Cracked 6cyl head [Archive] - Rovers North Forums

NepentheSea

10-27-2009, 04:28 PM

Cliffnotes in bold/underline. Whining in normal font.

Took my head off today (the one that is re-attachable. on the rover).
When I dropped it off for evaluation (replacing the gasket) at the machine shop, four men gathered round, looked down at the thing and cussed various ways. Saying that they'd never seen one like that.

George calls back with the wonderful news of a cracked head! He doesn't want to try and repair it, and doesnt know of someone who would.

And that brings me about to wondering just how much I really want to spend on this 2.6 bundle of leak. Rob Davis' conversion kits are mighty mighty appealing right now. And Peter of Riverport Rovers has great videos of his Chev 4.3 swap on youtube.
And TeriAnn's side has been tremendous help, I'll be spending alot more time there. TeriAnn, if you come across this, thank you for taking the time to write web pages.;)

Reasons for posting this thread?
1.I dont know. But where else can I whine.
2. Anyone have any news/experience on other adapters?
3. I suppose Im looking for general recommendations on a swap. There, at last, is my reason for posting. My whiny post is theraputic.
I dont care about originality when it comes to my 6cyl. If I had a 2.25 and easier access to parts, things may be different.
Im mainly looking for reliability, and ease of replacement.
Is the Chev straight 6 my best option for those two goals?
many thanks,
-Will

greenmeanie

10-27-2009, 05:44 PM

I think I said it in the other post but if not. Chevy 6 pots are good engines that will live a long time. OOoodles of torque at low rpm make them fun to drive and well suited to the Rover. Fuel economy is not a strong point. One benefit is the rodders pulled them out to put in SBC so you can quite often find them free or extremely cheap. They are, however, getting long in the tooth so I would really say that a 4.3L V6 would be better these days.

The nice thing is Chevy used that common 90° bell housing pattern for decades so you have lots of options using a Scotty's adapter onto your original drivetrain. 2.5L I4, 250 or 292 I6, 4.3L V6, 350 V8 and a bunch of others I'm sure. As stated earlier, however, if your doing the engine you might seriously consider a drivetrain swap too in which case the world is your oyster.

Linus Tremaine

10-27-2009, 06:04 PM

I know where a head is for both if you need one.

I also have a scotty adapter for the six cylinder bell housing if you need one.
I think robert davis would be a great way to go otherwise.

brucejohn

10-27-2009, 07:22 PM

Will... At least in my opinion one of the better reasons to belong to a community such as this is to have a place to go where you know many will commiserate when you're having a bad day.

We feel for your pain and we are rooting for you. It will come together, keep us posted.

NepentheSea

10-27-2009, 08:01 PM

Green, Linus and Bruce-
You guys have saved my sanity. Im taking paramedic classes right now and couldnt think about anything but my rover in class tonight. Its really bummed me out. I really appreciate the help and advice.

Linus- Ive got the 2.6, and its a right hand drive, so Im assuming that means that I dont have the westlake heads. I can take some photos and send them your way. Im interested in a good head if you have one, or in your scotty adapter. I'll send you a PM

NepentheSea

10-28-2009, 11:51 AM

Ive got cracks on 3 cylinders between the valve and the spark plug hole. Argh!

NepentheSea

10-28-2009, 11:54 AM

Top of the head- I think Ive got the euro spec six.
And as it sits now. At least theres some company; cows and the dump truck.

badvibes

10-28-2009, 12:16 PM

Ive got cracks on 3 cylinders between the valve and the spark plug hole. Argh!

Apology for taking this off track But is this the type of damage that results from running unleaded gas in a leaded motor? Not saying that's what happened here. But is the cracking between the valve and sparkplug hole typical of something specific? Does that one valve surface look like it's been scorched/hot? Just trying to learn something here.

Nice blue Ford by the way. Now back to the regular scheduled thread.

Jeff

NepentheSea

10-28-2009, 02:29 PM

The scorched look you mentioned is pitting from coolant in the cylinders- that one was the worst, but the other two with the lesser cracks have noticeable pitting too.
I dont know if the cracking between the spark plug hole and valve is because of something particular- it is the thinnest part of the head, so I thought that was the reason.

