Conference terri::cars_uk

    I won't be changing the engine in mine :-)
    

The 214 and 414 use the 1.4 litre K series Rover engine. 
The 216 and 416 use 1.6 litre Honda engines. As far
as I know, Rover are working on their own replacement for
the 1.6i 16v unit. The 220 and 420 2 litre engines are 
Rover's too.


	Ian

The K series is a Rover developed engine currently in production in
1.1 and 1.4 litre capacities, with the 1.4 having a 16v head. The 
Honda supplied engines are the 1.6, 2.3 and 2.7 litre petrol engines and
the 2.5 Diesel. The 2.0 litre used in the 220, 420 and 820 is also a Rover
engine.

Outside of production (but almost completely devloped) are 1.6 and 1.8 
litre versions of the K series, along with K6 which is a large capacity
V6 variant of the K series.

In future, I would expect Rover to use the BMS 2.5TD engine, but otherwise
use the expanded K series and the K6.

Clive

    
    
    ...the 2.0 in the 620 is a Honda unit... the Rover unit doesn't fit!
    

>    ...the 2.0 in the 620 is a Honda unit... the Rover unit doesn't fit!
    
I thought they used the Honda engines because they couldn't produce
enough of their T series to meed demand?  You do have a point, though,
even the 1.4 K in my 200 looks pretty hefty!

Chris.

Actually the turbo diesel unit in the old Rover 800's was not a Honda unit. If I remember rightly, Rover use the
same diesel engine as Alfa - can anyone verify this? Is it Alfa's engine, or an outside company?

re: Caterham 7. Yes, and the 130bhp is a simple chip change/air filter/exhaust. It can also be fitted to another
fine kit car, the new K3 GTM Rossa, so I only presume this chip upgrade can be fitted to Rover Metro's too. There
already exists a Pipercross air filter & performance exhaust for Rover Metro GTi's. Note that I think this chip
change applies to Multipoint models.

Is that all correct?!

Dan.

	RE: Rover 800 Turbo Diesel

	Yes, you're right. This engine is made by an Italian Company called VM. It
	can indeed also be seen in the Alfa 164, amongst quite a few others, including
	pre-TDi Range Rover and Discovery.

	/Ben

    The 130bhp upgrade can be acquired from Rover, all the parts are
    factory produced items so I hear.
    
    The kit consists of a new ECU and a couple of new cams, and basically
    that's it for roughly another 30 brake! Sounds good to me. Maybe with
    an easy breathing induction and exhaust system, you could even creep
    that up from 30 brake!
    
    I wonder how much power a 16v K-series is 'safe' up to before you start
    running into ridiculous reliability problems (ie. engine rebuild
    required every year!).
    
    Dan.
    

    Anyone read last weeks Autocar & Motor (I think it was) discussing the
    new MG midget-type-thingy?!
    
    Mid engined, RWD, soft top, K-series powered, uses modified front metro
    subframe at the back.... this is a complete rip-off of the GTM K3 as
    previosuly mentioned!
    
    Interesting point is the MG will use a 1.8 litre derivative of the K
    series engine, producing 125bhp or, with Variable Valve Timing will
    pump out 150bhp!
    
    I was wondering if anyone knows any reason why a stonking 150bhp
    monster motor could not be dropped into a Rover Metro (and hence a GTM
    K3.... !)
    
    Dan >:-D
    Evil_cackle_pondering_on_the_implications_of_a_150bhp_700Kg_GTM_K3!!
    

    I would hope that a 1.8litre engine would be good for 180bhp'ish. This
    is what Honda ae getting out of the 1.8litre lump from the US spec
    CRX's.
    
    Mind you Ferrari seem to be able to better that with their 355.
    
    	Rik

    I think the CRX's here are a bit less than that, but I agree 180 brake
    is possible from a 1.8 given todays technology. Maybe Rover thought
    150bhp in a car the size of the new MG was enough (I think maybe they
    were right!).
    
    It's worth mentioning the VVT system is Rovers, not nicked off Honda,
    and works completely different to current VVT systems from Honda and
    Porsche.
    
    Dan$looking_for_a_written_off_MG_next_July!!!!

	True variable valve timing is an interesting prospect but
	is this it?. Honda's is just a two stage device.

	-John

    I got the impression that it could well be, yes, with one varying
    profile on the cam lob, and some clever hydraulic system that pushed
    the lobe across the top of the follower....
    
    ...I don't know, though.... don't hold me to it!
    
    Dan

    Considering that Bimota get 180bhp out of a 1 litre motor, anything
    else *must* be less..
    
