V8 recon engine numbers

Paul Everett · Jun 20, 2004

Morning all,

I've just put a V8 from an old rangie I bought into my 110, as the
engine in it was used up and the new one has, allegedly, only done 10k
miles since a rebuild. The engine number starts "RP EX", which doesn't
match the Rover pattern of engine numbers, so I guess this ties in.

Anyone know if this gives away who rebuilt it?

Ta,
Paul

--
Paul Everett
repton at repton dot org
http://www.repton.org/

Austin Shackles · Jun 20, 2004

On or around Sun, 20 Jun 2004 10:46:57 +0100, Paul Everett
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>
>Morning all,
>
>I've just put a V8 from an old rangie I bought into my 110, as the
>engine in it was used up and the new one has, allegedly, only done 10k
>miles since a rebuild. The engine number starts "RP EX", which doesn't
>match the Rover pattern of engine numbers, so I guess this ties in.
>
>Anyone know if this gives away who rebuilt it?

RPi?

that's only a guess.

--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.fsnet.co.uk my opinions are just that
"Festina Lente" (Hasten slowly) Suetonius (c.70-c.140) Augustus, 25

Paul Everett · Jun 20, 2004

Austin Shackles wrote:

> RPi?
>
> that's only a guess.

That was my first guess too. No idea if it's right or not.

Paul

--
Paul Everett
repton at repton dot org
http://www.repton.org/

Richard Adcock · Jun 20, 2004

On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 10:46:57 +0100, Paul Everett
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
>Morning all,
>
>I've just put a V8 from an old rangie I bought into my 110, as the
>engine in it was used up and the new one has, allegedly, only done 10k
>miles since a rebuild. The engine number starts "RP EX", which doesn't
>match the Rover pattern of engine numbers, so I guess this ties in.
>
>Anyone know if this gives away who rebuilt it?
>
>Ta,
>Paul

Give Four plus Four a call, they should know,
richard

Richard Adcock · Jun 20, 2004

On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 21:52:51 +0100, Richard Adcock
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 10:46:57 +0100, Paul Everett
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>>Morning all,
>>
>>I've just put a V8 from an old rangie I bought into my 110, as the
>>engine in it was used up and the new one has, allegedly, only done 10k
>>miles since a rebuild. The engine number starts "RP EX", which doesn't
>>match the Rover pattern of engine numbers, so I guess this ties in.
>>
>>Anyone know if this gives away who rebuilt it?
>>
>>Ta,
>>Paul
>
>Give Four plus Four a call, they should know,
>richard

that message should have said they should know, they did it!

richard

Badger · Jun 21, 2004

"Paul Everett" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Morning all,
>
> I've just put a V8 from an old rangie I bought into my 110, as the
> engine in it was used up and the new one has, allegedly, only done 10k
> miles since a rebuild. The engine number starts "RP EX", which doesn't
> match the Rover pattern of engine numbers, so I guess this ties in.
>
> Anyone know if this gives away who rebuilt it?
>
> Ta,
> Paul
>
RoverPart EXchange ????
Badger.

P.S. My engines keep their original number as well as one I add myself.

Austin Shackles · Jun 21, 2004

On or around Mon, 21 Jun 2004 10:39:46 +0100, "Badger"
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>
>"Paul Everett" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>>
>> Morning all,
>>
>> I've just put a V8 from an old rangie I bought into my 110, as the
>> engine in it was used up and the new one has, allegedly, only done 10k
>> miles since a rebuild. The engine number starts "RP EX", which doesn't
>> match the Rover pattern of engine numbers, so I guess this ties in.
>>
>> Anyone know if this gives away who rebuilt it?
>>
>> Ta,
>> Paul
>>
>RoverPart EXchange ????
>Badger.
>
>P.S. My engines keep their original number as well as one I add myself.
>

I'd be disappointed in one that didn't, frankly, unless the new number
contains the same info about the engine. By all means add your own
identifier (not you personally, any rebuilder, I mean) but leave the
original info on the engine.

--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.fsnet.co.uk my opinions are just that
"You praise the firm restraint with which they write -_
I'm with you there, of course: They use the snaffle and the bit
alright, but where's the bloody horse? - Roy Campbell (1902-1957)

Badger · Jun 21, 2004

"Austin Shackles" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> >>
> >
> >P.S. My engines keep their original number as well as one I add myself.
> >
>
> I'd be disappointed in one that didn't, frankly, unless the new number
> contains the same info about the engine. By all means add your own
> identifier (not you personally, any rebuilder, I mean) but leave the
> original info on the engine.
>
For good reason too, Austin, it proves that there isn't anything being
hidden about the original engine's identity. If I was buying an engine and
it's original no. had been removed I'd certainly be asking the seller to
prove it was a legit engine, or I'd be walking.
Reason I add my own no. is so that I can instantly tell what is in the
engine from my own build database, what cam it left here with, what spec
heads, what crank undersizes or rebores, who it was built for and what
vehicle it was destined for etc, as it's altogether possible for a 3.5 to
leave here with an early 110 8.13cr 15G series no., but with 10.5 pistons,
efi heads, lumpy cam, adjustable pushrods and rhodes lifters etc, etc.
Badger.