Thanks for the comps on the Ford- its only got 45k miles and runs great. Tops out around 45-50. When I get the rover going again I'll have a race.

Linus Tremaine

10-28-2009, 03:09 PM

part of the advantage of lead is that it coats valves and valve seats and serves as a lubricant of sorts between them. Without lead, valves can get hotter and burn or crack. Still, I dont know how much difference it would make. I have heard, from two sources that I trust, that I do or dont need to run lead substitute, so I always did. I would be more suspect of lean mixture.

badvibes

10-28-2009, 04:21 PM

NepentheSea/Linus T-

Thanks for the replies.

swingkeel

10-28-2009, 05:49 PM

I dont know what Robert Davis is offering these days, but if you go that route I would recommend that you or your local machine shop build the engine and that you only get the pieces such as mounts, radiator spacer, adapter (if you cant find a Scotty's) etc from RD. In my opinion the LR sixes are not worth fixing. The 4 cylinder swap is relatively easy and requires no altering of the firewall. The Chevy six has more grunt than the standard LR tranny can handle in the long run as do the other V6s and 8s. The I-6 Chevy also has clearance problems with the firewall and front driveshaft. Good luck and post pictures!

All the Best, Michael

NepentheSea

10-29-2009, 07:45 PM

I'd love to do the Chev 4cyl swap- my only deterrent to that is finding one. Aren't they only found in 60-70's chevrolets? I need to find a list of cars with that motor so that I can start checking the junkyards.

Ive also looked at the Series Trek site and his Mercedes Diesel out of a 240D.
The downside to that? I wonder if I could even move uphill with it in my 109. From TeriAnn's site- Of the four cylinder engines, the Mercedes 240D engine has been adapted but seems way underpowered for all but the lightest 88's. Here is an excerpt from an unsigned email I received from someone who had a 616 engine in a Land Rover Series I "Ive done the mercedes 240 D swap in a 49 80 inch. I used a factory remanned motor with about 40K miles on it. Ran sweet returned fair mileage. However, its a gutless motor. Its great for an 80, but not enough oomph for anything much larger. Under 100 ft/lbs of torque."

amcordo

10-30-2009, 06:29 AM

I've read through TeriAnne's (awesome) site, and surfed on here for a while wondering about this...

Has anyone ever transplanted a modern motor? It's a LOT of work to transplant the powerplant, so to replace it with an outmoded engine still seems kind of backwards in my head (even if all of the adaptors already exist).

I'd love to see someone put a modern Ford 4 or 6 into one of these. By modern I mean last half-decade. Maybe one from a manual Ranger truck so the computer doesn't cause you issues?

kevkon

10-30-2009, 08:13 AM

I kinda agree with you on that, though I understand why certain motors are usually picked. Cost, availability and ease of installation.
I was looking at a friend's Isuzu diesel as a possibility. A Duratec 4 cyl Ford would be another possibility. The problem is you have to consider all of the other requirements a modern engine requires. For one, the additional torque may require replacment of the trans and transfer case as well as the differentials. Then there is the engine management and injection systems on these more modern engines to consider. It can certainly be done, but it can get quite extensive ( not to mention expensive).
Another thing, do you really want your truck to be like everything else today? I mean with these modern engines and management systems you are pretty much out of the loop, if you know what I mean. One of the joys of these old trucks is their simplicity and the ability of the owners to fix them.

greenmeanie

10-30-2009, 10:49 AM

Another factor to consider when swapping engines is your state laws on such things. I believe California has a lot of rules about swapping newer engines into older vehicles while others take the view that if you didn't kill yourself getting here it must be good.

I got put off doing a diesel conversion on my 109 because all I could get out of the county assessor who would determine emissions requirements and vehicle inspection was 'depends'. Depends on what I asked. Depends on who's working that day was the answer. Too much money involved to play that game.

amcordo

10-30-2009, 11:48 AM

Luckily I live in central Ohio. The gov't is pretty supportive of the community doing anything we want (as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else). So to that end I feel comfortable that I could install coal fired boilers in the rover and the BMV wouldn't give a crap as long as I paid my registration fee.

