6 Cylinder Conversion Question

[asalnick]

I was wondering if those of you that have done chevy I6 conversions could help me out. I researching this as an option for an 88. I know that the 6 cylinder engine bay is what this was designed for, but I am wondering if it can be shoehorned into the 4 cylinder bay. It seems as if the extra 70ish mm that that the 4 cylinder loses could be made up by putting in a fancy radiator up on the crossmember. This is sort of what seems to be implied by the original doccumentation on TeriAnn's website. Has anyone done this before?

[NickDawson]

No clue :D but you might take a look at the most recent Riverport Rovers videos http://www.youtube.com/user/RiverportRovers

[greenmeanie]

Yes you will have to move the radiator forward but not as far as you might think and, of course, if you move the radiator forward over the corss member you'll have to think about how to deal with the steering relay.

The difference, however, is not at the front of the engine bay but instead it is the bulkhead shape to clear the rear of the engine. The 6 pot has a bigger dog house, or central part, to clear the longer engine and you need this to clear the chevy 6 pot too.

It all depends on how far you want to go to fit one. A minimalist effort on an 88 would be:

Move the radiator forward.
Scotty's adapter onto a 6 cylinder gearbox.
6 cylinder front prop and maybe a custom length rear.
Modify the bulkhead to the dimensions of a 6 cyl item.
6 cylinder tunnel covers.
Potential repositioning of gearbox cross member.
But if you are going to go to all that effort why stick with a Rover gearbox which will have marginal strength to cope with a Chevy 6. I'm using an Ike adapter to mate a Ford NP435 to a high ratio series transfer case on the back of a 292.

In reality, our man at Roverport has got it right for an 88. A 4.3L V6 will be a much easier swap in an 88. Inlines are more cool though.

[hughwilton]

If you don't upgrade the whole drive train you will have on going problems with reliability. IMHO it's not worth the effort or money!

[greenmeanie]

If you don't upgrade the whole drive train you will have on going problems with reliability. IMHO it's not worth the effort or money!


It all depends on what you want out of a truck.

There's a lot to be said for the original set up but it has its limitations in speed/driveability in the hills, parts are becoming more difficult to get hold of unless you want to take your life in your hands with Britpart and even in stock form the drivetrain has questionable strength as almost everyone with a Rover type rear axle has snapped the halfshafts. A well executed engine and drivetrain conversion addresses these issues which makes it very attractive to some.

The OP is doing his research after which it is all about what the owner wants.

[jopa]

Engine conversions are not for the faint at heart...Ive done a few inline 6's and dont recommend them to anyone anymore. If you are going for just an engine swap id recommend spending the money for a proper rebuild of the 2.25...if that is not an option then Id suggest a GM 2.5 iron duke 4 cyl...very few mods to fit and gives about 100 hp. They dont have the torque to tear up the series transmission.
If you want more power then you will need a stronger transmission and axles...costs quickly add up.Good luck- J

[amcordo]

I've got an 8cyl GM engine in my truck. The PO replaced the standard axels with V8, upgraded all the transfer cases with ashcroft gears, etc. The weak link in my setup is that the PO never replaced the original transmission with something a little heartier. That explains why at some point he stripped third gear and now I've got to go in and fix it (absolutely a great, smart guy - said the truck hits 85 easy :eek: ).

That being said, just because the transmission can't handle peak torque (or probably anything remotely near peak) it's still a viable system. When in motion, I never really push the RPMs up past 2500. That gets me to 55-60 on the highway. I also watch my foot when I'm hitting hills or increasing speed. Without a light touch, and NEVER a lead foot I should be able to keep the transmission in good order. The benefit to me being that I've got a very reliable engine that needs almost no maintenance.

[brucejohn]

One thing to keep in mind with drivetrain conversions is that these vehicles were not intended to travel done the freeway at 70 mph. They do not have the safety features more modern vehicles have.

One of the things I love about Series trucks is that I can't logically be in a hurry to get where I am going. To get the most out of these vehicles requires finesse and skill, not brute force. Yes, I get frustrated at times with 71 hp, though more typically I love the ability to travel in a more laid back style.

[Linus Tremaine]

I have a scotty adapter for a rover six bellhousing- thats what timm cooper identified it as- if you decide to go that route.

[amcordo]

[QUOTE=brucejohn;41188]One thing to keep in mind with drivetrain conversions is that these vehicles were not intended to travel done the freeway at 70 mph. They do not have the safety features more modern vehicles have.

[QUOTE]


I vaguely remember him [PO] telling me about taking it around 90 across the plains on his way to Utah.

No thanks!

[greenmeanie]

One thing to keep in mind with drivetrain conversions is that these vehicles were not intended to travel done the freeway at 70 mph.

Are you sure? A stock 88 on 30" tyres should be able to hit 65 mph. Add an overdrive which was offered as an option by LR and they can run at 70 mph which is the motorway speed limit in the UK. It is not a part of the envelope where the truck is comfortable but it is within the designed performance envelope.

A series LR is not a modern vehicle and does not meet modern safety standards but was deemed adequate for the time it was built. I've got 10s of thousands of miles commuting between Phoenix and Tucson in a fairly stock 88 at 70 mph quite safely but it is done with a good understanding of the limitations of the vehicle.

If I was concerned about having modern safety features I would buy a modern car as you will never be as safe in a Rover no matter the speed. At 40 mph, for instance, those stock low back seats are going to result in serious injury yet how many owners retain them for the look? There are, however, plenty of things that can be done to improve safety.

It is a common misconception that conversions are about outright speed. It is really about driveability - the ability to climb a 6% grade at 65mph comfortably or 40mph with the engine screaming? Depending on where you live that can be an extremely important difference.

I've got trucks set up both ways and they both have their attractions. Again, it is up to the OP to figure out what he wants the truck to be and build it accordingly.

[brucejohn]

It is a common misconception that conversions are about outright speed. It is really about driveability - the ability to climb a 6% grade at 65mph comfortably or 40mph with the engine screaming? Depending on where you live that can be an extremely important difference.

I've got trucks set up both ways and they both have their attractions. Again, it is up to the OP to figure out what he wants the truck to be and build it accordingly.

As I stated I am confident that the intention was not for going 70 down the freeway (my spelling was atrocious in that post). You make great points quoted above.

Sorry I hit a cord, that was not my intention.

[greenmeanie]

No offense taken really.

Its getting off the OP's question though. I like the big Chevy 6 and am using a modified one in my 109. I don't think it is the easiest engine to put in an 88 and really feel there are many others that are better suited to the short trucks such as the 4.3L as shown in the video posted a few days ago.

And just because posts are better with pictures:
http://www.roversnorth.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=2220&stc=1&d=1256596952