Buying Rebuilt Engine Sources

[Bertha]

5k? You could get a complete turner enginer for that. Course you'd be wasting money. For less than half that you can have it rebuilt locally to the same effect...

Less than half????? The machine shop work alone is around 2k for a proper rebuild and that is without buying parts. Not sure where you are getting your figures from......good luck with that.

[gchinsr]

Originally I was going to swap a diesel, until this engine popped up on Ebay. It was mentioned earlier that the 2.8 is only good for ease of swapping. The 200Tdi requires only a few mods for the intercooler, and fuel delivery, no biggie.I would have to learn all I can, and wrench a lot before i leave to be self sufficient with any Tdi, which have taken away much time that could have been used in vehicle preparation. Now I have an engine optimized to the best standards possible, without negatively sacrificing reliability, that I can repair myself. Perfect for my needs. And bringing up the argument that its too this, or too that, is just opinions. How did countless travelers ever survive, or complete a trip with a, gulp, stock grossly under powered, inefficient engine, impossible right? Its not all about the engine, as there are more than one to choose, but the whole package we are able to put together. My ambulance weighted at Tillbury with a quarter tank was 1603k, light starting point. I do intend to keep it as light as possible, and travel light. As for the aerodynamics, my interior has roughly an extra 35sq ft over stock roofs, and how do you think I will compare with a 110 that needs a full roof rack, and RTT. Not to mention the COG and handling advantage I will end up with. My guess, a tad better, which I will require less power to to maintain the same speed, with better economy. There is a pattern here in the specs, and add them all together, I think I will end up with something just a little better in the end. That is exactly what this engine is, a little better breathing, a little extra displacement etc...I am not building this for anyone except my son, and I, based on what we are best able to put together for us. Modern engines are not all gems, some dogs have ECU's. I never said it will get 30 mpg, and climb K2 in third gear, or that I need that, only it will suit my needs, nothing more. BTW, I don't recommend this engine for you, and hope that your choice suit your needs. Merry Christmas all.
Cheers,
Greg

[Tim Smith]

5000#? Well, I guess my truck diet works.

[yorker]

The owner of this engine stated average of just over 14 mpg( D110) with lots of mud play. In speaking with Roland at ACR with the addition of the Magnetronic points replacement, and 110 specific exhaust (more efficient tan Series), 16 +mpg will be normal. I am saying, peak power doesn't tell the whole story, it's the improved usable power band that makes the big difference, I will not running around at peak RPM's all day. Yes if the throttle was always on the floor, it would suffer greatly, and probably do your stated mpg, but that is not my intention, or how I drive. To me, the increased engine efficiency is the greatest advantage, nothing more. I think this engine is a great upgrade, and best suits my needs, and wants. Just as SGS714 is stepping up and acting, so am I, and thrilled about it as well.
Greg

You are still pushing around a ~5,000lb + truck with a small displacement overworked 4 cylinder. A 2.8 may have more capacity vs. the 2.25 but it is creating that via more fuel and air consumption. You still don't have a crossflow head or any other advances that will make a vast improvement in the engine's efficiency. Look at your torque to weight ratio and consider the drag coefficient of a LR is ~.59 and frontal area is ~37ft2. The only way you are going to get greatly different fuel consumption is with a more modern engine design or a diesel. What I am saying is don't expect any miracles.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
As for nice shiny galvanized frames- they aren't just for that sexy shine, in the rust belt it is $ well spent .

[yorker]

The owner of this engine stated average of just over 14 mpg( D110) with lots of mud play. In speaking with Roland at ACR with the addition of the Magnetronic points replacement, and 110 specific exhaust (more efficient tan Series), 16 +mpg will be normal.

UK Gallons or US gallons?

[gchinsr]

You bring up some good points Scott. We all have wish list, want lists, and needs lists, based on our own individual values, and pocket books. But to say it's a "rip off", when someone steps up and upgrades his vehicle, to suit their own needs, is not right, just insulting. Would it be any better to spend $10k for a HS2.8 TGV base conversion kit, then need to upgrade the drive train to cope with the extra power? To some it would, and myself personally,not. That's my opinion, and would simply say, great engine, not on my list. Land Rovers are about individuality, improvising, and using whats available to you to make them work best for our needs. You want a $60k+ pretty truck to go to the mall, looks nice, only have $2k to make a runner, great job. Point being, neither owner is smarter, or more ignorant, just two people doing what they want. The world would be awfully boring with 1 Land Rover for all, based on 1 person's opinion.

[SGS714]

I am saying, peak power doesn't tell the whole story, it's the improved usable power band that makes the big difference, I will not running around at peak RPM's all day. Yes if the throttle was always on the floor, it would suffer greatly, and probably do your stated mpg, but that is not my intention, or how I drive. To me, the increased engine efficiency is the greatest advantage, nothing more. I think this engine is a great upgrade, and best suits my needs, and wants. Greg

X2 what Greg said.

x2. A nice rebuild from a local shop and the 2.25 does nicely. The 2,2,5 is what it is.

