BritishV8 Forum

"Will the 3.85" crank fit the Rover block and clear the pan rails?

 Jim"

Yes.

Greg

With the rods on it I presume?

Some clearancing required:

http://forum.britishv8.org/read.php?6,29211,29998,page=4

Using a front cover with the integral pickup is helpful.  The crankcase oil pickup inlet has to have some meat ground off otherwise.  Also two spots inside the crankcase have to be ground away beneath the front and rear cylinder.  Otherwise, looks like it can be made to fit cleanly.

Greg

Greg, About time you got on here!

It would need either a pan spacer or a modified pan of course.

Jim

Check out the Aluminum V8 web site for some information and ideas.

I wonder if the P76 crank will fit a 4.6 block. The main journal diameter might be too small. You can use an earlier 3.9 block.

I would guess that the P76 crank has 2" rod journals. Your choice of rods includes the stock 215 rods, Chevy 327 rods, and Buick 300 rods. Rover 3.5, 3.9, and likely the 4.2 rods will probably fit up, too. I use the Keith Black/Silvolite catalog when I'm browsing for pistons for a stroker lash-up. Of course, you'll have to do the math to calculate compression height to search for a piston.

The Buick 300 heads are about right for what you're doing. The 215 intake is a low-profile design and is usually used in swaps.

Good luck.

Paul

Thanks for the info Paul, I will have to decide which way I want to go. I would still like to answer the initial question--so lets say I end up with $900 in the aforementioned parts, then $1100 in liners via this guy's method (http://www.landroversonly.com/forums/f40/my-diy-cylinder-liner-sleeve-removal-top-hat-install-video-pics-inside-68210/). Is $3k enough to get the rest done? Going with a 300 or other crank would lower the parts and machining cost, so that would probably need to be done away with (if my math is correct you would lose 12ci, but I think the increase in RPM would likely make up for it).

The 300 crank needs a seal adapter to fit it to the 4.0/4.6 block and a custom flywheel. An alternative is a 4.6 crank offset ground from 3.22" to 3.375", but you'll have to find a machine shop that can do the work. My point is that you might ask around to see if there's reliable shop to do the offset grind. It simplifies the job to use the original type crankshaft.

4.6 stock 3.22" stroke is 277 ci.
The 3.375" offset stroke is 290 ci.
The Buick 300 3.4" stroke is 292.5 ci.
A P76 3.5" stroke in a 3.9 block is 301 ci.
4.0/4.6 w/340 3.85" crank is 331 ci.
Buick 300 w/340 3.85" crank is 340 ci.

If you can get the P76 crank, look for a 3.9/4.2 block. That seems like the best combination. The 300 heads have bigger chambers to help keep the compression ratio reasonable.

I favor using the 4.6 crank in the 4.6 block. I'll consider pricing the offset grind of the 4.6 for my projects, but if I really want more, I'm going with a stroked Buick 300 (stroked to 340). Transmission fitment is easier on the Buick 300 block - stock manual bellhousing fits a T-5, and the 200R4 automatic 4 speed with overdrive is a compact, strong transmission with a good first gear ratio.

Yes, $3k is more than enough to get the rest done.

Fun!

Update, added the 4.0/4.6 with 340 crank combo. I'd forgotten that this has been done with a 3.5 block. Seems like a good combination for the kind of daily driver that some of us would like. Since I have a 4.0 and a 340 crank, this might be the eventual build I go with.

The 4.2 blocks are not given good marks by Glenn Towery, Woody Cooper, & Justin Broome.

Just wanted to add that it is not clear if this is with the original 2 bolt main block or the later "interim" block that had the capability to be turned into a 4 bolt main block.

I left a message with the man who owns the engine asking to know what he wants for the complete motor and swapping the 2 barrel intake for the 4. I figure then I can have my options open for either a Rover build or a 300 based build. My question is, how many cubic inches do the ported 300 heads support? I don't want to go trough the trouble of maximizing displacement if the heads won't breathe sufficiently anyway (and TA heads plus porting are not in the budget...).

Casey, The 300 head was THE head before the T/A head came out. Larger valves and seats are the key. 2.3 Ford 1.74 IN and 1.5 EX are what I used years ago. 305 Chevy are the same with taller stems. Ported have gone 200 IN and 150 EX which should be good to 400HP. I would use studs or steel thread inserts in rocker hold downs.

We need to dig up the thread where Dan Jones has the flow numbers for ported 300 aluminum heads.

