpg from all of them, except when i had a worn camshaft in one and a pair of duff carbs in another. In fact, worn camshafts was a big problem for the power output on them, no sound of a problem unless you had ears tuned in to what they should sound like just generally slower than they should be. I suspect those you've had on the dyno procuing considerably less than they should be had worn camshafts and/or blcoked breahers which would give another problem of high oil pressure. Should be no more than 35psi hot - if it is, you're losing power, economy and likely to lose seals left right and centre any time soon.

Also ignition timing varied a lot over the years, getting it wrong would also have a huge effect on power and economy.

All carb versions of the V8 were rated at 155bhp, even on the horrible Strombergs with the even more horrible FASD on them. The 136bhp rating was in fact for the straight six 2600 models, essentially a revised Triumph 2500 engine with a Dolomite style head designed by Triumph engineers sat on top of it and "that" problem with the oil restrictor valve that caused the camshaft to temporarily sieze in its bearings.

You're right about the advent of EFi hiking the power, it went up to 190bhp and the injection system was a Lucas version of the Bosch L-Jetronic system. However some head and cam work had also been done to take advantage of the EFi so even adding a pair of Vitesse heads to a carb model would give a boost of 15-20bhp.

As for the Essex 3.0 V6, no they didn't produce more power

Even Ford only rated them at 138bhp (after some mods 2-3 years into production prior to which they were only ~130bhp) and a 38DGAS doesn't have the flow capabilities of a pair of SU HS6s or HIF44s - two 1.5" barrels of the 38DGAS Vs two 1.75" barrels of the SUs - big difference!

Also the Capris/Granadas were lighter than the SD1 but the SD1 V8 would leave and 3.0 V6 Ford in a cloud of exhaust and the Ford would never get near catching up.

Even when Ford changed to the Cologne V6 and fitted K-Jetronic injection to the 2.8 which boosted power from 135bhp on the Solex carb to 160bhp with injection, they still weren't that quick. Never came across a 2.8i (Capri or Granada) that an SD1 V8 wouldn't leave behind, assuming both cars were standard.

In short, the Rover V8 was a lot better than you're giving it credit for but the big point is that these days, it's outdated at ~60 years old. Technology has moved on and we now have 32v V8s such as the 1UZ that can also return surprisingly good fuel economy. A friend bought the later 1UZ which was a 4.3 with VVTi and that happily returned 36+mpg on a run. At nearly twice the weight of a Capri it was not only quicker but more economical. Fitting something like that into a Volvo would be the way to go if you wanted a V8 Volvo unless of course it's an S80 or XC70/90 in which case the Yamaha 4.4 V8 which Volvo themselves fitted. That said you could just buy one ready made..................

[AndrewBrown]

Bloody Hell chaps there's another one!!!

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/203656674...cAAOSw2QZhXIvo

this Volvo is much better though take a look

[Laird Scooby]

Originally Posted by AndrewBrown

Bloody Hell chaps there's another one!!!

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/203656674...cAAOSw2QZhXIvo

this Volvo is much better though take a look

At least the second time that one has been listed. First time round it sold for £1950 on 15/10 but the person(s) who converted it didn't do their research very well. The A340 gearbox as Toyota/Lexus call it is almost identical to the AW71 gearbox we all know so there would be no need to change the propshaft (just the extension housing and output shaft) or the selector lever. Also the engine would sit further forward using the original length prop and would make use of the Volvo gearbox mounting bracket.

Wherever the engine is mounted (forwards or backwards of the original redblock) the sump is likely to need modifying to fit but given it's ighter than the redblock having the gearbox a bit further forward is likely to help balance the weight distribution.

I wonder if the buyer got there and found it had all been bodged and walked away?

[Othen]

Originally Posted by Laird Scooby

At least the second time that one has been listed. First time round it sold for £1950 on 15/10 but the person(s) who converted it didn't do their research very well. The A340 gearbox as Toyota/Lexus call it is almost identical to the AW71 gearbox we all know so there would be no need to change the propshaft (just the extension housing and output shaft) or the selector lever. Also the engine would sit further forward using the original length prop and would make use of the Volvo gearbox mounting bracket.

Wherever the engine is mounted (forwards or backwards of the original redblock) the sump is likely to need modifying to fit but given it's ighter than the redblock having the gearbox a bit further forward is likely to help balance the weight distribution.

I wonder if the buyer got there and found it had all been bodged and walked away?

Fascinating. It will be really interesting to see what it goes for this time - I'd find it hard to imagine it would make 2 grand because the potential market is so small (perhaps a handful of folk around the country).

Personally I can't see the point of this type of modification - is it really going to make a better motor car than the Lexus the motor came out of?

Alan

[Othen]

Originally Posted by Laird Scooby

At least the second time that one has been listed. First time round it sold for £1950 on 15/10 but the person(s) who converted it didn't do their research very well. The A340 gearbox as Toyota/Lexus call it is almost identical to the AW71 gearbox we all know so there would be no need to change the propshaft (just the extension housing and output shaft) or the selector lever. Also the engine would sit further forward using the original length prop and would make use of the Volvo gearbox mounting bracket.

Wherever the engine is mounted (forwards or backwards of the original redblock) the sump is likely to need modifying to fit but given it's ighter than the redblock having the gearbox a bit further forward is likely to help balance the weight distribution.

I wonder if the buyer got there and found it had all been bodged and walked away?

The Volvo/Lexus sold for £1260... about where I thought it would I suppose.

[Othen]

Originally Posted by Othen

A mere £3,750 now - another 2 years at this rate of decline should see it down to what it is worth:

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Volvo-240...-127635-2958-0

... and now only £3,450!

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/115036846...kAAOSwoxZhD-EA

:-)

PS. I think this started at £8,000!

[Othen]

Originally Posted by Othen

... and now only £3,450!

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/115036846...kAAOSwoxZhD-EA

:-)

PS. I think this started at £8,000!

This old friend is back again (I've lost track of how many times it has been advertised):

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/115126550...53.m1438.l2649

:-)

[Othen]

Originally Posted by Othen

... and now only £3,450!

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/115036846...kAAOSwoxZhD-EA

:-)

PS. I think this started at £8,000!

Another price reduction (to a mere £2,999 - form an orderly queue).

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/115126550...53.m1438.l2649

At this rate it should reach its value (about £999) by Xmas 2022:



:-)

PS. This motor car will become an historic vehicle on 1 April 2023 - its value will increase then, perhaps to £1,500 - and it will not need a MoT test (now that is a scary thought, it was last tested in 2009!).

[360beast]

Originally Posted by Othen

Another price reduction (to a mere £2,999 - form an orderly queue).

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/115126550...53.m1438.l2649

At this rate it should reach its value (about £999) by Xmas 2022:



:-)

PS. This motor car will become an historic vehicle on 1 April 2023 - its value will increase then, perhaps to £1,500 - and it will not need a MoT test (now that is a scary thought, it was last tested in 2009!).

It won't pass as a historic vehicle unfortunately Alan because of how it has been modified.