Low profile oil pan for Rover V8

[GT8MX]

I need a low profile oil pan for a Rover 4.6 V8.  I searched the drivetrain forum, and found some discussions around dry sumps, which would be fun, but they appear to cost more than my engine.  I am trying to make the engine as low as possible, but I had positioned the engine mounts and tranny with a BOP 215, and now the Rover V8 oil pan is significantly deeper.  

I read the www.seight.com/baffle.html article and now I don't want to just shorten the Rover pan, which was my first instinct.  I plan to drive mainly on the street. but I do intend to take the car to a local road course for track days.

Any leads?

Thanks,

Bill

[Moderator]

I presume you're using the 4.0/4.6 style timing cover, and that's why you don't want to use your Buick 215 pan and pick-up (with some sort of baffle added)?  

This old article might possibly help: <a href="http://www.britishv8.org/articles/bop-rover-oil-pan-options.htm">BOPR Oil Pan Options</a>  (e.g. Buick V6 pick-up?)

[GT8MX]

Curtis:

I thought it might be important to have a cast pan (like the 4.6 OEM pan) to act as a girdle around the mains.  I figured the reason Rover converted to a cast pan instead of the BOP sheet metal pan was for rigidity to aid longevity of the mains.

Plus I like the looks of the Rover pan, except for how much hangs down exposed below the frame.

Bill

[mstemp]

Bill,

Most of us with 4.6L changed over to Buick timing cover and Rover SD1 pans. No clearance issues  then on a RB car. As for rigidity, not sure there is any issue with older steel pans. Main benifit from cast pan is superior sealing. Rights stuff gasket sealer can give the similar results.

[GT8MX]

Mike:

I'm not familiar with the Rover SD1 pan.  Is it interchangeable with the BOP 215 pan, so that i can use it, or do I need to find an SD1 pan?

Thanks,

Bill

[afirover]

I know you said you don't want dry sump but I bought a pan from A.R.E a very nice cast alum low profile intended for d/s

http://www.drysump.com/buickrover.htm

its a beast of a Pan fyi

[mstemp]

Bill,

Actually I may have used a LR pan, not sure. The SD1 pan is from 1980 Rover 3500 car. May be hard to find but the LR pans from a 3.5 or 3.9L should also work. BOP pans may also be hard to find today so look for LR. What ever you use you will need the oil pickup tube and the a different timing cover. Have you looked at Jim Stuart's car? He was able to get the cast LR pan to fit in his 4.0 conversion, should be the same as your 4.6.

http://www.britishv8.org/MG/JimStuart4.htm

[GT8MX]

Gary:

I would like to *have* a dry sump setup, but I don't want to *pay* for a dry-sump setup.    

I looked at the A.R.E link you supplied.  I assume you have dry sump setup if you can use that pan?  If so, did you invest less than $1000 for the pan, pump(s) and tank?

Thanks,

Bill

[GT8MX]

Mike:

I have a pan and timing cover from the BOP 215 that I had bought (in pieces) to put in before I decided to switch to the Rover 4.6 in search of 300 HP.  I'm not sure about the pickup tube....I'll have to dig through my tubs of parts.

In regard to Jim Stuart's car, I looked at what's posted under "Galleries", but I have not seen it in person and I could not find pictures of the oil pan arrangement.  It may not apply anyway since I have a GT6, not an MGB, and I don't know if their frames are similar.  

The BOP 215 pan fits fine, since I sized the engine mounts for the BOP 215, so if I can get by using the BOP 215 oil pan and timing cover with the Rover 4.6, I'm in good shape.

Thanks,

Bill

[mstemp]

Bill,

No idea you were doing a GT6.
BOP should work but you need the pickup, oil pump, pump drive via cam change, distributor etc.

[GT8MX]

Mike:

Yikes...that's a lot of changes just to effectively raise the oil pan 2"....I'll  have to take the current Rover pan off and explore my options.  I would like to make as few changes as possible  (for durability).

Stand by...

Bill

[afirover]

Bill
I have less than $1000 in the set up
the pan was 500 bucks ish  I had them bring it to me at PRI show last year :-)
the pump was 250 ish (ebay)  patterson unit
I bought the tank on ebay 80 bucks ish
the hoses I will have made
the mount and drive I will make work .

[ptschram]

Who will make the mount and drive work???