So as you said the newer engines are more complicated. In my head, though, I keep thinking about how I've owned half a dozen newer cars in my life so far and never had engine trouble on one of them. With those odds, even if the engine is hard to fix it wouldn't matter - I'd rarely need to touch it! (My goal with my truck is reliability over anything if you couldn't tell). Anyway, so my question about using a newer engine: is it actually feasible? Can you even transplant newer engines? I'm sure it's possible to find one that's the right size, and matches up and all, but what about computers? Is it possible to make those fancy ECUs work in a rover environment?

greenmeanie

10-30-2009, 12:19 PM

The answer is anything is possible, it's just a matter of time, effort and, of course, money. I think there must be an LS series V8 transplant in almost every type of older vehicle in the US. I know of people modifying the GM 4.2l(?) straight 6 to work in older vehicles.

In a lot of cases the biggest effort is the need to fool the ECUs into working with the transplant vehicle, especially if it was originally hooked up to an auto box. For the most part these issues can be worked round by stripping all the OEM stuff off and going Megasquirt. It starts turning your conversion job from simple wrenching into a real science project and you have the potential of losing some of that OEM reliability that you desire.

amcordo

10-30-2009, 12:36 PM

brucejohn

10-30-2009, 01:53 PM

With what little I know about all this if I was after ease of swap and reliability I'd be looking into a 200tdi and the 5 speed.

NepentheSea

10-30-2009, 06:23 PM

Id love a diesel, its my first preference really.
But besides the diesel out of the Mercedes 240D, what else fits right in and allows me to use the rover transmission? The 6cyl Mercedes might be an option, Im watching the Seriestrek site with interest.

Im not very interested in the 200tdi/5speed because-
Isnt the 5 speed longer than what Ive got now? That means I get to shorten the rear prop shaft, lengthen the front, move mounts and a crossmember, at the least. Ive got two priorities- ease of swap and reliability. That kills the ease of swap.

Im not opposed to swapping transmissions along with the motor. It really makes more sense, I know. Who wouldnt want more power, and a strong transmission to back it up. But I feel like Im dreaming when I think of putting in a new motor and trans. and keeping the transfercase in the same spot. When I add in swapping the transmission the complications grow exponentially.

If I follow the path of "but wouldnt I like ____ too, might as well if I change the engine" I end up with a peppy diesel, a stout trans, lockers in both axles and parabolic springs. And how could I do all that work and leave a rusty bulkhead? The only way it would end is with a full resto!
Realistically, all ll I want is my rusty stinky rover to run reliably.
So Im back at just swapping the motor.

Im enjoying the discussion on modern motors to put in too. I wouldnt be opposed to fuel injection. It would also be easier to find a donor motor that was from the last twenty years.

Ive been looking for an idea of what vehicles came with the "iron duke" that works with the Scotty's adapter. Ive googled the heck out of it but I still havent found out exactly. Anyone know more about what I should be looking for?

NepentheSea

10-30-2009, 06:32 PM

I was looking at a friend's Isuzu diesel as a possibility. A Duratec 4 cyl Ford would be another possibility.
I like the Isuzu diesel's too- I remember those trucks going a few hundred thousand miles and still running as rest of the truck rusted away around it.

Another factor to consider when swapping engines is your state laws on such things...
One of the few times that I can say- luckily Im in Alabama!
I dont have any worries of state laws.

The slack laws worked out in my favor when I first got the rover too-
I bought it without a title- just a bill of sale. It had been shipped over from England and never registered here. It still had the British tax sticker in the window and tags on the front and back. Since its a pre-75 that means I didnt need a title for it. So I just took in my bill of sale and voila! Tagged and registered! :D

kevkon

10-30-2009, 08:31 PM

I think that the starting point is to determine exactly what your parameters are. How much more horsepower and torque are you looking for? Reliability is an obvious concern, but remember that it isn't just limited to the engine and trans. Go too far with increased performance under the hood and the next weakest link in the chain will become evident. Remember, these trucks were designed with certain parameters in mind and everything works within them.
I think the bottom line is that ramping up the performance of the Series trucks is alright as long as it is very conservative. Go beyond that and I think a Defender would be a better choice.

NepentheSea

10-30-2009, 08:56 PM

Keeping the power conservative is fine with me. I dont mind keeping the parameters within what the factory transmission offers.

