|
|
|
Continuing on the thread of the Rover PE166, I've been doing a boatload of research into these engines and I'm pretty confident they'd have a ton of potential. Head design looks great, and looks like it's got plenty of scope for improvement. There's a procedure for sleeving the block in the workshop manual which involves boring out the block to 84.4mm to fit the sleeve, so boring it out to 84.5mm for O-Series Turbo pistons (direct fit onto stock rods) or T16 turbo pistons (with Datsun L24 rods) should net 2.8l. Measuring the head I have suggests this should be fine with bore wall thickness. The crank, although it's 4-bearing, is quite frankly a massive unit of a thing. Massive webs and oversized bearings. Should be really rather stiff. Rod ratio is a little short, but that helps keep the height down so I might just be able to fit one in my Spitfire. It's a bit of a misconception that they're based on the Triumph OHV (or, rather, they are but share no parts or critical dimensions). The project started as an OHV head for the old pushrod engine, but quite quickly ran into the limitations of the old block and rotating assembly. They'd basically stretched the old OHV engine as far as it could be taken (massive long stroke, siamesed bores to squeeze as much wall thickness in as they could etc.). The block's a clean-sheet casting, as is the crank, and the only thing held over from the old engine was the camshaft being used as a jackshaft for the distributor. Once they decided to drive the distributor from the cam they deleted the jackshaft which was the last direct link to the OHV engine. They were intended to share a conrod with the Dolomite Sprint, but the needs of an I6 to have a stiff crank meant an increase in big-end bearing size so the only thing that's shared is the conrod length. As a link back to the 'engineering features' theme, despite being an OHC engine the PE166 is pretty much exactly the same height as the old Triumph OHV (meaning I might jsut possibly be able to fit on in my Spitfire!). There's something really curse word about them which the old boys at work go on about but I can't remember what it is. I worked on them from introduction until there were effectively none left. But they didn't die from mechanical failure, can't say I can remember an I6 ever having a catastrophic engine failure, even one of the "gutless wonder" 2.3s (though they did wear out a lot quicker than their bigger brothers (unsurprisingly) The engine was ONLY ever used in the SD1 and THEY died of terminal tinworm.
The only real problem affects tuning potential, not day-to-day reliability and driveability, and is the same problem as the Dolly Sprint has. Driving all 16 valves from 8 cam lobes (12 valves and 6 lobes in the PE166) means compromising the cam design, you can't alter the relative cam timing or duration between inlet and exhaust. Which isn't a biggie unless you are looking for spectacularly large outputs. A Sprint engine will not go much over 240bhp, but that's still nearly double it's production rating and by that point the block and several other important bits are also at (or possibly beyond) their reliable limits. You have to carefully cherry pick parts (and discard 9/10 blocks) to build a Sprint engine that will produce that sort of output without blowing up inside a couple of laps!
I'm not sanguine about the huge stiff crank either, As a long time tuner of older engines, I like a nice whippy crank, They seem to last longer and respond better to serious tuning (and hard use) But that is purely subjective, others may not agree with me!
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's possible that the engine has sludging issues anyway but finding out if it's that or poor maintenance is tricky. No-one taking a car in for warranty repair is going to own up to not doing oil changes! In those days, the BL warranty period was only 12 months or 12,000 miles whichever came first. So maybe 3 oil changes, the first of which would have been done at 1500 miles and was free. It's unlikely that a failure due to sludging would have occurred in that short space of time/mileage, even on a BL product!