LOL

[GT8MX]

I removed the RR cast oil pan and checked the fitment problems that would occur if I used a BOP 3.5L (215 ci) oil pan that I have instead.  The  RR cast pan is a cast rigid piece.  The BOP pan is thin sheet metal.  The oil pan mounting bolt holes seem to line up except at the timing cover.  The RR cast pan is 21" from the holes for the timing cover studs to the holes for the bolts at the back (center to center), but the BOP pan is only 20".  The BOP pan is not long enough to reach the RR timing cover mounting studs.  (You probably knew that.)

I have a BOP timing cover, and maybe that would solve the BOP oil pan fitment problem, but then: the RR oil pickup would be partially covered by the BOP pan, and I don't even see how the pickup could be routed differently; using the BOP timing cover changes the oil pump (does the BOP pump even deliver enough capacity?); the BOP timing cover has a distributor drive that isn't needed and it might get in the way of the RR serpentine system; the RR timing cover has crank timing and oil pressure sensors wiring that are not provided for on the BOP timing cover, and since I am going to use Megasquirt EFI, I need to maintain the crank sensor.

Overall, switching the RR 4.6 over to the BOP oil pan seems like a lot of bother.

Maybe an SD1 oil pan and timing cover has fewer of these problems?

I can't run with the RR cast oil pan since I would have about 1" ground clearance at the bottom of the oil pan, but it's beginning to seem like $1000 for dry sump is reasonable.  

Ulp....

[mstemp]

Bill,

You would change the entire front end of the motor! Timing cover, oil pump, pick up, pan, belt system, crank damper, spacer for damper and camshaft etc. The cam is not really suited to the light weight car anyways. For MS you could maybe use the trigger wheel that is in the flywheel but you likely have a drive plate since it was automatic. The distributor could then be modified so you could run sequential injection if you have a newer MS system, look at Curtis's car on this site.  Sounds like you have 90% of the parts already, just a new cam. As for the oil pump yes it will handle the 4.6 also you can get different gears etc if you want higher flow or pressure. Jim B can help you on this.

[BlownMGB-V8]

I could NOT recommend longer gears in the Buick style oil pump. This has been clearly demonstrated to be a poor band-aid for improper engine setup and is now considered a "Very Bad Idea" in particular because it often does not work, and destroys distributor gears in the bargain.

Use the stock length gears, they are more than adequate. Enlarge the oil pickup and galley to 5/8" (use a piloted drill). Set oil pump gear end clearance to the absolute minimum (the housing will expand more than the gears and give additional running clearance). Use the "booster plate" to stabilize the housing and give a new wear surface. Port the plate, housing, and turns in the oil passages to ease the corners and bends. Set bearing clearances to the minimums, usually .0015". Make sure the lifter fit is close. Consider restricting oil flow to the top end (pushrod oiling is a good choice but make sure the rocker shafts get oil as that is where the wear occurs). Fit an uprated pressure relief spring and/or adjustable cap. Running pressure should hit 10lbs/1000rpm and 5-15psi at idle.

Jim

[MGBV8]

I was under the impression that, at some point, Rover improved the oiling for these engines.

[mgb260]

They went to the crank driven Gerotor type oil pump but didn't do the block mods or larger pickup Jim suggests.

[GT8MX]

Well I must say that if I were a "real" hotrodder,  I would want to modify my Rover 4.6L as y'all have detailed using the pieces from my BOP 215 so that the Rover 4.6 would have the shallower oil pan I need, but the side effects of using the BOP 215 oil pan seem to ripple too much into pickups, oil pumps, distributors (or not)...

So I am going to wimp out and take Gary's advice and go the dry sump route using the ARE pan.  Yes, I will end up spending nearly $1000, but I hope to avoid several months of engine fiddling, which is what I had originally intended by installing a running 4.6 complete with induction, accessories and serpentine belt.  I want to minimize the time I spend on the engine until I have driven it a bit.

Besides, from the research I've done, the cast pan does add some rigidity to the bottom end, and I hate to give that up.

So now I am seeking a lead on a dry sump 3-stage oil pump.

Thanks for all your inputs and advice.