So far, after alot of reading, Im still looking towards the scotty's adapter with either the 4 or 6cyl chevrolet.

I just found a rebuilt 250 6cyl Chev. for $100 bucks! If the Scotty's adapter will work with that, then we're in business. The power may be on the upper edge though. 155hp/235tq seems like alot of pop for the factory tranny, but its one of the engines that Scotty recommended for the 109. (http://www.expeditionlandrover.info/AcrobatFiles/Scottys%20Adapter%20Install%20Instruct.pdf) Link courtesy of TeriAnn's excellent site.
Scotty has "very tight" hand written in the margins, ha.

Nium

10-30-2009, 09:02 PM

I am curious, as I have a 4 cylinder, and haven't seen a 6 cylinder Landy engine let alone with the head off so I'm just going to demonstrate my ignorance and ask. Where are the other valves? I count 6 in the picture of the bottom of the head and assume they're the intakes, by the size, so where are the exhaust?

Sorry the head cracked on ya. :(

Regards

NepentheSea

10-30-2009, 09:37 PM

I am curious, Where are the other valves? I count 6 in the picture of the bottom of the head and assume they're the intakes, by the size, so where are the exhaust?

Aha! When I first got it I pulled the valve cover to check the valves and saw the same problem! Theyre on the passenger side below the exhaust manifold. Theyre operated via long push rods. Really a pain in the arse to get to. Compared to getting to all of them on the top that is.

greenmeanie

10-31-2009, 12:39 AM

I'll let you in on my secret which is that I am building a fuel injected hopped up 292 powered 109. In my case I'm replacing the original tranny with a Ford NP435 mated to a series transfer case using an Ike adapter. That little lot keeps the transfer case in the same position as stock but is not cheap.

When I bought the truck it had a Scotty's adapter onto a 6 cyl bell housing. On a 6 cyl truck the chevy 6 pot will fit in nicely if you move the radiator forward. This becomes a lot easier if you take the opportunity to convert to power steering so you can eliminate the steering relay which leaves a nice big hole for the radiator. If you want to see the original set up I took a lot of pictures. It was not a pretty truck but the detail is all there.

If you want info on the possibilities with the big chevy 6 inliners.org is the place to go.

swingkeel

10-31-2009, 05:43 AM

Like all engineering problems, in order to get to a satisfactory solution it's beneficial to begin by defining the problem and the priorities involved. It looks like you've done that - cheap, simple, reliable. As far as modern engines go, cheap and simple rules out a modern ECU controlled engine. Also, it's completely wrong (IMHO!) that just because an engine is modern, it is inherently superior to an older design. The gains in weight savings and friction decreases may mean sacrifices in reliability and longetivity especially for an off road truck. The Chevy Stovebolt Six and Small Block V8 are 2 of the great engine designs of all time. With modern lubrication, filtration, and peripheral components (alternator, etc.) it's hard to imagine a better choice for a powerplant in an old 4wd truck. BUT, those choices require a tranny swap as well, so there goes cheap and simple again. Same with diesel - more complicated, more expensive. Very cool though - I still drool over Jim's MerecedesRover at SeriesTrek. In any case, the 2.5-3 litre 4 cylinder will fit easily, not require a new tranny, have minimal expense and give you enough power to move the 109 even with an overdrive or high ratio transfer case. If you want more info on the 4 let me know. Dont get the 153 cid engine confused with the 151 cid. You will also have to take the RHD aspect of your truck in to consideration.

Meanie - I would love to see more before, during and after pictures of your truck. Got any posted anywhere?

All the Best, Michael

kevkon

10-31-2009, 08:39 AM

Exactly Michael.
My own preference is to stick with a 4cyl and I do believe that within that choice there is quite a bit of latitude and potential for better power. As far as reliability goes, sure a modern fuel injected ecu controlled motor is a hands down winner. However, at what point does the Land Rover cease to be a Land Rover? I mean there's a reason we are attracted to this truck and most of us get into it knowing at least some of the pitfalls. You could just go out and buy a new Jeep and have little to do. I think most of us Series owners enjoy ( whether we admit it or not) the challenges of a Series ownership and the fact that most things can be fixed by us.

