Go Faster 944
- Thread starter JM1962
- Start date
Guest
New member
Tommo. It may be an old design but it was rather good. It was also very compact (look at the oodles of space in the picture of the 944 engine bay), very light and easy to rebuild at very moderate cost. None of this 'front of engine service every 30K' business. I have had dealings with quite a few of these engines that have got to 120-150K on their original waterpump and ultra-cheap cam chain. Camshafts can wear out at lower mileages but only if owners neglect oil changes.
Small blocks are OK but I presume are heavier than the all-alloy Rover/Buick?
I would also expect an SB Chevvy to drink rather more petrol than a Rover.
Incidentally if anyone has, or knows of, a UVA adaptor to mate Rover V8 with the 924/944 bellhousing, I would be genuinely interested ......
UVA made them in the early Nineties.
Their conversion also used an Audi 100 Turbo transaxle that gave a decent high top gear of around 28mph per 1,000rpm. which even a standard Rover will pull effortlessly ( my Scimitar SE5A with an SD1 engine and 5-speed box would cruise at 80 mph on 2,800rpm - 28.5mph per thousand.)
Where can you obtain a Rover transmission adapter from ? and what sort of power can you get from it standard and lightly modded ? What other parts are required ?
Its an interesting concept but I suspect it would work out cheaper to buy a turbo.
Has anyone fitted a nitrous kit ?
Its an interesting concept but I suspect it would work out cheaper to buy a turbo.
Has anyone fitted a nitrous kit ?
Guest
New member
Hi Muddy,
Everybody remembers the Rover/Buick connection. The interesting thing is that Buick originally stole the design from a BMW engine of the 1930's!! That engine is mighty old. To be honest it is not that good either. The Turner designed Daimler V8 is a better engineering design (same designer as the Triumph Bonneville engine). In 2.5 litre form with 2 x 1"3/4 SU's on it makes more power than the Rover 3.5 litre of the day
In 4.5 litre form as fitted to the Daimler Majectic Major Limo it had a better power to weight ratio than a V12 E Type! I have owned a few Rovers in my time from P6 S's to a SD1 Vitesse withthe twin plenum. Good car in it day too! From memory the V8 tends to run hot at the centre of the V where the camshaft sits. There is then a gasket fro the inlet manifold which sits over the cam. Inside this area is the biggest sludge making factory I can recall ever seeing. I think it is magnificent that the engine survived for so many years, very similar to the Jag straight 6. But putting out 140hp from 3.5 litres is not great in standard form
Modern small blocks are all alloy as used in the Ultimas to great effect with a Porsche G60 transaxle.
They are very compact too, and can be economical as the Rover!!
Sorry if it sounds like I am knocking a british institution the Rover V8, it was a "Good" engine. Its now all nostalgia. There are a lot better options out there........ Just my 2p worth!
morris944s2john
New member
Yes, but it does fit nicely in the 944 engine bay, and there are lots of tuning options for the Rover V8, twin 1 3/4" SU's. An old engine maybe, but did well in the TVR's for example. Combine that with points ignition, an SU fuel pump, grease nipples on the lower balljoints and, buckle me trunnions, I'll be well within my mechanical comfort zone
][][][]
][][][]
sawood12
New member
I'm surprised that when it comes to V8's people always pluck for the Americal ones. What about the european ones? The Audi S2's in the UK had 5cyl turbo engines (which is a mighty good engine which might be pretty good in a 944) but our european cousins also got the choice of a good sized V8 which also could be a good choice for a 944 as they used them with an S2 gearbox, or at least a gearbox of the same architecture as an S2 box, so should hopefully bolt up perfectly with no adaptors required. I'd much rather have a european engine under the bonnet than a US one anyday.
A chap at work is working on a project that uses one of these v8's out of a European Audi S2, though it is not a 944 project.
A chap at work is working on a project that uses one of these v8's out of a European Audi S2, though it is not a 944 project.