Bill

[BlownMGB-V8]

Bill, since this is going in your GT-6 that might make sense, to keep it below the hood as even the Buick pan may be a bit deep for what you are doing. But understanding that, it seems to me it'd be cheaper and easier to modify the cast rover pan than to go dry sump. Can you find someone to do TIG welding for you? That cast Rover pan can be mated easily to some aluminum sheet of about 12 ga thickness and bulged out wherever needed to bring the sump bottom up. Bending the pickup neck isn't terribly difficult either.

As for the oil passage mods recommended above, they apply to ALL Rover engines as well as the Buick and Olds 215. Yes, the gearotor pump is considered an improvement, yet still it is a production piece and can benefit from easing sharp corners and such. The block itself is no different, and although I do believe Rover did increase the pickup journal size at some point (better, and maybe good enough) enlarging it a bit more is pretty cheap insurance. Buick saw fit to go with a 5/8" pickup on the later V6 and this part is now standard fare for all SBB and Rover builds Doesn't it make sense to increase the journal in the block to the same size? It's a straightforward operation and can even be done in the car. However, even 9/16" represents a significant improvement over the stock 1/2" passage, and blending the corners is just a good practice as it greatly reduces turbulence.

Your dry sump system is going to be a big challenge and you will have to have a large custom tank built and find a place it can go, plus the lines will be in the way of everything. Sure, it'll have the WOW factor, but fir the street it's really a bit much.

Jim

[MGBV8]

I just went & measured a Rover 3.9 block. The oil galley is 7/16. The crazy thing is I can find no reference anywhere to this mod being done on Rover blocks. Spent quite a bit of time searching v8forum.co.uk/forum/ and there is nothing about doing this to Rovers. I was sure the factory had addressed this at some point. Live & learn.

[BlownMGB-V8]

Carl, was that the pickup galley or the pressure side? I think it sounds right for the pressure side but the suction side should be bigger.

Jim

[GT8MX]

Jim:

Relative to reworking the Rover cast pan to redistribute the volume without extending below the frame, I had briefly thought of that, but then www.seight.com/baffle.html article made me wonder what sort of internal baffling and trap doors would be needed.  I wonder if it would be OK to use the OEM windage tray without adding any baffles or trap doors.

I need to take some measurements to see what volume I could create by revising the Rover cast pan shape so that it doesn't extend below the frame.  I'm pretty tight down there.  The GT6 is a narrow frame and there is no room on the sides of the Rover pan, but there might be some room where the cast pan widens just before the bell housing.

Bill

[BlownMGB-V8]

You'd have to add back in the area you lost off the bottom. Can you extend the sump section any further forward? I'd probably try that first.

Jim

[GT8MX]

Jim:

I think you may be onto something!  Here is the frame into which I have to set the engine.  The gray metal is where I have reworked the frame to accept the Rover bell housing and T5.


Here is the pan resting in it's position as though the Rover 4.6L engine is installed.


This is a closeup showing the space between the frame and the Rover cast pan sump.   I have about 2-1/2" clearance on both sides of the pan sump running about 6-1/2" from the back of the sump forward towards the engine mount.  The space between the sump and the frame can't be used from the engine mount forward because the engine mount I built takes up the space.  


I need to shave off 1-1/2 inches to bring the bottom of the pan up to be parallel with the front frame cross member (and the bottom of the bell housing cover).

If I shave the Rover cast oil pan 1-1/2" (2-1/2" at the drain plug sump) then the sump hangs down only 5" from the top of the pan (like the BOP 215 oil pan).  That removes 58.5 in3 of volume (minus some wall thickness).  If I put wings (or ears) on the sump portion of the pan that are 6-1/2" long x 2-1/2" wide x 3" deep, each wing will add 32 in3, for a total of 64 in3 from wings on both sides.  Better than break even with what I shaved off.  

This approach leaves the windage tray in place, and still provides the rigidity of the cast pan.  

I can put the drain plug on the rear face to avoid it being struck.  I can make the new floor of the shaved pan slope to below the new drain plug to create a sludge capture crevice.

I may want to add some internal trap doors, because I suspect slosh effects in a wide shallow sump are worse than a narrow deep sump of equivalent volume...hmmm.

Now I need to mount the Rover cast pan back on to the engine, drop the engine in place between the frame rails, and make cardboard mockups that I can provide to the welder.

(Whew...it's a lot of work to get pictures re-sized and attached to a message.  Yikes.)

Thanks for the thought, Jim.

Bill