rods for 215

[quietone]

Does anyone know, offhand, which rods work with the 305 Chevy pistons?

[mgb260]

Depends on the compression height of your pistons. I like the flattops for 6" aftermarket Chevy rods. I think they have 1.25 pin height. 5.7 stock length early Chevy rods 305 piston 1.55 pin height. You want to get as close as you can to zero deck height. The Chevy rods have to be milled .050 each side of the big end and the bearing tang notches redone for the Buick bearings.

[quietone]

Thanks for the info, Jim. Somewhere, I have that old HR magazine with all the rod and piston combos, but I can't put my hand on it. I started out to build the old 215 I've had for 30 years, but it may be getting out of hand. I am looking for 425 HP. I have a 3.9 Rover TPI unit, and a pair of KKK turbos, and a roller cam blank from The Wedge Shop. The Silvolite pistons might not be up to the stress. There is a set of TRW forged 305 standard pistons on Ebay, and a set of Scat H-beam rods for small journal Chevy. Probably would be a good investment, since it cost almost nothing to sleeve a block.

[roverman]

Larry, "It cost almost nothing to sleeve a block", please explain ? The best sleeves are flanged, and are easily $30+/ea. Finding a shop that will properly heat the block,for exact interference fit, is difficult to find,(lack of experience).  Locktite "620" is suggested.  Your results may vary.  Good Luck, roverman.

[ex-tyke]

From D&D's website...
http://www.aluminumv8.com/tech/tech.htm

[quietone]

Flanged sleeves are nice, with a light slip fit, the way they are designed to be installed. However, the heat transfer to the block from the sleeve is pretty miserable. When a sleeve is pressed into the block with the proper lubricant, the heat transfer to the block is approximately ten times as good as hot dropped. This information came from Outboard Marine Corporation and research they did when they started installing sleeves after the aluminum block is cast. In this case, I have had the sleeves over 20 yrs., and I am the machinist that will install them, and you can sleeve 2 cyl. with one long sleeve cut in half.

[roverman]

Larry, Please let us know your results,(perhaps a demo)?  What is your target interferance fit ? Thanks, roverman.

[quietone]

Forever, the sleeve manufacturers have sized the sleeves for .003 interference. The current thinking is that .003 is neither necessary or desirable. It introduces too much stress and distortion into the block. Installing a sleeve at .003 interference will distort the adjacent cylinder over .001. I prefer .0005 interference. With the sleeve sitting on a ledge at the bottom of the bore, and the head gasket fire ring bearing on the top, It's not going antwhere.

[mgb260]

Larry, What lubricant /adhesive do you use(Hylomar,Locktite,etc.)? Where do you get the sleeves? I always thought, how could the Rover sleeves move? Because of lack of quality  control the step on the bottom is too low or sleeves too short? You might be able to pull the stock sleeves and deck the block and make sure the sleeves are reinstalled all the way to the step and then deck the sleeves. I have a previous thread on here detailing using locktite and pinning the sleeves to the block.

[quietone]

Since I am new here, I just read the thread about pinning the sleeves. I don't understand how this condition can occur. The piston sits on a ledge at the bottom, and the head bears on the gasket fire ring which bears on the sleeve top. This could not allow the sleeve to "rattle up and down against the fire ring". There is a situation which occurs with "hot dropped" sleeves that might explain what is happening. The block can be heated to 400F and a room temp sleeve installed in the block. When the assembly cools, it leaves the sleeve slightly above the ledg e in the block. If the sleeve is not rapped down aga.inst the ledge before the machine work is finished, it will drop down from the block expansion and the force of the head and gasket fire ring. The lube OMC used is what I also use. It is a food-grade lubricant called Acculube LB5000.

[mgb260]

Thanks, Larry! I still am Interested in what you use for sleeves. I thought about using  iron or steel pipe 1/8" thick for sleeve material. After all it is going to be finish honed anyway. Or reusing stock sleeves after block is decked. I think I would use at least .001 interference. I agree.002-.003 is too much and can cause distortion. There are a lot of Rover 4.0 and 4.6 crossbolted blocks going to waste. Someone should get a rover block with slipped sleeves and measure the sleeve length and distance from deck to bottom step. Should be the same so sleeves can't rattle up and down. Now if we can find someone to offset grind the 4.6 crank cheaply for strokers that would be great!

[quietone]

The sleeves are no problem. They are made by many engine parts manufacturers, like Melling, Federal Mogul, Wiseco,Mahle, and others. And they are cheap. They are  available by size, and come in several thicknesses, depending on the condition of the cylinder that you are sleeving. I have installed a sleeve in a sleeve on small diesel engines with catastrophic cylinder damage. (Large portion of the cylinder wall missing ) That is 2 eighth inch thick sleeves for a total of quarter inch thick cylinder wall. Most castiron engine blocks have quarter inch thick cylinder walls. It's always better to deck the block after the sleeves are installed and seated and finish bored. Oh, by the way, the sleeves come unfinished, with a .030 allowance on the inside. They are centrifugally cast and have a 200 BH hardness.