George Elliott
New member
Scott, our engines are alli and when you find out the weight of the Audi 5 Iron lump it will scare you.
At risk of contradicting myself I would have been a swb quattro fan in 1986, and have owned 5cyl q's over the years.
George
944t
At risk of contradicting myself I would have been a swb quattro fan in 1986, and have owned 5cyl q's over the years.
George
944t
peanut
Active member
all this talk of POWER []
once I was happy with my Lux. Then I was amazed with my S2 and now I have a chipped S2 I thought I could never want anything faster until today.
Today I accelerated hard 6000rpm from 30-80mph looked in my mirror to see a Meganne glued to my bumper !.......[:-]
I had to pull over and let him pass... oh the shame of it[]
] once I was happy with my Lux. Then I was amazed with my S2 and now I have a chipped S2 I thought I could never want anything faster until today.
Today I accelerated hard 6000rpm from 30-80mph looked in my mirror to see a Meganne glued to my bumper !.......[:-]
I had to pull over and let him pass... oh the shame of it[
]
Guest
New member
Hi Scott
You have a good point and it is well put.
BMW, Audi, Merc, Jaguar all make some great all alloy V8's
The only problem comes when you go to fit them to another car. (I have built an XJR 4.0 supercharged into
a MK2 Jag) You have to fit every guage, pickup, immobiliser alarm, module yadda yadda just to get the car to run. The only other alternative is to go for a stand alone engine management system which is expensive and a specialist job to set up.
The yanks make everything for their engines, it is all well engineered reasonably cheap and does what it says on the can have a look at this company to see what power can be bought for reasonable money http://www.amerspeed.com/
You have a good point and it is well put.
BMW, Audi, Merc, Jaguar all make some great all alloy V8's
The only problem comes when you go to fit them to another car. (I have built an XJR 4.0 supercharged into
a MK2 Jag) You have to fit every guage, pickup, immobiliser alarm, module yadda yadda just to get the car to run. The only other alternative is to go for a stand alone engine management system which is expensive and a specialist job to set up.
The yanks make everything for their engines, it is all well engineered reasonably cheap and does what it says on the can have a look at this company to see what power can be bought for reasonable money http://www.amerspeed.com/
sawood12
New member
Yes but my point is that I believe the Audi S2's used a 944 S2 derrived gearbox and the Europeans got a choice of either the 5cyl unit or a V8 so in theory the 944 gearbox should bolt right upto the V8 engine without the need for an adaptor. I take your point about the integration to get the thing running though.
Didn't realise the 5 cylinder engines had cast iron blocks.
Didn't realise the 5 cylinder engines had cast iron blocks.
pauljmcnulty
Active member
Peanut, you're banned...[&:]
Seriously, my humble Lux has famously poor suspension, and may well have lost a few of her horses over 20 years. I've been humbled by many cars, but never with less than 400 BHP and the engine/gearbox/drive in the right place.
Honest.....[
]
Guest
New member
Tommo. It may be an old design but it was rather good. It was also very compact (look at the oodles of space in the picture of the 944 engine bay), very light and easy to rebuild at very moderate cost. None of this 'front of engine service every 30K' business. I have had dealings with quite a few of these engines that have got to 120-150K on their original waterpump and ultra-cheap cam chain. Camshafts can wear out at lower mileages but only if owners neglect oil changes.
Small blocks are OK but I presume are heavier than the all-alloy Rover/Buick?
I would also expect an SB Chevvy to drink rather more petrol than a Rover.
Incidentally if anyone has, or knows of, a UVA adaptor to mate Rover V8 with the 924/944 bellhousing, I would be genuinely interested ......
UVA made them in the early Nineties.
Their conversion also used an Audi 100 Turbo transaxle that gave a decent high top gear of around 28mph per 1,000rpm. which even a standard Rover will pull effortlessly ( my Scimitar SE5A with an SD1 engine and 5-speed box would cruise at 80 mph on 2,800rpm - 28.5mph per thousand.)
