Six appeal - six cylinder Land Rovers - let's see them!

I think the vehicle dynamics of a series land rover isn't best served by more than about 100-150hp.

ciderman said:

I think the vehicle dynamics of a series land rover isn't best served by more than about 100-150hp.

Click to expand...

It depends, tire turning torque is more important than BHP.

The best driving series I've experienced was a Series IIA with a 3.5 Rover V8 it had from memory a torquemax cam and offenhauser manifold topped by a Holley carb..
It was paired not to the standard manual but to a 3spd 727 torqueflite out of an early Range Rover with a fully manual valvebody

It was a dream to drive.

Webley1991 said:

Were the six cylinder engined models a lot more expensive when they were new? There don't seem to be many about now.

Has anyone on here even seen a 6cyl fitted into an 88 as an engine swap?

Click to expand...

Quite a lot of work to fit a 6 cylinder into a 4 cylinder vehicle, the bulkhead, transmission tunnel, and bell housing are slightly different, to get the longer engine into the engine bay. They also have a different radiator to 4 cylinder.

The removal of 6 cylinders to fit other engines, often aftermarket, Perkins, Ford V6, etc, was common. Which is one of the reasons it is difficult to find a good 6 cylinder vehicle now.

Mine may be bashed and seized but because it was off the road for the last 25 years or so it is also almost all completely original as built.

Turboman said:

Quite a lot of work to fit a 6 cylinder into a 4 cylinder vehicle, the bulkhead, transmission tunnel, and bell housing are slightly different, to get the longer engine into the engine bay. They also have a different radiator to 4 cylinder.

The removal of 6 cylinders to fit other engines, often aftermarket, Perkins, Ford V6, etc, was common. Which is one of the reasons it is difficult to find a good 6 cylinder vehicle now.

Click to expand...

Because the engine is differently placed, so is the transmission so the prop shafts are different as well.

I have deliberately not taken bits off mine because they would just get lost and trashed over the 4 years or so it has been stored since I bought it. However when the chassis comes the engine will be coming out and I will be seeing just how bad it is. I hope it can be unseized or at least the original block recovered for reuse.
I tried when I first got it by dumping diesel down the bores etc and trying to crank it over with no joy. Will see what it is when I get it out and stripped and keep my fingers crossed

BruceB said:

I have deliberately not taken bits off mine because they would just get lost and trashed over the 4 years or so it has been stored since I bought it. However when the chassis comes the engine will be coming out and I will be seeing just how bad it is. I hope it can be unseized or at least the original block recovered for reuse.
I tried when I first got it by dumping diesel down the bores etc and trying to crank it over with no joy. Will see what it is when I get it out and stripped and keep my fingers crossed

Click to expand...

I hope you manage to get it sorted, maybe some other more seriously penetrating solvent could be tried in the bores? Do you know the circumstances of how the engine seized?

Parts can be a bit of a nightmare but I have seen things like valves, pistons, bearing shells and even a crated bare block come up for sale in the last couple of years.

By the way, I was being nosey on the DVLA look up - do you know why yours was manufactured in 1982 (hence X plate) but first registered in 1987, out of interest?

No idea, it may be in the file for the vehicle but offhand can't remember if I know the reason or not

ciderman said:

almost as pointless as the 2.25 diesel..

Click to expand...

I had the 2.25 diesel that came in my Series professionally rebuilt to as-new condition as I believe it is the original engine. I mean to the point of being re-bored, crankshaft reground, reconditioned injection pump etc. I thought I may as well spend the money then to hopefully avoid problems later on.

With all the problems I read about on here with setting carbs for the petrols, I am glad I made that decision. It is obviously noisy and slow, but will easily start after being stood. It is a hobby vehicle that does very few miles, so long term durability is not such an issue.

Webley1991 said:

I had the 2.25 diesel that came in my Series professionally rebuilt to as-new condition as I believe it is the original engine. I mean to the point of being re-bored, crankshaft reground, reconditioned injection pump etc. I thought I may as well spend the money then to hopefully avoid problems later on.