[MGBV8]

Not sure who has read this.

http://robisonservice.blogspot.com/2010/04/last-word-on-land-rover-liner-failures.html

[mgb260]

Carl, Thanks for the article! I know Cadillac uses an O ring on the bottom of the sleeve. About the same bore size also. As far as the taper on top, I wonder if you turned the liners around you would have a flat surface to seal against the head gasket. I would still use Hylomar or Loctite for sealer on the  sleeves. Looks like 2000 and up sleeves don't move but still leak by the taper on top of sleeve because of crack behind sleeve. I thought the crack was from too long of head bolt so I would use older style bolts with washers or studs.

[quietone]

I don't understand about the "taper on the top". Exactly where do these cracks occur?

[mgb260]

Larry, For some reason the sleeves Rover used in the 3.9,4.0 and 4.6 have a angle on the top edge. The cylinder wall is thinner when they went to 94mm(3.7") bore. The headbolts are non reusable angle torque stretch type. I recommend the older headbolts with washers or studs as I think the newer ones are too long and bottom out the threads and cause the crack behind the liner. Then you have a coolant leak between the sleeve and cylinder up to the head where the sleeve doesn't seal because of the taper. The earlier than 2000 sleeves did move because they were shorter or the block bored deeper than the newer ones. I've seen them 1/4" below the deck. I'm trying to figure out a economical fix to the problem and make available 4.0 and 4.6 blocks rather than scrapping them. With the expense to  do the flanged liners you could have bought another short block.

[roverman]

Larry and clan, IMHO, installing a 1/8" wall flangeless sleeve, with 94+ mm bore,will render it "WET" 100% of the time! Are you prepaired for this ? "MID" sleeves are a different animal. 215's and RV8's are not designed for wet sleeves-period. (1) wet sleeve RV8, has been built with "some" success,(see rally TR7-Mikes post). It uses cast iron heads to strengthen the RV8 decks, severly weakened with wet sleeves/4.020" bores.  Good Luck, I suspect you'll need it, roverman.

[mgb260]

Art, I agree, I plan on using stock 4.0/4.6 sleeves bored out .036 to 305 Chevy standard size. Have you pulled out a stock sleeve? Is it flat on the bottom? If so I'm thinking Caddy O ring/Hylomar on bottom, Loctite on top, sleeve flipped around and block decked.

[quietone]

I am using 3 3/4" nominal bore sleeves with 3/32" wall thickness. That doesn't get into the water jacket. The sleeves installed with .0005 to .001 interference fit and pressed in against a ledge, with Acculube lubricant will not leak. There is actually no real way for leaks to occur if the machine work is properly done.

[roverman]

For the record, 94mm bore, .060" wall oem RV8 blocks,  crack and leak between block and sleeve, way too frequently. Larry, you'll be removing approx .059" MORE per side, than a standard 94mm RV8. Please enlighten how you will succeed, where all others have failed ? Once you remove the old sleeves, and then sonic test the remaining aluminum walls, core shift will be apparent. Block castings are approx 28 ksi.ut., with low mallebility and high willingness to crack.You might pm Tim Lanocha, about his 4.02" bore, RV8.  roverman.

[BlownMGB-V8]

I have just one question, and it is one you really should take seriously. Is all of this really worthwhile for an 80 lb weight advantage? Because that is the difference between a BOPR block and a 300 Buick iron block, and even less for the later Rover blocks which weigh more. A 300 block can easily be built as a 5.6 or a 5.7 liter engine using the 350 Buick crank. The block is stiffer/stronger and will handle 700 hp without reinforcements. The threads will not pull out. Torquing of fasteners is more positive. Reliability is improved. Fit and appearance is almost identical. If you really want it to look like an aluminum block you can have it ceramic coated.

To my mind it is the obvious choice for a big inch motor. Why build a Dixie cup when you can have something reliable?

OTOH if max hp and minimum weight is your game, it would seem that either the LS or turbo4 is the way to go. YMMV

Jim

[Moderator]

Why not a 300? For starters, I like the characteristics of a shorter stroke (2.8" vs 3.36") and I like later-model Rover intake manifolds (for EFI). One day I'll build a new short-block and I might have it sleeved/bored for 3.75" (Chevy 305) or 3.78" (Ford 2.3 Turbo) pistons - so I've been very interested in this thread.

[mgb260]

Plus thousands of crossbolted blocks going to waste! Curtis, you need one of the latest 3.9 that had the casting for crossbolts. There is enough meat in the stock sleeves to go .036 over for standard 305 pistons. I think if we put our heads together we will find a solution on the sleeves. Rover dropped the ball on that. The 300 Buick is great, I just wish they made more of them.

[roverman]

Jim B., perhaps we can have a write-up of this 700 hp.,300" sbb, with NO reinforcements" ? Who built it ? Got dyno sheets and durability ? Is it possible this is derived from "Buick V8 forum, bench racing developement" ?  Availability of these oem. pieces that will reliably sustain these impressive #'s ?  Cheers, roverman.

[MGBV8]

Like Curtis, I prefer the short stroke engine in a MGB. Feels proper for the sports car character.

Over the past several years I have pondered how to best do better pistons for my 3.9 project. I have spent hours pouring thru piston catalogs, calculating different rod lengths to match the compression height, etc. Keith Black 305 Chevy pistons, small journal 6.0 Chevy rods machined .050 each side with bearings dressed to match. Bore the block, cross your fingers. What a pain. May be cheaper & faster to just order overpriced custom pistons and be done with it.

Or, skip the whole thing & jump on the LS bandwagon.  I would do it with some sort of 4.8L mongrel since it is the shortest stroke LS.