Nium

10-31-2009, 10:56 AM

Aha! When I first got it I pulled the valve cover to check the valves and saw the same problem! Theyre on the passenger side below the exhaust manifold. Theyre operated via long push rods. Really a pain in the arse to get to. Compared to getting to all of them on the top that is.

Very curious way to arrange valves. Thanks NepentheSea

NepentheSea

10-31-2009, 11:00 AM

greenmeanie- Id love some pics of your old setup. Id like to know more about how you did the swap to power steering, and why you got rid of the 6cyl with the Scottys. (If there are any reasons besides the obvious- 292 power and reliable transmission to match!) Was the 250 6cyl too much power for the stock trans
Thanks for the info on inliners.org, I'll have a good look around there.

Michael- I would very much like some more info on the 4cyl. Have you got some experience with it? Its looking like (hopefully) either the 4 or 6cyl Chev will work with the Scotty's adapter. I was originally looking for the 151 4cyl, but a quick look on Craigslist gave me 3 local options for the 250 6cyl. Two for $100. I havent found a local 151 yet.

Cutter

10-31-2009, 05:35 PM

Great thread- I've got the same engine in my 109 (the euro 2.6) that needs new main bearings, I've decided to spend the considerable money to get the crank pulled and ground and the bearings replaced, but there's still a voice in the back of my head that is asking the same questions as you. If the bearings and crank are the only issues with mine then I'll probably stick with it, but if anything else is amiss I might consider a swap more seriously. I like the power and smoothness that the engine has, and while I don't care too much about it, it is nice to keep it stock.

NepentheSea

10-31-2009, 06:04 PM

Cutter-
Youre right, it is nice to keep it stock. I was planning on that until I became a crackhead. Let me know if you need any 2.6 parts in the future. I'll keep mine around the barn until it gets in the way.

swingkeel

11-01-2009, 04:09 AM

Nium,
Not curious at all. Its an L head design, quite common once upon a time. That was a Rover car engine designed in the 1930s. A flathead engine has intake AND exhaust valves in the block.

Nep,
Yes my 109 has an RD 3 litre Mercruiser engine in it. The block is Mercruiser which is a stouter bored out version of the GM 2.5 (151). The head and manifolds are from a 1977 Chevy Monza - it is a NON cross flow setup. Pontiac used that engine too. I understand the attractive aspects of the 6 but it has more issues to deal with too. First you need to figure out what setup (cross flow or non-cf) you would want with your RHD truck. Look at pictures of both and talk to people more familiar with RHD. If I had to guess I would think that you could use either. Its mainly clearance issues with the steering. I would think that a 151 cid pontiac engine with a cross flow arrangement would be easy to find. You'd need an adapter and you could get the other peices (mounts, etc) from Robert. From the pictures you may get a hint of why I recommend NOT buying an engine from RD.

All the best, Michael

http://i109.photobucket.com/albums/n64/67NADA/LandRover%201967%20109%20NADA/IMG_1428.jpg

http://i109.photobucket.com/albums/n64/67NADA/LandRover%201967%20109%20NADA/IMG_0545.jpg

NepentheSea

11-01-2009, 08:36 PM

Thanks for the photos! and OUCH. I get the hint. I'll steer clear.
The 4cyl fits in nicely. The 6 cyls were easy to find, but Im going to prowl a few junkyards and see what I can come up with before I make a choice between the two.

NepentheSea

11-03-2009, 06:57 PM

A Scotty's adapter is on the way, thanks to Linus T!

I'll post photos when I get the 2.6L anchor out and decide where to go from there.

NepentheSea

12-07-2009, 08:28 PM

Took the left fender, radiator and engine out tonight- my first time ever pulling an engine. Took about 3.5 hours in all, from starting on the fender to having the engine out. Next time I think I could do it in an hour or less, now that I have an idea of what Im doing.

Taking off the fender is great for access. When I put it back together Im planning on making it a flip up front end, I cant go back to leaning in over the fender!

