mgs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Use a Rover, NOT an Buick V-8

To: MGMagnette@aol.com
Subject: Re: Use a Rover, NOT an Buick V-8
From: Larry Dickstein <bugide@tfs.net>
Date: Mon, 02 Feb 1998 08:44:29 -0800
I cannabilized a TR8 for my Rover V8 engine for an MG B.  Is that OK?

Larry Dickstein
Kansas City, MO



MGMagnette@aol.com wrote:
> 
> Subject: Re: Use a Rover, NOT an Buick V-8
> Date: Sun, 1 Feb 1998 12:32:30 EST
> From: MGMagnette@aol.com
> Organization: AOL (http://www.aol.com)
> To: mgb.roadster@juno.com
> 
> Hey All-
>   Someone said:
> "I doubt that the 63 Buick 3100 series engine was under-powered, compared
> to the first Rovers. "  It was.
>   Strangely enough there is a story in the February 1998 Issue of Classic And
> Sportscar.  In that issue they compare a Rover P5B Coupe and a Buick LeSabre
> 400.  They compared the two cars ofcourse because they have "the same" engine.
> But they aren't the same. Let me quote two sections...
> 
>  "The Rovers ability on the motorway is still a thing of wonder.  Moving
> naturally into the outside lane, the P5B sits at 85mph, ebbing and flowing
> with the quickest of moderns.  Kickdown delivers enough thrust to shift past
> liines of uphill, middle-lane queues and onto speeds that will cost you a
> license before they'll worry the P5B.  That's thanks to the British
> interpretation of the Buick V-8.
>     When the engine came over to be developed for the P5B, a Buick man came to
> help. (re-read that, "developed" means the engine was changed).  Rover wanted
> it to rev higher than its top whack of 4400 rpm, and the American couldn't
> understand why.  So Rover put him in a 6 cylinder P5 with a development driver
> and send him up the newly opened M6 at 100mph plus.  He returned white faced
> and wise to the demands placed on British cars.  (Re-read that, it means it
> red lined where you'd just start going until Rover got ahold of it)  In due
> course, the Buick 3.5-litre V8 became Rover's own, giving 184 bhp gross at
> 5200rpm, a 30 percent hike on the original. "
> 
> Ah, 30% hike.  That might just mean faster.  Ok, so we've established that
> from the beginning, the Rover versions had more horsepower and a higher rev
> line.  Sounds like the Rover might make a better sportscar engine...  Let me
> quote some more.
> 
> "On the motorway, the Rover just dissapears.  The Buick pulls well to about
> 60mph but then begins breathing hard, just at the point where the Rover
> explodes into the distance."  You want to breath hard at 60 or explode into
> the distance at 60?
> 
> Someone completely different said:
> "You encourage people to use the Rover engine in their conversions then
> ask them not to use certain Rovers, the very Rovers that use the BOP
> engine.  See anything contradictory in this?  If you are concerned about
> saving P5Bs or P6s then encourage the converter to use the BOP engine."
> 
> Yes, we should save the remaining P5Bs and P6s, but I've never minded anyone
> dismantling a Range Rover.  You engine choice is gonna be a compromise between
> availibility, price, power, and maybe a desire to save British Classics.  The
> BOP (Buick Olds Pontiac) engine doesn't have the power.  That leaves Rover
> Engines.  While price and availiblity change from region to region, ripping
> the heart out of a Range Rover doesn't make me too upset, but destroying a P5B
> would be tragic.  Obviously if any of these cars are beyond repair why not
> give the engine another life, but most trashed cars have trashed engines.  So
> for most, a Range Rover engine will be the greatest compromise.
> 
> Then someone said:
> "I have to disagree with your statement, "You'd be just as happy with a
> normal MGB, and a nice restored Rover to drive to work".  You obviously
> haven't driven a high performance sports car.  No one who enjoys cars and
> has driven a MGB V8 would make such a statement."
> 
> I guess the V-12 XJ-S I drive everyday isn't a high performance car...   What
> is a V8 MGB?  It's called a TVR, why don't you get one of those?  You've
> obviously never driven a Rover to work.  No one who enjoys cars and has driven
> a Rover would make such a statement.
> 
> I again put out my plea to stop the destruction of Rovers for the sake of a
> hotrod MG.  I say this as an owner of 3 MGs, and former Rover owner.
> 
> Ofcourse, this information isn't meant to criticize, just to enlighten, please
> accept it in the manor it is given.
> 
> John



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>