fett
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 8,637
- Location
- South Hampshire
oh yeah and the rv8 is simple to work on sure , but with other engines you dont have to work on them :doh:
Top hat liner block
- Thread starter dove
- Start date
This site contains affiliate links for which LandyZone may be compensated if you make a purchase.
fett
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 8,637
- Location
- South Hampshire
hardly ever, or never in my case (on the bmw). you have done some hours and pennys to get your rv8 to near 300hp though 
hardly ever, or never in my case (on the bmw). you have done some hours and pennys to get your rv8 to near 300hp though
got to bear in mind that the RV8 was tuned for low quality petrol with low compression and low RPM torque delivery which is completely different to what you get in a lexus or BMW V8 designed for a saloon car.
if you use the 4.0L 282hp M60 you'll have Nikasil linings which really love UK fuel lol or the vanos problems that you can get with the M62. all engines have their problems
plus you have the cost of buying the engine and fitting it too.
however its relatively simple to get an RV8 to 300hp - lets not forget how old this actual engine is compared to modern units.
Mr Noisy
Coming in your ears.
- Posts
- 10,146
- Location
- Altrincham, Cheshire
like 60 years!!
i agree that the easiest/cheapest option is to stick with the rover and tune it to the limits of value for money.
i dont however see the point of buying 2 grands worth of heads to bolt onto it. fit a better engine and go really quick for the same money.
the beauty of the rover is that its old and its aluminium, an old yank big block weighs too much. i can understand why folk (including myself) wouldnt want a modern engine, theyre boring.
ahh, its a hard one. i couldnt justify ploughing over a grand into a rover v8. as such im happyto go slow. i guesssome people have the money to spend so it alters your opinion on things.
tune it and polish it is what theyre good for IMO, theyre not a viable big power option at today's prices, especially bearing in mind the availability of modern options.
i suppose at the end of the day, if we were interested in value for money, we wouldnt be talking in the v8 section and we certainly wouldnt be modifying cars!
nor would we be on a land rover forum lol
fett
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 8,637
- Location
- South Hampshire
92 percent of all nikasil blocks changed to alusil for free under warranty for up to 12 years after the car was made regardless of current owner and that inlcudes mine with a parts bill of £1700 in 1995 paid by the dealer and nil labour cost showing. cant see landrover doing that with porous blocks. now there is not enough sulpher in uk fuel to cause any probs for the remaining 8 percent with the nikasil block. that was assuming any are about now anyway. they are restricted to 286. with a simple laptop map its goes to 330 and 340 ftlbs with no other mods.
I already said the 4.4 was crap, thats why landrover chose it ofcourse- they like to be consistant.
I am sure it was you who agreed with me on this in the past and said you wouldnt go down the tuning rout again with the rv8 as its bloody expensive for not much power and you had wasted your time and cash
I would like to see the real cost of building a 300 hp rv8 that is actually relaible for 100k miles. witha top hat linered block I would think more than 2k especially if you dont do it yourself and it wont last 100k
fett
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 8,637
- Location
- South Hampshire
well we agree on that lol
nah I love the rover engine, would not change it.
I think an increase of 54hp and 45lb ft torque from a simple remap on a N/A is a bit far fetched though lol
I think an increase of 54hp and 45lb ft torque from a simple remap on a N/A is a bit far fetched though lol
fett
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 8,637
- Location
- South Hampshire
I have the rolling road print out and a vid of it on there.
if we ever meet youre welcome to see it!
if we ever meet youre welcome to see it!
fett
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 8,637
- Location
- South Hampshire
they restricted it so it wasnt faster than the current m5 of the time which was still only a six cylinder
Similar threads