But nearly EVERY manufacturer of that period in the late 70s/early 80s was having trouble with the new fangled OHC tech, remember the Ford "Pinto" engine? Launched in the MKIII Cortina in 72 or thereabouts they were still chewing cams in MKIVs in 1979! Or the first SOHC 1200 MKI Astra from 1980? I worked for Avis (we feature Vauxhall cars) in 1980. Avis bought 500 1200cc SOHC Astras straight off the line, within 3 months we had over 200 of them sat in the yard of Avis' main workshop facility in Langley, near Slough, waiting for cams the factory hadn't got (and a fix they hadn't worked out yet) This engine became the legendary "Family II" Vauxhall 8v motor in capacities from 1200 to 2000cc and once the cam woes were fixed, could do half a million miles on 1 engine, without stopping for breath! I knew several Cavalier III taxis that ALMOST made it to a million miles in the 9 years the local cab companies were allowed to keep them licenced, with nothing more than routine servicing (and a few clutches)
No doubt the Rover I6 would have been improved in similar fashion (not that I can recall anything LIKE that sort of endemic failures on the Rover lump) but it was never given the chance. It lived and died with the SD1.
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Air cooled VW beetle engine has two valves operated by one cam lobe, which means there are only 4 lobes on the camshaft Which is something that completely escaped me when I was younger, but I noticed whilst building the engine for the Fug with Tom
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes & the ones that still use a key are by far the best. This keyless ignition nonsense is nothing more than a gimmick & a pretty curse word one at that. It has got to rank as one of the worse ideas ever thought up. Utter utter tripe It was about as reliable as you'd expect from a Renault electrical system too. What makes you think it has a Renault electrical system? Or do you mean it's as bad as a Renault one?
|
|
Last Edit: Apr 1, 2022 21:04:38 GMT by Flingstam
1991 Toyota Deliboy (RWD JDM LCV) - Now SOLD 1998 Lexus LS400 (RWD EUR VIP) - Also GONE 1989 Volvo 740 GLE (RWD EUR GLE)
|
|
|
|
|
It was about as reliable as you'd expect from a Renault electrical system too. What makes you think it has a Renault electrical system? Or do you mean it's as bad as a Renault one? Because that was the first car that came out of the Nissan/Renault alliance/merger/whatever. And the keyless start had all the hallmarks of Renault electronics - random failures.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What makes you think it has a Renault electrical system? Or do you mean it's as bad as a Renault one? Because that was the first car that came out of the Nissan/Renault alliance/merger/whatever. And the keyless start had all the hallmarks of Renault electronics - random failures. I'm pretty sure that K12 development started before the Alliance was formed, and Renault didn't have that technology for a few years. The failures might therefore be coincidentally Renault-like.
|
|
1991 Toyota Deliboy (RWD JDM LCV) - Now SOLD 1998 Lexus LS400 (RWD EUR VIP) - Also GONE 1989 Volvo 740 GLE (RWD EUR GLE)
|
|
|
|
|
Air cooled VW beetle engine has two valves operated by one cam lobe, which means there are only 4 lobes on the camshaft Which is something that completely escaped me when I was younger, but I noticed whilst building the engine for the Fug with Tom This is both correct (4 cam lobes for 8 valves) and incorrect, as in this engine 2 lobes operate 4 inlet valves and 2 lobes operate 4 exhaust valves, you don't get the same lobe operating both inlet and exhaust valves as in the Sprint and PE166. This economy made possible by the boxer design and the VW's near unique firing order.
Steve
|
|
|
|
ChasR
RR Helper
motivation
Posts: 10,194
Club RR Member Number: 170
|
|
|
Air cooled VW beetle engine has two valves operated by one cam lobe, which means there are only 4 lobes on the camshaft Which is something that completely escaped me when I was younger, but I noticed whilst building the engine for the Fug with Tom This is both correct (4 cam lobes for 8 valves) and incorrect, as in this engine 2 lobes operate 4 inlet valves and 2 lobes operate 4 exhaust valves, you don't get the same lobe operating both inlet and exhaust valves as in the Sprint and PE166. This economy made possible by the boxer design and the VW's near unique firing order. Steve
Quite cool mind you to see two 4 lobes basically making an engine run . I never thought about that until now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's possible that the engine has sludging issues anyway but finding out if it's that or poor maintenance is tricky. No-one taking a car in for warranty repair is going to own up to not doing oil changes! In those days, the BL warranty period was only 12 months or 12,000 miles whichever came first. So maybe 3 oil changes, the first of which would have been done at 1500 miles and was free. It's unlikely that a failure due to sludging would have occurred in that short space of time/mileage, even on a BL product!