    Rob

    Rob,
    	I couldn't agree more. I was meary pointing out that Honda make a
    fairly nice shopping trolly for OAP's (Ever seen anyone less that 50 in
    a Civic ?) which manages 100 bhp / litre. As such, I would expect a
    half decent sports car to easily better it.
    
    Mind you Honda have managed to sqeeze 8 valves/cylinder into some of
    their trumped up mopeds.
    
    	Rik.

I don't think you can beat 120bhp out of a 1.4Litre 8 valve pushrod
engine. Turbo charging is brilliant!

Mark.

    BBR can get 210bhp out of one of those...
    
    	Rik

    re.15
    	Yes but it probably does it at some obscene amount of rpm with not
    a lot of heavy, big moving bits inside so this isn't surprising!
    re.17
    	Yes but this is using forced induction which if you bolt onto any
    engine (okay, 'bolting' is being a bit silly but....) will make some
    stonking great improvements so this isn't surprising!
    
    	Can anyone name a road car engine other than Hondas that makes 100bhp
    /litre while still being naturally aspirated?
    
    Dan

    Ferrari 355 > McLaren F1 > BMW M3
    
    I that order. I think the M3 may be something like 97 bhp/litre.
    
    Mind you its bhp/tonne which really counts.
    
    	Rik

    Rover rumoured to be developing a 3-cylinder K series for the next
    Mini. Basically they're lopping of a cylinder from the existing K... I
    hope they block up all the holes.

    re -1
    >> the next Mini
    
    Is this as in a Metro replacement, or as in the cute cuddly one that's 
    been around for 35 years (roll on forty...)?
    
    Andy

    Hmm. Couldn't say, but I think the 'replacement' bit holds true. I
    doubt it'll be going into the existing mini. The existing mini will be
    killed off by crash regulations some time this decade (can't remember
    the year, sorry). The Metro replacement is the Rover 100, which will be
    bigger so I imagine it won't be going into that.
    
    So I deduce it'll be going into the small cure cuddly one, but NOT the
    existing one - it's future replacement. Anyone shed light on this area?
    
    Dan

I read in Autoexpress they're going to develop a Rover 90 as replacement 
for the 'real' mini, which as was said cannot continue because of crash regs.

Richard

re.24:

I learnt to drive in a Rover 90. Very solid car.

Dave.

Yeh, well, that's the trouble with using numbers for car models. 
Eventually they come around again!

This one should be one hell of a lot smaller that the previous Rover 90!

Richard

    Several years ago I read that rover were building a quad-cam V8...I
    presume an extension of the venerable buick/rover V8...It was due
    sometime in late 1993...it of course appears to have not happened, and
    with BMW now owning Rover Igather this motor will just die...
    
    any thoughts???????????
    
    thanks
    
    Byron
    

    Could anyone help complete the following list of Rover (and its
    predecessors) engines:
    
    
    Engine	Capacity	Derived from	Used in
    ======	========	============	=======
    
    A Series	850-1300			Mini, Metro
    
    A+ Series	1300		A Series	Maxi, Allegro, Maestro
    						Montego
    
    B Series					MG
    
    J Series	1750				Maxi, Marina, Allegro
    
    K Series	1100-1800			Metro, 200, 400, MG-F
    
    M16		2000				200, 400, 800
    
    T16		2000				200, 400, 600, 800
    
    O Series	2000		J Series	Maestro, Montego
    
    R Series	1600				Maxi, Maestro, Montego
    
    S Series	1600		R Series	Maestro Montego
    
    
    
    Regards
    Clive

    >>A Series    850-1300                        Mini, Metro
    
    Never the Metro. Always was A+, right from the start. Plus you can add
    a whole whealth onto there... A30, A35, MG Midget. There are loads more
    (between the A and A+) but I can't remember... I'll consult my Vizard
    book tonight!
    
    >>A+ Series   1300            A Series        Maxi, Allegro, Maestro,..
    
    GTM! GTM!
    
    >>K Series    1100-1800                       Metro, 200, 400, MG-F
    
    Caterham! Caterham!
    
    Sorry, I'm being silly now.....
    
    Cheers,
    Dan
    
    

    P.S. What's wrong with topic 2252 - is it just coz it's missing a
    capital letter?
    
    ;-)
    
    Dan$pedant

    The 1800TC Marina used the same B series engine as the MGB
    Same carbs the lot.
    In fact it was amusing that the marina could out accelerate
    the Roadster because the MGB was heavier!  Different thing
    at the bends though. the Marina had serious trouble with the
    front end going round a corner......
    
    Matt

    
    re: Clive
    
    The Maxi started with the J series (1500 and later 1750) it didn't use
    the A series.
    