With all the problems I read about on here with setting carbs for the petrols, I am glad I made that decision. It is obviously noisy and slow, but will easily start after being stood. It is a hobby vehicle that does very few miles, so long term durability is not such an issue.

Click to expand...

The diesel is adequate to the job, although 5 bearing is better than 3 bearing.
In overall diesel engine terms, it is not one of the best examples ever built.

Webley1991 said:

I had the 2.25 diesel that came in my Series professionally rebuilt to as-new condition as I believe it is the original engine. I mean to the point of being re-bored, crankshaft reground, reconditioned injection pump etc. I thought I may as well spend the money then to hopefully avoid problems later on.

With all the problems I read about on here with setting carbs for the petrols, I am glad I made that decision. It is obviously noisy and slow, but will easily start after being stood. It is a hobby vehicle that does very few miles, so long term durability is not such an issue.

Click to expand...

I had a 1974 diesel 109 and it was noisy and a bit slow but it went well enough if you worked through the gears, like with many old vehicles with a fairly narrow torque range. I liked it - it always started and it didn't seem to use too much diesel even with a drip coming from the pump - I read that this was common and could be solved with refurbing.

6pot said:

I had a 1974 diesel 109 and it was noisy and a bit slow but it went well enough if you worked through the gears, like with many old vehicles with a fairly narrow torque range. I liked it - it always started and it didn't seem to use too much diesel even with a drip coming from the pump - I read that this was common and could be solved with refurbing.

Click to expand...

Quite possibly weeping from where the actuator arm goes into the governor housing. Common, and easy to fix with a small nitrile rubber O ring.

Turboman said:

Quite possibly weeping from where the actuator arm goes into the governor housing. Common, and easy to fix with a small nitrile rubber O ring.

Click to expand...

Yes that sounds like what it was, never got round to fixing it. Even passed its MOT like that.

Getting back to the original subject, here's mine

OK so the power isn't a lot more than the 2.25 and it doesn't necessarily go a lot faster - I remember one of those car programmes years ago pitting a 4cyl and a 6cyl petrol against each other and the 4 left the 6 standing, possibly because the 4 driver drove in a way to prove a point...

Also the compression ratio is a bit pants because it was made to run on any old rubbish petrol so it's a bit thirsty but any shortcomings are worth it for the sound it makes, after all we all drive Landies for fun rather than purely practicality, surely

I saw one of the engines for sale at the Newbury show a few years back. I remember it being painted bright red.

Did anyone on here acquire it?

6pot said:

View attachment 228719View attachment 228720 View attachment 228721

Click to expand...

I have this to look forward to shortly. Once the chassis arrives I have a temp garage to erect and will start stripping. I have had the vehicle for a few years but have deliberately not taken it apart to avoid confusion and stop me breaking/losing bits.
The idea is to get the landrover in the garage, strip it right down to the chassis, change for the new one and build it back up again.

Mine looked like this when I got it


Currently looks like this


Just about to pull the rear axle off then donkey out and chassis for blasting

I have seen liners come up and like previous posters I will completely rebuild the engine to make it as new. Its not being rebuilt to make money but because I want one
I have rebuilt plenty of vehicles and money for parts, up to a point, is not a major factor. as far as time goes I do just about everything myself so this is technically free
For example I am just starting to rebuild a Honda Superdream 250, I reckon it will probably cost me somewhere in the region of £2.5k b the time it is finished. I could buy a decent one for half that. However I want one that I know is right, looks completely original and is in perfect nick. Not to sell but to keep as part of the collection.
Why a Superdream? It was the first bike I was ever on, as a pillion, when I was 15. Why Not?

Lexx said:

Mine looked like this when I got it
View attachment 229433

Currently looks like this
View attachment 229434

Just about to pull the rear axle off then donkey out and chassis for blasting

Click to expand...

Looks nice, I suppose it's the usual chassis repair. How bad is it, it's difficult to tell from the photo?

Mine's been repaired in the past and looks like it's had a replacement rear crossmember at some point, hopefully all sound.

I ran a "6" for a while when I also had a Rover P4 (95)
I was asked to tow a boat from Brum to Aberdeen and was misled on the all up weight. I filled the tank 14 times on the way up......