But nearly EVERY manufacturer of that period in the late 70s/early 80s was having trouble with the new fangled OHC tech, remember the Ford "Pinto" engine? Launched in the MKIII Cortina in 72 or thereabouts they were still chewing cams in MKIVs in 1979! Or the first SOHC 1200 MKI Astra from 1980? I worked for Avis (we feature Vauxhall cars) in 1980. Avis bought 500 1200cc SOHC Astras straight off the line, within 3 months we had over 200 of them sat in the yard of Avis' main workshop facility in Langley, near Slough, waiting for cams the factory hadn't got (and a fix they hadn't worked out yet) This engine became the legendary "Family II" Vauxhall 8v motor in capacities from 1200 to 2000cc and once the cam woes were fixed, could do half a million miles on 1 engine, without stopping for breath! I knew several Cavalier III taxis that ALMOST made it to a million miles in the 9 years the local cab companies were allowed to keep them licenced, with nothing more than routine servicing (and a few clutches)
No doubt the Rover I6 would have been improved in similar fashion (not that I can recall anything LIKE that sort of endemic failures on the Rover lump) but it was never given the chance. It lived and died with the SD1.
Steve
Don’t ever recall an RS2000 being associated with ‘chewing cams’ with a Pinto in , which is basically the same engine. In fact I don’t recall Pinto’s chewing cams at all
|
|
|
|
norm75
Part of things
Posts: 658
|
|
|
When I was a 7 year old my dad bought a 3 year old sd1 2600s Damn thing would hardly run on 6 cylinders and giving it some wellie resulted in a massive cloud of smoke left trailing behind the car. Only kept it a year as it was in and out of the dealers all the time. Shame really as it was a nice car otherwise. Remember having lots of different BL loan cars, some that I remember being a bright yellow Mini and a metallic purple Allegro. And I thought the rovers steering wheel was a funny shape!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In those days, the BL warranty period was only 12 months or 12,000 miles whichever came first. So maybe 3 oil changes, the first of which would have been done at 1500 miles and was free. It's unlikely that a failure due to sludging would have occurred in that short space of time/mileage, even on a BL product!
But nearly EVERY manufacturer of that period in the late 70s/early 80s was having trouble with the new fangled OHC tech, remember the Ford "Pinto" engine? Launched in the MKIII Cortina in 72 or thereabouts they were still chewing cams in MKIVs in 1979! Or the first SOHC 1200 MKI Astra from 1980? I worked for Avis (we feature Vauxhall cars) in 1980. Avis bought 500 1200cc SOHC Astras straight off the line, within 3 months we had over 200 of them sat in the yard of Avis' main workshop facility in Langley, near Slough, waiting for cams the factory hadn't got (and a fix they hadn't worked out yet) This engine became the legendary "Family II" Vauxhall 8v motor in capacities from 1200 to 2000cc and once the cam woes were fixed, could do half a million miles on 1 engine, without stopping for breath! I knew several Cavalier III taxis that ALMOST made it to a million miles in the 9 years the local cab companies were allowed to keep them licenced, with nothing more than routine servicing (and a few clutches)
No doubt the Rover I6 would have been improved in similar fashion (not that I can recall anything LIKE that sort of endemic failures on the Rover lump) but it was never given the chance. It lived and died with the SD1.
Steve
Don’t ever recall an RS2000 being associated with ‘chewing cams’ with a Pinto in , which is basically the same engine. In fact I don’t recall Pinto’s chewing cams at all OH PUHLEEEZE! The Pinto motor was as famous for dropping cams (bad lubrication, they changed the oiling tube 3 times) as the Pinto itself was for catching fire at the slightest tap on the back bumper. I changed hundreds of the things in the 70s, a few even under warranty. Got so I could do one in an hour!