    The Marina used A series for the 1300s and B series for the 1800s.
    The Ital, which was based on the Marina used the A series 1300 and
    a 1750 in line engine driving the rear wheels. I think that this
    was a development of the O series though and not a J series.
    
    The A series started life as a side valve engine (998cc I think) and
    was used in the Morris Minor when it was first introduced. Others
    had used this engine before the Minor but i don't know which (c 1950)
    
    The A series was then upgraded to an 803cc ohv, and thence to 948
    and 1098 for the rwd cars (Minors, A35, A40, Midgets, Healeys etc).
    This engine was eventually extended to 1300cc for rwd cars like the 
    Marina, Midget and I think the final incarnations of the Triumph
    Dolomite in 1300 form. (The earlier Triumph 1300 used a completely
    different engine and were fwd).
    
    
    The first fwd A series was the 850cc Mini. This was latter developed
    into the 998cc Mini, the 1098cc Mini and eventually the 1275GT Mini.
    There were also 998cc Cooper S and 1301 Cooper s variants. There
    was also an Innocenti Mini built by the Italians. I think this used
    the 1098 engine and twin carbs but can't be sure.
    
    The 1098cc and latterly the 1275 engines were used in the Austin/Morris 
    1100/1300 range.   
    
    The B series used for the rwd cars (eg Marina, MGB) was modified for
    fwd drive cars when the Morris/Wolsley 1800 (the car with more rear leg 
    room than a Rolls Royce) was introduced. This car was also available
    as a Morris 2200/Wolsley 6 with a 2200cc 6 cylnder engine, but I've
    no idea what the nomenclature was for this engine or what it had been
    used in before.
    
    The Austin Princess replaced the Morris 1800 and was originally available 
    in B series 1800 and 2200cc 6 cyl form. When it became the Ambassador, 
    it received 1750 and 2000cc O series engines to replace the 1800cc B 
    series. 
    
    Of the early cars in the list,  probably the most notable absentee is
    the MGC (foreunner to the MGBGT V8) which used a straight six 3 litre
    engine known as the 'C' series. I suspect that this engine may have
    been used in Austin Westminsters and the like but don't know for sure.
    
    The O series may also have been used in the Rover 2000 (SD1 shape).
    
    I've no idea what engines were used in the Rover 213/216 range (were
    they all Japanese?) but I think that the 1300 may have had British
    origins.
    
    Because of the mergers of BL, Rover, Triumph etc there were lots of
    other engines, but none as far as I know were based on any original
    Austin/Morris engine.
    
    Richard.
    

    Sounds reasonable, though I remember a 970"S", also 1071.. anything
    13xx may have been bored out? people used to Rally 1330 S's but they
    were oversize.
    
    Matt

re .33,

I think that the O series in the Ital was a 1700 rather than a 1750, I'll
have to check with a mate of mine who used to have one when we were scumbag
students.

The Rover 213/216: the former used a 1.3 litre 12 valve Honda engine
(performance wasn't bad, but not outstanding; I think the actual engine
capacity was about 1350ccs, but I can't remember that far back!), and
the 1.6 was an old BL engine, there were allegedly some problems with
reliability.

The Princess/Ambassador: I think this could be another entry for the `ugly
cars' topic.  Hideous!

Chris.

    
    re .34
    
    Agreed, forgot those. I thought the 1301 was a BL production engine but
    I could well be wrong. As you say most of the 1300+ engine
    sizes came from the special tuning brigade. I think Longman did one
    that was nearly 1500cc.
    
    re .35
    
    Ah yes. Correct. The Ital 1700HL. With nylon velour seats. Luvverly.
    Come to think of it maybe the transverse 'O' series as used in the 
    Princess was 1700 and not 1750 as well.
    
    I worked briefly for a BL garage around the time of the introduction
    of the O series. The O stood for 'O'il leak.
    
    
    re. B series being derived from the A series.
    
    I don't think this was the case. The B series had a five bearing crank
    whilst the A series was only three. 
    
    Richard. 

    re .33, .35
    
    The engine in the Rover 216 (old style) was the S series. 
    
    Clive

	I'll have to go get the MG club mag that describes the
	family tree of engines.  However, the first B series engines
	in the MG B were 3 bearing jobs.  They moved to 5 bearings as
	they were stronger.  Whatever you say about the old B engine
	(thirsty, heavy, underpowered, wierd, leaky) it is *strong*...

	Dave

I dunno, the old 1800 TC B series was powerful enough, even if it did
get through two pints of oil in an average week's driving!

Chris.