Mr.Nice. · Jun 21, 2004

Twas Mon, 21 Jun 2004 20:01:59 +0100 when "Badger"
<[email protected]> put finger to
keyboard producing:

> it's altogether possible for a 3.5 to
>leave here with an early 110 8.13cr 15G series no., but with 10.5 pistons,
>efi heads, lumpy cam, adjustable pushrods and rhodes lifters etc, etc.
>Badger.
>

Keep talking like that and I'm all yours.
;o)

Regards.
Mark.(AKA, Mr.Nice.)
--
___________________________________________________________
"To know the character of a man, give him anonymity" - Mr.Nice.
www.mrnice.me.uk - www.markvarleyphoto.co.uk
1984 110 CSW 2.5(na)D
___________________________________________________________

Dave White · Jun 22, 2004

In <[email protected]> Austin Shackles wrote:

> I'd be disappointed in one that didn't, frankly, unless the new number
> contains the same info about the engine. By all means add your own
> identifier (not you personally, any rebuilder, I mean) but leave the
> original info on the engine.

Some replacement (new) blocks don't have serial numbers on them at all.
Stamping an old engine number into a new block could be seen as a bit
dodgy as you are then changing the identity of the new block.I'd assume
that an engine with an unusual number has had a new block (unless there
are signs of grinding etc...). This applies more to 3.9 engines and
onwards than 3.5's though. It's unusual for a 3.5 to have a new block
but almost inevitable on a 3.9 or 4.6.

In that case the person owning or rebuilding the engine should stamp
their own serial number into it for identification purposes. IMV it's
better that way as the engine has an honest history rather than an
assumed identity.

If you are rebuilding an engine with it's original block then I agree it
should keep it's original number alongside any additional stamps you put
in it.

cheers

Dave W.
http://www.yorkshireoffroadclub.net/

David G. Bell · Jun 22, 2004

On Monday, in article <[email protected]>
[email protected] "Badger"
wrote:

> "Austin Shackles" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > >>
> > >
> > >P.S. My engines keep their original number as well as one I add myself.
> > >
> >
> > I'd be disappointed in one that didn't, frankly, unless the new number
> > contains the same info about the engine. By all means add your own
> > identifier (not you personally, any rebuilder, I mean) but leave the
> > original info on the engine.
> >
> For good reason too, Austin, it proves that there isn't anything being
> hidden about the original engine's identity. If I was buying an engine and
> it's original no. had been removed I'd certainly be asking the seller to
> prove it was a legit engine, or I'd be walking.
> Reason I add my own no. is so that I can instantly tell what is in the
> engine from my own build database, what cam it left here with, what spec
> heads, what crank undersizes or rebores, who it was built for and what
> vehicle it was destined for etc, as it's altogether possible for a 3.5 to
> leave here with an early 110 8.13cr 15G series no., but with 10.5 pistons,
> efi heads, lumpy cam, adjustable pushrods and rhodes lifters etc, etc.
> Badger.

Under the vehicle identity rules, it would also be wise to retain the
old engine number, so that there would be minimal problems if it went
back into the original vehicle.

--
David G. Bell -- SF Fan, Filker, and Punslinger.

"History shows that the Singularity started when Sir Tim Berners-Lee
was bitten by a radioactive spider."

Nicknelsonleeds · Jun 22, 2004

>If you are rebuilding an engine with it's original block then I agree it
>should keep it's original number alongside any additional stamps you put
>in it.

But if you rebuild an engine with a replacement block, and scrap the original,
I'd
think it entirely appropriate to give the rebuild the original number.

Nick

Badger · Jun 22, 2004

"Nicknelsonleeds" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> >If you are rebuilding an engine with it's original block then I agree it
> >should keep it's original number alongside any additional stamps you put
> >in it.
>
> But if you rebuild an engine with a replacement block, and scrap the
original,
> I'd
> think it entirely appropriate to give the rebuild the original number.
>
> Nick

Indeed, that is what "should" happen, just the same as if you fit a new
chassis you should destroy the old and stamp the original number on the new.
Anything else gets a "Q" plate, legally!
Badger

Paul Everett · Jun 22, 2004

Dave White wrote:

> Some replacement (new) blocks don't have serial numbers on them at all.
> Stamping an old engine number into a new block could be seen as a bit
> dodgy as you are then changing the identity of the new block.I'd assume
> that an engine with an unusual number has had a new block (unless there
> are signs of grinding etc...). This applies more to 3.9 engines and
> onwards than 3.5's though. It's unusual for a 3.5 to have a new block
> but almost inevitable on a 3.9 or 4.6.

Mine might be a new block then, as it has the weird number but no sign
of grinding.

I've asked 4+4 about it (as Richard Adcock, who happens to be the
previous owner, suggested) but they didn't have records going back far
enough that they could easily get at.

Paul

--
Paul Everett
repton at repton dot org
http://www.repton.org/

V8 recon engine numbers

Paul Everett

Guest

Austin Shackles

Guest

Paul Everett

Guest

Richard Adcock

Guest

Richard Adcock

Guest

Badger

Guest

Austin Shackles

Guest

Badger

Guest

Mr.Nice.

Guest

Dave White

Guest

David G. Bell

Guest

Nicknelsonleeds

Guest

Badger

Guest

Paul Everett

Guest

Similar threads