I used to cringe whenever I saw a small block Chevy in a Jag. I felt if
you can't handle the engine quirks of the Jag, you don't deserve one.
That translated to 'the only proper conversion for an MG is the Rover
V8', for obvious historic reasons.
However, the V6 conversion is looking better these days. For many reasons:
1. Cheap engine, tranny and parts available everywhere.
2. Great power.
3. Any mechanic anywhere in the US can fix this engine.
If originality is a concern, you wouldn't be doing a conversion anyway.
It's probably a very easy way to get better performance and reliability
with less maintainence.
Bottom line, don't worry about what we think. It's your car, do with it
what you want. Then be ready to give lots of rides. :-)
Paul.
Chris Thompson wrote:
> I was wondering if anyone on the list has any experience with putting a GM
> V6 in an MGB.
>
> Tony Barnhill linked to a site, http://www.killerbv6.com/ about the
> conversion. That site, of course, promptly removed all its pages for a
> "rewrite". Some google cache surfing showed me their old pages.
>
> Here's what I've gathered...
>
> The 3.4L Fuel Injected GM V6 is 160HP and 194ft/lb of torque, bone stock.
> The 215 Rover V8 Fuel Injected is 148HP and 180ft/lb of torque, bone stock.
>
> The GM V6 weighs 30lb less than the V8, and 80lb less than the 18V.
>
> The V6 is readily available and dirt cheap, as it appeared in mid 90s
> Chevy's from Camaros and Firebirds to Minivans.
>
> The V6 can easily be tweaked to even higher heights due to a flourishing
> aftermarket of guys upgrading their Camaros.
>
> The V6 can be dropped into an MGB engine bay with little problem by simply
> removing the stock engine mounts and installing the new aftermarket mounts
> which are specifically designed for this application.
>
> The engine is, from what I gather, physically smaller and runs
> substantially cooler than the 215 V8, with no endemic cooling problems.
>
> The engine can trivially fit under teh MGB hood without any bumps.
>
> So I turn to you guys and ask what the downside. From what I see on the
> web, the V6 is cheaper (I've seen people say that the engine can be had for
> $200 and the T5 transmission for $120), more Horsepower, more torque, no
> cooling hassles. I've always wanted a V8 but simply haven't had the cash,
> this conversion looks like it could be done dirt cheap.
>
> I'm comparing the cost of what I'm going to ahve to spend to rebuild my 18V
> with its cracked head and probable interior damage and numerous oil leaks
> to this conversion, and the opportunity cost to go to the V6 seems low.
>
> So what's your verdict?
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________
> Chris Thompson
> 1974 MGB Chrome Bumper Roadster
--
Paul T. Root E/Mail: proot@iaces.com
600 Stinson Blvd N.E., Fl 1S PAG: +1 (877) 693-7155
Minneapolis, MN 55413 WRK: +1 (612) 664-3385
FAX: +1 (612) 664-4779
/// or try http://www.team.net/cgi-bin/majorcool
/// Archives at http://www.team.net/archive
|