Engine options?

[PH4]

What is pirate, as mentioned in above post?

[groundhog]

I don't mind having to do a little engine mount mods so actually a SBC would be an option for me. Also I am not averse to a 4 speed auto w/ OD to mate to it. I have a Ford 300 straight 6 in a 1988 F-150 Is this too long ? I don't really want to have to move the radiator out farther. I want to try to keep the exterior look the same.
thanks,
Bruce

[mfreeman]

Pirate

What is pirate, as mentioned in above post?

Go to: http://www.pirate4x4.com/welcome1.php
Check out the forum section under Land Rover. Lots of knowledge there. Be advised many of the Pirateer's have an intollerant approach to elementary questions. Lurk before you leap.

[yorker]

I know the 300 Ford straight six has been done before. Ford 300 I6-NP435-Series Transfer case, maybe High Ratio Transfer case? Maybe Roverdrive? You have a lot of decisions ahead of you. A good thing! Good engine too.

[groundhog]

Is the 300 I6 still available new or would I have to source a junker? Also in my Ford it seems like the low rev range power sucks but when you rev it up its OK. would this present a problem with the series trans? On the 2.25 at least the low rpm torque is good.

[greenmeanie]

I don't mind having to do a little engine mount mods so actually a SBC would be an option for me. Also I am not averse to a 4 speed auto w/ OD to mate to it. I have a Ford 300 straight 6 in a 1988 F-150 Is this too long ? I don't really want to have to move the radiator out farther. I want to try to keep the exterior look the same.
thanks,
Bruce

The SBC is not just engine mounts. It requires bulkhead mods and probably gearbox and tunnel work too to take the power/torque.

I haven't done either but it is my understanding that the V8 is a lot more fab work than the Ford 300. If decide to go the SBC route you might want to consider a swap of your galvy bulkhead for a pritine non galvy plus cash. Seems a waste to cut up a good galvy part you know. I ain't volunteering yet but if you want to go that path give me a shout.

Cheers
Gregor

[yorker]

Is the 300 I6 still available new or would I have to source a junker? Also in my Ford it seems like the low rev range power sucks but when you rev it up its OK. would this present a problem with the series trans? On the 2.25 at least the low rpm torque is good.

Rebuilds are readily available. They were one of those engines that often outlived the rust prone body of the truck they were in too. They should be easy to find. The torque range may vary by year- carbed vs EFI, pollution controls etc...

[uralrover]

A completely Different Line of Thinking.

Why Not Rebuild your 2.25 Engine with after market bolt on mods, like a 9:1 Compression head, better rerouted intake and exhaust manifolds and BV rochester, carb with electronic pointless distributar. Add a hot cam and big bore exhaust and get about 113Bhp out of the 2.25 engine. Then rebuild your tranny, and add the better highway gearing into the Transfer case that gives a 32% gear reduction giving you your highway speeds and enough power to overtake the hill with confidence. No Modifying the frame, no great re-engineering of anything and all readily available on line or through various reputable Rover Parts Sources. As with the power upgrade you might want to consider adding better brakes (Disk brake conversion) and looking into Aluminum Radiators to handle your cooling needs.
Just a thaught....

[leafsprung]

because its just as expensive (if not more so), doesnt last very long and is only a meager increase. Still cant tow a load, still cant pull a real hill, still doesnt have much torque. I like stock trucks but their potential is limited.

[groundhog]

I already have the electronic distributer, shaved head, SU carb, big bore exhaust, headers, and a Fairey O/D, and it still is not that great. I can get a little above 70 if the wind is favorable, but it still drops to 35-40 on a steep hill. Has anybody else tried the 3.0 GM 4 cyl swap with the high range trans?
Bruce

[Paul Rossmann]

I know I will get a lot of grief for saying this, but who in their right mind would want to go over 70 in a Series? A Defender, yes, but a 35 yr old leaf sprung? Remember these cars were built as tractors originally... then as utility vehicles. Never as SUVs. Certainly one can modify the begeebers out of any vehicle, but then it is something different.

I would think that a rebuilt 2.25 (HP) and a rebuilt tranny with the high ratio transfer case would be as much engine as you would need (for what the Series was originally intended). A 200tdi would be nice if you could find one, then find the parts. Even then it is almost too much power for a Series, and unless you go non-turbo, will require extensive mods and cooling system revisions to install.

Dont mean to grandstand, but engine options are infinite. It's really what you want your car to do (and and your budget/mechanical ability) that will be your deciding factor.

[Paul Rossmann]

I know I will get a lot of grief for saying this, but who in their right mind would want to go over 70 in a Series? A Defender, yes, but a 35 yr old leaf sprung? Remember these cars were built as tractors originally... then as utility vehicles. Never as SUVs. Certainly one can modify the begeebers out of any vehicle, but then it is something different.

I would think that a rebuilt 2.25 (HP) and a rebuilt tranny with the high ratio transfer case would be as much engine as you would need (for what the Series was originally intended). A 200tdi would be nice if you could find one, then find the parts. Even then it is almost too much power for a Series, and unless you go non-turbo, will require extensive mods and cooling system revisions to install.

Dont mean to grandstand, but engine options are infinite. It's really what you want your car to do (and and your budget/mechanical ability) that will be your deciding factor.

[greenmeanie]

You are correct that these trucks are not going to challenge the land speed record. More power, however, is not necessarily about going faster; it's about driveability. An overhauled and hopped up 2.25 can pull a truck along at 70 mph on the flat but that is about all its got. It is when you hit the hills that they plain suck.

In my case I live at 1500ft but regularly head to the hills of northern AZ which get up to 9000ft and you are going up several long 6% grades. It is the ability to hold your speed on these that makes the difference. An engine with more power, more torque and preferrably a nice wide torque band will be a lot less stressed making these journeys.

This was the supposed reason for introducing the six pot to the US market. Some of us just want to take it a small step further to replace the LR lump with all its issues with something more reliable.

Cheers
Gregor

[groundhog]

I also am not concerned with getting any more speed. Holding it at 65-70 on the highway requires a fairly straight smooth road. I just want a bit more push on the hills which the 2.25 just won't give.
Bruce

[I Leak Oil]

Just came back from winter romp. About a 5 hour trip each way for me. Every time I take a trip like this I tell myself that I don't need more speed but keeping my speed constant at 60 to 65 would be great. Dropping down to 50 on the hills on I-95 just plain sucks! I'm seriously thinking of a GM 4.3 liter with the SM465 that I have sitting in my garage. Just need to find a way to adapt it to my series transfer case....
Jason T.