Now its cleaning up the engine bay and looking for a new engine to go with the scotty's adapter. I haven't found a 151, but have found a few 250's. Looks like it may end up with a 250.

http://lh3.ggpht.com/_Lpu9dQ5S5xY/Sx22Q3tajxI/AAAAAAAAAtM/LNl-Qh92_lU/s800/IMG_0080.JPG
http://lh4.ggpht.com/_Lpu9dQ5S5xY/Sx22Qryc6gI/AAAAAAAAAtI/PzTeHpVQEhs/s800/IMG_0079.JPG

yorker

12-08-2009, 09:38 AM

i think if it was me i'd happily go with the 250.

BTW Have you seen this site?
http://www.turtleexpedition.com/vehicles/turtle1.php

NepentheSea

12-08-2009, 11:35 AM

Very interesting site! I really enjoyed reading about their different vehicle setups. Their experience with the 250 in their Rover was good to hear

SafeAirOne

12-08-2009, 11:48 AM

Hmm...It almost looks as if you removed all the bellhousing fasteners without taking off the floors/center bulkhead assembly. Nicely done! On my rover, you would have come away with black arms up to your biceps if you didn't remove the floors & center bulkhead!

http://lh3.ggpht.com/_Lpu9dQ5S5xY/Sx22Q3tajxI/AAAAAAAAAtM/LNl-Qh92_lU/s800/IMG_0080.JPG

NepentheSea

12-08-2009, 04:27 PM

Ze photos have deceived you!

I couldnt have done it and kept the small speck of sanity I cling to if I didnt remove the floorboards and tunnel. It was just too easy to remove those panels- I had taken them out before and put them back in with the minimum rivets needed; a few shots with the drill and they were right out.

And black to the biceps...tell me about it! I was black to the shoulders even with taking the tunnel off. And I never remember touching my face when my hands are black with gunk..

http://lh6.ggpht.com/_Lpu9dQ5S5xY/Sx7RT0c46UI/AAAAAAAAAuI/wGt3kzxII-o/s800/IMG_0075.JPG

Cutter

12-08-2009, 08:50 PM

Looks fun, I think if I did that I would keep taking things apart until is was down to the frame. Maybe while its so easy it might be worth it to degrease/rust and put some paint on the bulkhead.

swingkeel

12-09-2009, 08:41 PM

Good work! Yes the Chevy Stovebolt is a great engine. A 250 cid 6 cylinder will work fine if thats what you can get easily. Here are a couple of pics in an even more dismantled state. Scotty's adapter in second photo.

http://i109.photobucket.com/albums/n64/67NADA/886ab1df.jpg

http://i109.photobucket.com/albums/n64/67NADA/131383cc.jpg

good luck and keep posting! All the best, Michael

yorker

12-10-2009, 08:17 AM

Back in the 1990's there were some peope who wanted to swap in a Dodge Slant Six engine- I don't know if any of them ever did but today with the NP-435 transmission adapters out there it could be easily done. Just another engine/tranny possibility.

NepentheSea

12-11-2009, 09:01 AM

Cutter, I'll be cleaning up the bulkhead for sure. Ive been working on it since the pics.

Michael, thanks for the pics! Hopefully my bulkhead will be something close to as clean as yours when Im finished.

Yorker,
Ive heard that those slant sixes are good engines. I like most anything thats inline.

greenmeanie

12-11-2009, 09:54 AM

Good work! Yes the Chevy Stovebolt is a great engine. A 250 cid 6 cylinder will work fine if thats what you can get easily.

Just to be really, really **** but the 194/230/250/292 series of Chevy sixes are not Stovebolts. The commonly referred to Stovebolts were the 216/235/261 series that were available up to about 1963 when the gen 3 engines came out. The 1st generation of 6s were also stovebolts but are not nearly as common.

The stovebolt monicker came about because of the slotted head screws
used throughout the engine. The practice disappeared with the gen 3s.

With that somewhat useless fact explained we can get back to normal programming.

yorker

12-11-2009, 10:09 AM

Yorker,
Ive heard that those slant sixes are good engines. I like most anything thats inline.

I am a big fan of straight sixes- well at least the overhead valve ones, I don't like the flathead and F head ones. In any case any of the Ford/Chevy or Dodge I6's would be a good choice for a 109. The Slant 6 has a legendary reputation it would be a cool choice if it fits. I have yet to see one in a LR though. I've seen the Ford 300 6, and Chevy 6's a in LR's few times.