I can't give you the exact weights, but at my advanced age[and advanced mental
deterioation]I can still pick up a Rove block with crank in place, whereas I
don't
even try hoisting a Ford block. All of the Rover is alloy, so to get in the
same
ballpark with a ford you need alloy heads, intake, and such. the accesseries
will
be about equal. The ford block will still outweigh the Rover by a bunch. Also,
the late Rover motor bottom end is stout and better balanced than the average
ford. The only limit is the absence of good aftermarket heads for the Rover,
but
in an MGB, the Rover's combination of goodpower, good torque, and low weight is
unbeatable. 250-300 horse is within easy reach and the B still handles.
Weight=hp. John
DANMAS@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 98-11-20 17:22:24 EST, Paul.Kile@Aerojet.com writes:
>
> > If you check out the "engine
> > weights" page on the Scions of Lucas web page, you will find the 215/3500cc
> > aluminum V-8 weighs 318 pounds, vs 460 pounds for the Ford 289.
>
> Paul,
>
> We need to be real careful when talking about engine weights, especially if we
> are using the data from the Scions of Lucas site, to be sure we are not
> comparing apples to doughnuts. We must make sure we are comparing engines in
> identical dress. If we include the starter in one, but not in the other, that
> can account for 15 - 20 pounds alone. Like wise, an aluminum intake may weigh
> 16 pounds, whereas the factory iron manifold for the same engine may weigh as
> much as 39 pounds. A liitle bit of this can lead to a LARGE descrepancy when
> making comparisons.
>
> Also, The data in that chart is compiled from a variety of sources, some of
> which I KNOW to have errors in their dimensional data. If there are errors in
> the dimensions, it's not unreasonable to asume there are errors in the weight
> data as well.
>
> Now, having said all this, I'll make a trade - if anyone out there can tell me
> EXACTLY how much a BOP/Rover engine weighs, and EXACTLY what components are
> included/excluded in that weight, I'll do the same for the Ford 302 engine.
>
> A stock Ford 302, with iron heads, iron intake, Carburetor, valve covers,
> flywheel, clutch, headers, starter, alternator, distributor, fan, water pump,
> pulleys - everything needed to run except oil and water - weighs 519 pounds.
> This weight was determined by disassembling one and weighing it piece by piece
> on a bathroom scale.
>
> That same engine, with aluminum water pump, heads, and intake manifold,
> lightweight flywheel, light weight starter - everthing needed to run except
> oil and water - weighs only 424 pounds.
>
> How accurate are these numbers? When I recieved my Crate engine, I weighed
> all the packing material and subtracted that from the shipping weight. When I
> compared that value to my to my figures based on the stock engine in
> equivalent condition, the weights agreed TO THE POUND! Based on that, I would
> estimate an error of +- 5 pounds.
>
> 424 pounds is still a lot more than 318, but what does a fully dressed, ready
> to run, BOP/Rover engine actually weigh? I would guess there is not that much
> difference.
>
> Another somewhat surprising fact - The Ford 302 is SMALLER than the BOP/Rover
> engine. That statement is based on actual measurements.
>
> In a message dated 98-11-20 16:58:41 EST, DAN_GRAVES@hp-roseville-
> om3.om.hp.com writes:
>
> > Just curious. For those of you building MG's with R/B/O V8's, why
> > that particular engine?
>
> Dan,
>
> As far as I can imagine, there are about 8 reasons for a given engine choice:
>
> 1) The "gee Whiz" factor
> 2) Availability of the base engine
> 3) Availability of "go fast" goodies for the engine
> 4) Money available to spend
> 5) Fabrication skills of the owner
> 6) Performance potential
> 7) Engine Weight
> 8) Engine size
>
> If either item 4 or item 5 are available in abundance, then the only other
> factor that really counts is item 1. For myself, nothing else says "Gee Whiz"
> quite like a V8. Others may have different ideas, but for me, it has to be a
> V8. Given enough of items 4 or 5, you can stick anything in there you want, up
> to and including a V12.
>
> Items 4 and 5 are rarely in abundance, so they play a major role in the engine
> choice. Having a lot of one, but little of the other will have little impact
> on your choice, but if you are like most of us, not having much of either,
> your choices are limited. You won't be able to stray to far from the well
> beaten path, using an engine choice for which there is not a lot of
> information available. From that standpoint, the BOP/Rover wins hands down.
> There is probably no question you can ask about this choice that can't be
> readily answered by someone who has been there. It will cost you a whole lot
> less to get a professional, someone like Glenn Towery, for example, with lots
> of experience, to install the BOP/Rover than to get the same expert to install
> something else. You will have to pay for his learning curve. Likewise, if you
> run into a problem installing another engine, you are going to pretty much
> have to solve it yourself. How much of item 5 do you have? (since you have a
> Ford in your MG, my guess is quite a lot!)
>
> Item 2, availability of the base engine, doesn't restrict your choices very
> much, as there are plenty of BOP/Rover engines available, as well as a large
> selection of other V8s and 4 or 6 cylinder engines. There are even some well
> suited rotary engines available.
>
> Item 3 will restrict you somewhat, as there are a limited number of engines
> for which there is a large election of after market goodies available. The
> Ford will definately win out over the BOP/Rover in this aspect.
>
> Item 6 is only a factor as far as it relates to item 1, the Gee Whiz factor.
> The performance of even the stock engine is enough for a lot of pleasure. If
> you go too far beyond the limits of the BOP/Rover, you probably will have more
> power than you can really use anyway. Never-the-less, the performance
> potential for the Ford is quite a bit higher than for the BOP/Rover. 500
> streetable HP is not out of the question for the 302. 1000 HP is available if
> you don't ever have to idle. I don't know of any 4 or 6 cylinder that can come
> close.
>
> Item 7 goes to the BOP/Rover - it's even lighter than the stock 4 cylinder.
> How it compares to a rotary, I don't know.
>
> Item 8 goes to the original engine, or another 4 cylinder, or perhaps a
> rotary. Between the Ford and the BOP/Rover, the Ford wins. You can use a
> Chevy, and I have seen some very fine examples of this, but they are much
> heavier, and even larger than the BOP/Rover. But, if you like a Chevy, refer
> to item 1!
>
> Enough is enough, so I'll shut up now (my sig line will tell you my choice!).
>
> Dan Masters,
> Alcoa, TN
>
> '71 TR6---------3000mile/year driver, fully restored
> '71 TR6---------undergoing full restoration and Ford 5.0 V8 insertion - see:
> http://www.sky.net/~boballen/mg/Masters/index.html
> '74 MGBGT---3000mile/year driver, original condition - slated for a Ford 5.0
> soon
> '68 MGBGT---organ donor for the '74
|