$7,100 for that motor is a complete rip -off.

And I think someone that spends $7100+ on a galv chassis and a flawless bulkhead and then repaints everything after cleaning every nook and crany is not quite right, but I would not say they ripped themselves off....No....We all value different aspects of these great trucks. I value a powerplant that runs flawlessly and will pull me and a couple guys and a dog trailer to any remote hunting site I choose and more to the point.....I want it to get me home also, without having to work on it or having 10 trucks stack up behind me going up a grade....That adds stress to my life. I don't see the value in a shiney frame, but I can appreciate them.

I can be in the field with 3 guys....One might have $300 pump shotgun and another have a $7000 side by side from Italy.....and I carry anything between a $1500-$5000 gun, but none of us cares, we are all enjoying the sport. Don't even get me started on dogs and the spread in dollars invested among my freinds.....We all value different things.

When I'm not working, hunting, or spending time with my family I am probally sleeping....I do not have the ability or time to turn wrenches and value dependability and the no stress benefits of an engine that cost me $7100. I will own this truck for a long time....after amortization I don't care what the engine cost.

You want to feel rightious...feel rightious towards the guy that pays $140k from Orvis for a truck...not me and my total investment of $13k for a solid truck and fresh engine.

Ok...I feel much better now that I got that out of my system, please carry on with your discussion.

Scott

[mongoswede]

I pulled the block apart from a Saab 9-5 that had a piston break apart at 60000 miles for some reason. Block, crank, etc are all in good condition. Engine is a 16v low pressure tubo that makes about 185 hp and equivalent torqe. I believe its a 93 mm piston...not sure on stroke...probably fairly square. Though its not the ultimate truck engine its an easy one to play with. Hp/torque in the 250/250 range is easy. Playung with turbo selection and fuel injection tuning can bring power on line at lower rpms. Nice compact crossflow design...could easily build into a rover with all adapters for much les...I'll take notes if I try it out.

[gchinsr]

MPG's

The owner of this engine stated average of just over 14 mpg( D110) with lots of mud play. In speaking with Roland at ACR with the addition of the Magnetronic points replacement, and 110 specific exhaust (more efficient tan Series), 16 +mpg will be normal. I am saying, peak power doesn't tell the whole story, it's the improved usable power band that makes the big difference, I will not running around at peak RPM's all day. Yes if the throttle was always on the floor, it would suffer greatly, and probably do your stated mpg, but that is not my intention, or how I drive. To me, the increased engine efficiency is the greatest advantage, nothing more. I think this engine is a great upgrade, and best suits my needs, and wants. Just as SGS714 is stepping up and acting, so am I, and thrilled about it as well.
Greg

[yorker]

You have near V8 power, at a fraction of fuel usage, and a heck of a lot less weight. With the constuction of the Hi roof adding only about 20k, with low COG, Light weight interior, and super efficient lighter engine, this is the best combination for an expedition type camper I could come up with. There is no one size fits all, this is what I think is the best of available components for my son, and my trip to South America, at about 40% the cost of new.

You also have an engine of smaller displacement and higher weight that will have to work harder
to overcome the aerodynamics and weight of the vehicle. Even an American iron V8 could be roughly the same weight and far greater displacement. Swapping to a V8 or V6 doesn't always mean a penalty in fuel economy or complexity.

http://www.novak-adapt.com/knowledge/fuel_economy.htm

177 FtLb @ 2300 RPM 117 BHP @ 4100 RPM @11mpg

With a 4 the biggest advantages are the simplicity of the install and the lack of mods required to the drivetrain due to the small gain in power.

[yorker]

This post makes me think people have given in and cast aside a rebuildable engine for something they just drop in. Where do these poor things end up?

Ben Smith and Cristina Calado(I think) bought like 25 old 2.25 engines from that old shop in NH. So some people salvage them. There isn't a huge market in single cores though. I've seen a lot stored for a while over the years before someone finally gets sick of walking around them and scraps them. I junked my last core 2.25 when the price of scrap went up, no one wanted it.

[yorker]

Terry, I was hoping you would chime in...I appreciate your very to the point and in my opinion accurate thoughts. My mechanic can do anything but doesn't have any 1st hand knowledge rebuilding these engines....and we decided for an extra $1500ish why not just save us all the work of sorting out all the nuances that it takes to make this a pleasure to drive.

Find a new mechanic- rebuilding a 2.25 isn't exactly rocket science. If he isn't willing to do the work that is pretty telling.

[SGS714]

I think you would be better off with the standard exhaust manifold. I'd be happy to take that one off your hands.

Roughly $340usd + shipping to you from me and I can get Roland to put another pair in the box for you.

[SGS714]

Could you give us an idea what the freight side of this order is???

C

A lot more than I wanted. Brought a RPI 4.6 V8 over last winter and it ran around $625usd, this one is costing me $956usd.

[Crash]

Could you give us an idea what the freight side of this order is???

C