I watched this program on TV the other day about the Rover V8. The history of the engine in the U.K. was interesting, but (surprise surprise) there was no mention of it's origins as a Buick engine. I was discussing the program with a friend of mine and we both had to adimt that we knew next to nothing about Rover V8's. It got me to wondering, what are the biggest differences between the Buick 215 V8, and the largest displacement Rover 4.6L V8? Is it mostly just a matter of longer stroke (that is, can the Rover 4.6L be truly considered a defacto, stroked 215?). What changes were made to the outside of the engine? Can these really be considered, more or less, the same engine?
The Rover ( also used in the MGB GT V8 and TR 8 ) engine is the Buick 215 V8 :shock: and 64 300 Aluminum heads bolt right on ( I have a pair for sale ) also you can use the 300 crank and different rods ( pontiac ) and stroke these engines to 5.0 ltr :TU: From what i have read most or all parts easily interchange with most of the Rover V8 engines up until they changed maunfactures ( now BMW I think ) Ken
i thought some of the larger Rover variants had taller deck heights than the original 215 / 3.5L? wouldn't this include the 4.6L?
The later 4.0 and 4.6 blocks have larger crank journals, and are cross bolted. The crank case seems to have a little more room inside, too. Other than that and the 3.7" bore and extra ribbing, they are pretty much the same block. Buick front covers, and heads will bolt up to the block, no problem. Bell housing pattern is the same. Late Rovers use a crank driven gerotor oil pump, with no provision for a distibutor (like the later transverse Buick v6). The 4.0/4.6 crank has a longer snout with larger main and rod journals. The 4.0 crank still has the 2.8" stroke of the original 215, but the rods are much longer. The late block is a very minor evolution of the original design. Think 327-->350. Rick(wrench)
The 4.0 crank still has the 2.8" stroke of the original 215, but the rods are much longer. you're saying they made up for the longer rod length with shorter pin height pistons? that's the only way you can get around not raising the deck.
Yep, that's what he's saying. I'm also hearing that the Rover 4.6 blocks are prone to cracking behind the back cylinders when run too hot. That's not very heartening... http://www.v8engines.com/Acrobat/LRO_May_small.PDF http://www.v8engines.com/Acrobat/LRO_Spring.pdf http://www.motoring.co.za/index.php?fArticleId=3127570&fSectionId=1645&fSetId=381 Greg
The bolt pattern for the bellhousing is the same? I wasn't expecting that. I assume everything was converted over to metric, though, right? And what about the outside of the engine? Are the motormounts in the same places?
If you're talking about using Buick 215 motor mounts on a Rover V8 block, the answer is YES you can. Greg
The 4.0 is more prone to cracking than the 4.6. The problem was in the emissions control. The vehicles with the 4.0 had higher thermostats built into them (STUPID) so they are more likey cracked. the 4.6 was less likely to be cracked because the inspection process was much more stringent. They also had changed how they controlled emissions. The main problem is the coolent causes the liner to loosen in the block. If it is able to slide down the block it exposes the block to the combustion chamber. Coolent leaks into the combustion chamber and bad things begin to happen. If you can keep the liners from moving it may solve the problem. Many cracked blocks have been fixed by installing top hat liners. The engine works fine even when cracked with these liners installed. I am using a 4.0 block that is likely cracked. I decided to try an experiment before installing new sleeves. I was given an idea from a guy who works on one-of-a-kind diesel engines that suffer similar problems. Not having replacement sleeves on hand he pins the cylinders with a socket head screw throught the base of the cylinder and the block. I've made this modification to my block. I'll keep the list posted on the results as they manifest. It is likely that it will take a year or so to start having problems with liner creep... So I guess stay tuned for the long haul... I talk about pinning the cylinders more on my Aluminum 310 website if you're interested. Other than that the info the other guys posted in right on. Larger cross-bolted mains (2.5"), reinforced block casting. There actually was a crank-driven version with a distributor. It was on the mid 90's "Interim" engines. They have 2-bolt mains but have the undrilled bosses for the cross-bolt... Hope this helps!
You can bolt 300 heads on 215/3.5 block, but "early" rover block has 10 headbolts (14 for Buick 300).Chambers are much larger, good if you are building blown motor.
You mean the "early" rover block has 14 bolts and the 300 head has 10 holes... The 4.0 and 4.6 are only 10 bolt as well. The 4.0 and 4.6 heads also have smaller chambers: 29cc. The reason for this is Rover went with a thicker (0.050") composite head gasket instead of the thiner (0.020") metal gasket they were using on the previous blocks. They basically shaved the heads 0.030" and recessed the valve seats to make up for this. The castings are the same other wise.
oops Nix: You got that right :beer Now, if someone can explain why you cant use 64 aluminium heads on later engines...
You definately can use the '64 heads on a later block... You definately need to raise the compression ratio with new pistons! The compression would be REALLY low otherwise. I'm using '64 300 heads on my project.
They are not identical, but Yes, one will fit the other with one difference. The drive gear on the Rover is different than the Buick. You'll have to use a Buick drive gear in a Buick or a Rover drive gear on a Rover. Now I say that because the way the gear sits on the oil pump gear is different between the two. If you use aftermarket oil pump gears for a Buick, then you use the Buick drive gear and vice versa. Greg
I use an HEI from a Buick 350 in my '62 Skylark. Could this HEI also be used in a Rover 4.6L if the same drive gear is swapped out?
I'm also wondering if the mounts on a Rover 4.6L line up with the anchor points in the engine bay of the '61-'63 Skylarks as well. Could one of these 4.6L Rovers be swapped into an old skylarks just as another Buick 215 could be? Or would there be some minor mods to be made?
Maybe easiest way is to use Buick frontend on Rover 4.6.You can use Buick distributor and pulleys and brackets.
No mods necessary for engine mounting. The motor mounts are in the same place and the 215 mounts match up to the block. About the drive gear thing... If you were going to swap in a 4.6 as is there would be no distributor. If you were going to replace the top end to be old school, then you would need to swap out the front cover for a distributor. Here's where things get a lot different. I'm pretty sure the end of the crank is longer in the 4.6 so swapping front covers may be a little more challenging. The earlier front cover will bolt up but I think the accessory drive is different because the crank snout is longer. The cam doesn't have a dist gear on it and I'm not sure if we can just bolt one on... What the later cam does have is a really nice thrust plate design. I think there are guys over the pond that modify the crank for the front cover... I'll look up more info about it. It's likely it would be easier to swap in the harness and computer for a Mod Rod kinda thing.