I have found the thread you speak of and contacted the same company he used (JDC Engineering) to get a quote on porting. The 340 crank mains are 3 inches correct? Would it be possible to offset grind them for a gain of say, .4 inches, for a total stroke of 4.25? Of course you would have to find a rod to compensate but that would yield 375ci with a stock bore or 385ci going .050 over. Just an idea.

Hi Casey, Grinding the mains will not provide an opportunity to offset grind the rods journals. As it is, the 340 crank is already about the biggest you can fit into a Rover block. Some grinding will be needed to make it fit.

I had forgotten that the 340 crank can be fitted to the Rover block and I'm thinking that's my next engine project.

Other recent projects;

351 'Clevor' stroked to 393 for a 70 Mustang
224 Studebaker bored and stroked to 308 in a 1952 R1 pickup truck

Potential new projects;
Ford 2.8 V6 stroked to 3.5 for a Sunbeam Alpine
Rover 4.0 stroked to 5.4 for an MGB

Ha! Well that's my moment for the day... Sometimes the hands type faster than the mind thinks. I am interested to see how the 340 crank in the Rover block would work though.

340 and 350 cranks are the same.

215 vs 300

Thanks for that picture Carl, I was searching to find a visual side by side comparison. I wonder how many cars that size is the difference between a go and no-go? I don't have a lot of experience  with small engine bays, my last two projects were a '49 Ford F6 that went to Canada and a '67 Ford Falcon Futura that went to Australia before that. The gentleman with the engine said he would let me know by Saturday what he decides and the price.

My all-time fav Buick 300 powered MGB.  I have driven it many times.  It is so sweet!

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

M favorite too. Can't wait to see Chris' though.

Jim

QuoteMy all-time fav Buick 300 powered MGB. I have driven it many times. It is so sweet!

Probably the nicest MGB V8 on the road.

I have a Rover 4.0 engine, Buick 300 heads, crank, and 90% of the parts needed to build a D&D Stroker motor.
Would love to sell this package for a very reasonable price. i've had it sitting around for a long time and realize I will never build it.

QuoteQuote:
My all-time fav Buick 300 powered MGB. I have driven it many times. It is so sweet!

Probably the nicest MGB V8 on the road.

I agree 1000%.

Yours is right there with it, Dan!  Even if you do have a Blue Oval under the bonnet.  

I thought I would give an update on some things. Martyn gave me a wonderful offer on his setup, but getting it across the border proved cost prohibitive. If anyone in Ontario is looking for a great start on a stroked Rover they should contact him. I contacted a auto yard in AU regarding a P76 crank; they said it would be $100 plus shipping. Shipping was $300. Greg has one with a flywheel for sale for $400 so that is probably the best deal your going to get if you are stuck on a P76 crank. The gentleman with the '64 Buick got back to me and said he would take $600 for the engine and aluminum 4 barrel intake-- a great deal as far as I'm concerned but he got cold feet and I didn't push him. In the mean time I have procured a complete '98 4.0 (craigslist, $75) and a set of stripped '64 300 heads (ebay, $150 after shipping).

I am still tossing ideas around on which direction I want to head eventually. The 4.0 would make a great high rev engine in its stock form (6.111 length rods works out to a 2.182 rod ratio), but as I am most interested in low to mid range torque it is not very appealing. The combo that is looking good right now is a 4.6 crank (I might be able to get if for free semi-locally if I trade some parts off the 4.0) and use the 4.0 rods with forged Icon 305 pistons (1.133 comp height) and the rod ratio works out to 1.892. Still spectacular. I would be .102 below deck and the compression ratio would be 9.8:1 but could easily be increased to whatever I want by milling the heads. 283 cubic inches would probably suit me just fine.

Doing this would allow me to use a lot of the parts I already have (covers, rods, etc) which would be nice. I haven't torn the engine apart yet but the seller said it ran when pulled, albeit a bit roughly. I am tempted to forgo the tophat liners and just pin the block. If they slipped in the future all I would be out is a set of rings, gaskets and my time (assuming I didn't allow the problem to go undetected for a long amount of time). With all this said I would plan on dropping the budget closer to $3000. I think its definitely doable whether I choose to go carbuerated or Megasquirt EFI. At any rate, it looks like the $5000 Rover V8 isn't a thing anymore.

Edit: I forgot to mention I would need to bore the wrist pin holes in the pistons .0179.

Edit: The 1.133 comp height Icons have a -10cc dish which I mistook to be a +10cc dome (Summit states all values as +x cc's even if its referring to the dish volume). The better option would be the 1.265 flat top Icons. They have a negative volume of 3.2ccs (valve reliefs) and would come .030 above deck for a compression ratio of 10.8:1 with the stock 300 chambers.