One if the tricks to get round it, before Ford finally fixed it around 1980, was to fit roller rockers from Ford's Rallye Sport division, they were 3 times the price of the stock ones, but lasted 4 times as long. I'm not an expert on the RS 2000, but seeing as RS stands for Rallye Sport, maybe they had the roller rockers from the factory?
Steve
|
|
|
|
Rich
Club Retro Rides Member
Posts: 6,248
Club RR Member Number: 160
|
|
|
as any budget American compact was for catching fire at the slightest tap on the back bumper. Fixed that for you. Don’t even get me started on the Chevy C10 class action suit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lots of Mk1 Audi TT owners don't realise that there's a third sun visor just above the rear view mirror. It's intended to fill the gap between the other two visors in low sun, and almost works. My ‘96 A6 has one of these too. To say it almost works is a bit generous 🙂 Nick
|
|
1967 Triumph Vitesse convertible (old friend) 1996 Audi A6 2.5 TDI Avant (still durability testing) 1972 GT6 Mk3 (Restored after loong rest & getting the hang of being a car again)
|
|
|
|
|
Don’t ever recall an RS2000 being associated with ‘chewing cams’ with a Pinto in , which is basically the same engine. In fact I don’t recall Pinto’s chewing cams at all I do….. mainly on under-maintained example to be fair. The next wrinkle was that what looked like an easy job, wasn’t as the cam would only come out of the head backwards, so you with had to remove the head, the whole engine or chop a hole in the bulkhead. Nick
|
|
Last Edit: Apr 3, 2022 21:22:57 GMT by Rich
1967 Triumph Vitesse convertible (old friend) 1996 Audi A6 2.5 TDI Avant (still durability testing) 1972 GT6 Mk3 (Restored after loong rest & getting the hang of being a car again)
|
|
stealthstylz
Club Retro Rides Member
Posts: 14,840
Club RR Member Number: 174
|
|
|
They haven't made Pintos for ~30 years and we still get the odd one in at work with the cam chewed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think the key was regular servicing with good oils, I has 2.0is Sierra with a Pinto that still sounded perfect at 160,000 miles.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My next door neighbour in the 1980s had a Cortina 2.0 Ghia, with the most clattery, smoky Pinto lump imaginable. Yet, it would still always start, even with an almost flat battery in the depths of winter - then he'd set off with the exhaust billowing blue smoke up the road in the usually filthy (he rarely washed it), invariably untaxed green banger!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Apr 10, 2022 19:39:11 GMT
|
On the subject of cam chewing (both 2600 and Pinto), I stumbled upon this research paper from 1988 about cam and follower tribology of Pintos and the 2600. It goes into way more detail that I know how to interpret at the moment, but it's interesting stuff (if you're a geek like I am) Another clever engineering feature I've just come across. People talk about I6s as if they're some sort of perfect engine, but they suffer terribly from torsional vibrations with their long cranks. It's usually this more than anything else which limits their rpm. One of the main factors in the frequency of torsional vibrations is the rotational inertia of a crankshaft. When making their CR166 racer their engineers fitted two great slugs of mallory metal in each counterweight directly opposite the crank throw. This let them have more mass directly opposite the crank throw, meaning you can have lower rotational inertia while still offsetting the throw, and revving higher. Neat to see what happens with race cranks to make them rev as high as they do
|
|
|
|
rlw7w
Part of things
Posts: 30
|
|
Apr 11, 2022 19:24:19 GMT
|
My D2 A8 had this too, and pre-dates the TT by 4 years. My 2nd gen Honda Legend has one as well, and they started in 1990 😅 And my 1991 Toyota Soarer. It had some other goodies too for example ultra-sonic mirrors. You press a button and all the water drops on the external mirrors just fall off.
|
|
|
|