[/quote]
Hi Muddy,
Everybody remembers the Rover/Buick connection. The interesting thing is that Buick originally stole the design from a BMW engine of the 1930's!! That engine is mighty old. To be honest it is not that good either. The Turner designed Daimler V8 is a better engineering design (same designer as the Triumph Bonneville engine). In 2.5 litre form with 2 x 1"3/4 SU's on it makes more power than the Rover 3.5 litre of the day
In 4.5 litre form as fitted to the Daimler Majectic Major Limo it had a better power to weight ratio than a V12 E Type! I have owned a few Rovers in my time from P6 S's to a SD1 Vitesse withthe twin plenum. Good car in it day too! From memory the V8 tends to run hot at the centre of the V where the camshaft sits. There is then a gasket fro the inlet manifold which sits over the cam. Inside this area is the biggest sludge making factory I can recall ever seeing. I think it is magnificent that the engine survived for so many years, very similar to the Jag straight 6. But putting out 140hp from 3.5 litres is not great in standard form
Modern small blocks are all alloy as used in the Ultimas to great effect with a Porsche G60 transaxle.
They are very compact too, and can be economical as the Rover!!
Sorry if it sounds like I am knocking a british institution the Rover V8, it was a "Good" engine. Its now all nostalgia. There are a lot better options out there........ Just my 2p worth!
[/quote]
Hi Tommo.
I think the BMW V8 story is a bit of a fairytale to be honest. When I put the 1968 Rover V8 (185bhp by the way not 140 thanks to 10.5 CR and 5* petrol) into the Allard, my local garage boss said "Of course you know it is copied from a 1956 BMW 507 V8?". Well, two months later I looked at a 507 being restored and apart from being a V8 I could not see a single strong point of similarity - so I remain to be convinced [
] Did BMW produce a V8 in the Thirties ?GM certainly had the engine design on the drawing board in the late Fifties , and it went into production very early Sixties (the one in my TVR-Buick is a 1962 unit). When my TVR was being driven in hillclimbs by its first owner it regularly came up against a 'sister car' built by Geoff Taylor with a 2.5 Daimler. Sorry to say the Buick had the upper hand at all times.
But I have always reckoned that the Daimler was indeed a superb engine and in fact I looked for a 4.5 Majestic Major for the Allard at one point but then decided I did not want to drag a cast-iron block around at the front of a trials car.
And I think the poor grade of corrodable alloy used for the heads has lead to the demise of many Daimlers - but is simply not an issue with Rovers.
I have never experienced over-heating (touch wood) despite giving the Rover a huge amount of abuse on trials. You are often holding 5,500-6,000 rpm in 1st or 2nd whilst actually only moving at 2 or 3mph on steep muddy hills. The sludge problem certainly occurs with the pre-historic oils and neglect of changes. On fully synthetic 20-50 Royal Purple mine has remained as clean as the day it was rebuilt.
So, I am a dyed-in-the-wool Buick/Rover enthusiast and probably blind to a few of their faults!
The all alloy modern version of the small block is a well developed design but doesn't it depend on loads of electronics for various systems? And it still isn't available cheaply enough for me to consider yet.
I confess to liking the simplicity of a pair of SU's and a Lucas distributor made ultra-reliable by a Lumenition kit.
Guest
New member
I don't think anyone other than the defunct firm of UVA has ever produced a Rover-to-Porsche adaptor but I would be very chuffed to be told of another source!
Rovers went backwards on power. The first engines on 10.5 CR produced 185bhp even with restrictive exhaust manifolds. The later engines with lowered CR's for Range Rovers and MGB V8's went right down to a pathetic 135bhp.
Later fuel injection motors went up again to 165 + and with capacity increased from 3.5 litres to 3.9, 4.2 or 4.6 - then bhp became much more respectable.
