BritishV8 Forum

Lobotamy-Nic? Thaaatz jus "silly". You can't believe "everything", in a tell-all-alien, abduction. Can we just focus heere? roverman.

Paul, TIG I hope? Both sides? Rollin on Riv....

Art, I don't yet have my 110v welder set up for gas. I do know a gear-head that's a retired welder. I'll see if I can interest him in the project.

Paul, If not, I'm thinkin brazing with map gas or ox/acet. This process will likely anneal the local area,(little heat as possible).Good Luck,roverman.

LOL

Paul and all, I got 54 lifters so far,(16) soon-to-be mech.I hope their enough. No dog bones as yet. 3.1/3.4L chev. V6- right ? Amusing spyder-Nic?.

Art, GM V6 lifters, Chevy V8 dog-bones, Ford 5.0 or two Buick 3.8 90^ spiders. The cam is going to be pure custom.

I'm still waiting for 24 Chevy lifters to be delivered.

We need to find something Mopar to use in this gypsy lash-up. Pushrods? Rockers?

You wouldn't do much good quenching the ends, as it'd leave a soft zone in between that and the part that wasn't heated. Really the whole thing would need to be heat treated at once unless you could come up with something really clever. No ideas here though. The Buick V6 spiders sound like the best plan to me.

Jim

Paul, Because the motor just would'nt be expensive enough with-out something Mopar in there? How bout a "Ram" wearing a "Bowtie"? Less frustrating, because these two never play-well together.roverman

Art I'm tempted to use the Ford spider, instead of using Buick V6 spiders, just to get that brand into the combination.

Paul, I thinkin this"melting-pot" theme is a little overcooked at this point, for being half-baked, that is. If you just halft to have Ford in there, go- with- the- flow, and use Henry's crank. An don't forget those Volvo rockers. "Swan Neck" intake would be nice touch.You go too far here and "someone" may rat you out to the (smog natzi's). Not a pleasant thing?

Guys, I E-mailed Schneider Cams to see if they would do a hyd. roller grind. We will see.

60^ mech. roller lifters on the cheep. This requires making a sleeve of "exact" length between internal step and original push rod cup in lifter. Up-grade to internal circlip. Mech. lifter will be considerable grams lighter. No final weight yet. Rollin on a riv.....roverman.

It's official. oem. lifter weighs 105 grams w.o. oil. "Converted" to mechanical,91 grams, with hd. circlip. So Nic, with carbon fiber push rods,(in-stock), "light weight" cam, carbon fiber wrist pins,(in-stock), 370 gram pistons, 550gram,1k hp.,6" rods, LS 1 firing order. I hear a song...Rollin on a Riv....Happy Hoidays,ya'll  roverman.

Peace, brotha. Rollin'!!

I love the idea of a roller cam in a RV8, my reservation would be can the heads flow the extra volume,, especially with the valves not being on the centerline of the bores making them shrouded by the bore sides, a lower lift, long duration cam would seem to make more sense,, what I do like the idea of it the Beehive springs, has anybody sorted these out to fit a RV8 yet???

I'm interested in a roller cam for my 300 project. currently in the parts research and gathering stage. plans call for a 300 shortblock, TA performance Rover heads and a procharger d1sc. looking for big power with street driveability. i'll be watching this thread with much interest

Welcome Ian and Rob. Regarding why a roller in a Rover. Net flow under the curve, is what wer'e looking for.The small base circle and small lifter dia. of .842"(sbc.),used in Rovers and sbb's., limits the lift rates to .007" per deg. cam rotation,Max. Thanks to Chevrolet,making low cost, reliable, hyd. rollercam hardare plentiful, ie. lifters, dog bones,and "spyders with mod's". Todays oem roller set-ups provide better power,economy with reduced emissions, while lasting longer with reduced friction, over previous flat tappet designs. Our next hurdle is getting cams made in enough volume to secure  good price for custom grinds. Regarding "pine cone" springs, I know of none that woun't require cutting the spring seats. At least "one" takes std Rover retainer dia.  Rob, How much hp/boost? You would do well to follow what Jim Blackwood is doing. roverman.

Cutting spring seats is not a problem, im a engineer, but finding the right info over here in the UK for info of "On  the Edge" bits and pieces is a big problem, I do like to experiment with oddball combos

Ian, If this forum has "anything" ,it's lots of combo's. You may want to "peep" ,Comp Cams webb site for springs, Update, Behive pn. 26918 might be useable..65" id/top and 1.31"od/base, .625 max. lift( enough for most Rovers),lol. If your building a "Nostalgia" motor, you might consider,"394" Olds(circa 1960),pinecone springs., possibly the first, production use of the basic design. When your  3.9L buzzed 8,200 rpm., I'm thinkin, it was, "on the edge"? Good Luck, roverman.

Art
 i'll most likely limit myself to 7-8 psi until i learn a little more about running under boost. using the turbo V6  engine as a baseline for hp estimates i would think it's safe to say that a 300 would make an easy 500 hp with that setup (remember the 231 is basically a 300 engine minus two cylinders( and a larger crank dimensions). the new TA heads are supposed to flow as good as or better than the aluminum V6 heads they currently produce.

Rob, I hope the TA heads work as well as projected(300 cfm@28")? My Home ported ,Stg II flowed 294 @ .7 lift. I believe Jim Blackwood has a similar build ,with 300" heads and a Ford, "Lightning" blower. Good Luck, roverman.

= 1-8-7-2-6-5-4-3 Anybody? Sneider Cams,anybody? Hooked on Harmonics? At least we're not driving oil pump and dizzy, off the rear of cam.roverman.

What are you saying? We should move to a different firing order? What are the implications here...

Not me sayin-askin. SBB guys sayin best 4bbl., fuel equalization and least harmonics on crank. I have no experience of such. Anybody? roverman.