The 185bhp can, for peanuts, be upped to 220. Using 2" SU's, freeflow manifolds and a few tweaks. After that you start putting cams in, porting heads, increasing capacity etc etc. I met one chap at Prescott Hillclimb who had a "dyslexic" Rover in his Ginetta. It was 5.3 litres.
It might well be cheaper to buy a Turbo but the sheer low down pull of a well put-together Buick/Rover V8 is quite something. In the 1966 TVR-Buick my party-piece was to wooffle off in 3rd gear without punishing the clutch and proceed rather rapidly, in just that one gear, up to 115mph.
morris944s2john
New member
You can get fast hot hatches nowadays that match the 944 S2 performance:-
Renault Megane sport 225
Engine
Fuel Type
Unleaded Petrol
Injection Type
Multipoint Injection
No. of Cylinders
4
No. of Valves
16
Induction Capacity (cc)
1998
Bore x Stroke
82.7 x 83
Compression Ratio
9:1
Maximum Power - kw ISO (hp DIN)
165 (225)
Maximum Power (revs/min)
5500
Maximum Torque - Nm ISO (mkg DIN)
300
Maximum Torque (revs/min)
3000
Performance
0-62mph (0-100kph)
6.5
Maximum Speed - mph (kph)
147 (236)
If he had 225BHP and your car now has less than 211BHP then thats why he kept up.
Renault Megane sport 225
Engine
Fuel Type
Unleaded Petrol
Injection Type
Multipoint Injection
No. of Cylinders
4
No. of Valves
16
Induction Capacity (cc)
1998
Bore x Stroke
82.7 x 83
Compression Ratio
9:1
Maximum Power - kw ISO (hp DIN)
165 (225)
Maximum Power (revs/min)
5500
Maximum Torque - Nm ISO (mkg DIN)
300
Maximum Torque (revs/min)
3000
Performance
0-62mph (0-100kph)
6.5
Maximum Speed - mph (kph)
147 (236)
If he had 225BHP and your car now has less than 211BHP then thats why he kept up.
Hmmm, yes, but have your seen those Megane Sport 225's try to tackle a corner? I was on a track day in my old Mk2 Golf GTi (8v) last summer, and there was one there.
OK, it was very quick on the straights, but I went past it like it was in reverse on the corners. And that was my first ever track day, so I was not exactly speedy gonzales out there ...
(And do you think that people are going to be raving about Megane Sport 225's on interweb forums in 20 years time? I don't think so either ... )
Oli.
OK, it was very quick on the straights, but I went past it like it was in reverse on the corners. And that was my first ever track day, so I was not exactly speedy gonzales out there ...
(And do you think that people are going to be raving about Megane Sport 225's on interweb forums in 20 years time? I don't think so either ... )
Oli.
morris944s2john
New member
I agree absolutely. Renaults are rubbish, I've driven several. In a straight line yes, it would out drag peanut, but if an old Golf Gti can beat one in the corners then a 944 would do even better.
Actually, I like old (Mk1) Golf Gti's.
Actually, I like old (Mk1) Golf Gti's.
I think that the Megane Sports are pretty heavy as well, which is part of the downfall of most modern cars. I certainly have no desire to own one ...
Mk1 Golf GTi was fantastic. The Mk2 was a better all-round car, and a more sensible proposition for day-to-day use, but the Mk1 gave a better drive and much better performance (funnily enough, because it was lighter!) Quite fragile in some ways tho'. Still love 'em ...
Oli.
Mk1 Golf GTi was fantastic. The Mk2 was a better all-round car, and a more sensible proposition for day-to-day use, but the Mk1 gave a better drive and much better performance (funnily enough, because it was lighter!) Quite fragile in some ways tho'. Still love 'em ...
Oli.
Posts made and opinions expressed are those of the individual forum members
Use of the Forum is subject to the Terms and Conditions
