For those interested in old cars.

[Rugd1022]

I never had any real trouble from the four Rover V8s I owned, I know that one of them was completely rebuilt just before I bought it but can't vouch for the other three. Very smooth with bags of go, but by Jimminy they could get a tad warm in heavy traffic.

 

Interesting that someone mentioned how V6s can be troublesome earlier - one of the '90s Maseratis I've got an eye on at the moment has the quadcam, 24 valve twin turbo V6 in which has its origins in a much earlier engine, is considered to be about the most bullet proof example in the Maserati range. It's also interesting that the optional auto 'box that was mated to it was considered just as good as the manual in the period road test reviews. Why would anyone want an auto 'box in a Maser...? A good question but quite a few did at the time.

[Oldddudders]

Wasn't the Vitesse a bit nose-heavy due to the engine, thus losing some of the joy of the base model Herald, much lauded for its chassis in the day?

[Oldddudders]

28 minutes ago, Rugd1022 said:

Why would anyone want an auto 'box in a Maser...? A good question but quite a few did at the time.

I think it depends upon the real-world driving of the owner. Anyone who bought one to show off round town would soon bore of changing gear for every set of lights, just as taxi-drivers do. OTOH if you live in deep country then changing down twice for that bend is part of the fun. And of course modern auto boxes tend to have some degree of manual over-ride, offering something like the best of both worlds. 

[Kickstart]

50 minutes ago, Rugd1022 said:

 

Interesting that someone mentioned how V6s can be troublesome earlier - one of the '90s Maseratis I've got an eye on at the moment has the quadcam, 24 valve twin turbo V6 in which has its origins in a much earlier engine, is considered to be about the most bullet proof example in the Maserati range. It's also interesting that the optional auto 'box that was mated to it was considered just as good as the manual in the period road test reviews. Why would anyone want an auto 'box in a Maser...? A good question but quite a few did at the time.

We have a Maserati 222SE, which uses the older 18 valve version of that engine. Engine wise it isn't really troublesome . The 24 valve is little different. The head gasket scan weap slightly, but not a major issue (they still do their job to the cylinders). Cam belt should be changed at 2 years / 24k, and the cam belt drives the water pump, so a seized pump can instantly do serious damage. The 24 valve has an extra headache with a pair of cam chains. Belt at the front of the engine drives one cam on each bank, chain drives the 2nd cam from the first. Chains were mentioned to be changed at every other belt, but that was meant to be an engine out or heads off job due to clearance. Tightening the power steering pump belt is a ‘mare of a job!

 

The auto box works rather well on a turbo. With no need to back off when changing gear any turbo lag on changing gear is eliminated. One other thing that was apparently an issue with the closely related v8 was wear to the crank on the manual from people starting them with the clutch depressed; this put a load on the crank before there was any oil pressure to cope with it. The auto box eliminated this issue.

 

Not sure if the car you are thinking of is a Ghibli, QP4 or an older car, but if an older one beware of the fuse box. These use circuits printed on 4 acetate sheets inside and are renowned for issues.

 

All the best

 

Katy

[PatB]

41 minutes ago, Oldddudders said:

Wasn't the Vitesse a bit nose-heavy due to the engine, thus losing some of the joy of the base model Herald, much lauded for its chassis in the day?

I've always been under the impression that the extra power available to induce a degree of oversteer compensated for any noseweight induced understeer. Until the driver overdoes it, of course, at which point there's a whole lot more energy floating around when it all goes to custard. 

 

Seriously though, whilst I don't have any numbers to back it up, I've always thought the Triumph engines were relatively light for all iron, pushrod units. Having manhandled assorted Herald/Spitfire units, they always felt like less of a chore than their competitor A-Series. The six that I was in process of transplanting into my Spit' when life intervened also felt no heavier than a B-Series 4 pot. Which, admittedly, is not a high bar to clear. When extracting the B from my mother's Morris Oxford our efforts were somewhat hampered by the small system of moons which insisted on orbiting its massive iron bulk. 

[Phil Traxson]

19 hours ago, MJI said:

What is surprising is the amount of 6 cylinder engines and how many are on a low state of tune.

 

And how long some old ones lasted (eg Ford Cologne)

And, for long lasting, no one has yet mentioned the old BMC inline 6, the basics of which which lasted from the old long nosed RWD Police  Wolseleys through to the FWD Princess 2200. I had one of the Princesses, twin carbs, heavy engine, not particularly quick off the mark, but soooo smooth.  

Edited October 20, 2020 by Phil Traxson

[PhilJ W]

2 hours ago, MJI said:

The Daimler V8 was basically a Triumph engine wasn't it?

 

Just checked it was based on the bike heads

The Daimler V8's were nothing to do with Triumph. Daimler made two V8 engines from the late 50's, 2.6 and 4.6 litres. Both were all aluminium with hemispherical combustion chambers. The smaller engine was put in the Dart sports car and the larger engine in the luxury cars. When Daimler took over Jaguar replacing the XK engine with the Daimler duo was considered but it was realised that Daimler would not be able to produce the number required. They ended up only putting the small V8 in a Mk II bodyshell as the Daimler 260. All subsequent Daimler models were rebadged Jags with extra trim and for limousines (and hearses) a stretched Mk X. Until the Rover/Buick engine became available and in some quantity the smaller Daimler engine was very popular with British hot rodders. This was because it quite closely resembled the American Dodge 'hemi', a popular choice of American hot rodders.

[alastairq]

I think the 'Triumph' link has arisen because I believe [without checking] the designer of the Daimler V8 was the same designer for the Triumph  Twin? {Edward Turner?]....who based the combustion chamber design on that which he developed for the Triumph motorcycle engine.

There is also another [vague] Triumph link to Daimler..in that the chassis used for the  DAimler Dart / SP250 sports car was the item used in the Triumph TR [2, 3?] sports car range.

Possibly also there is some confusion because of Triumph's own V8, used in the Stag...which was rumoured to be two Triumph fours glued together?

 

The Daimler V8 was prominent in drag racing, being used in Tony Densham's ''Commuter'' slingshot..the first 'British' V8 dragster.

 

Of all the 4 pots I have messed with, the best for power-to-weight ratio I feel was/is that designed by Skoda for their rear engined cars?  Not as complex [or in need of technology to make reliable?] as the Imp engine....yet, in 1300cc, all ally form [from the mid 1980's...the  136 engine ], lasted well into the VAG era [since VAG engineers had not got anything like it for weight and power output.]....finishing up as the 1.4 litre used in the earlier Fabia. Such a lightweight engine when compared to the boat anchors in the VAG range at the time....in front wheel drive configuration, it helped make a nicely steering small car, with so little weight to hurl into into the hedges with overt understeer...the  bane of having heavy engines up front in FWD form? [As per the first Ford Fiesta Diesels, etc?]

Purely my personal experience and impressions, .....

[PhilJ W]

4 minutes ago, alastairq said:

I think the 'Triumph' link has arisen because I believe [without checking] the designer of the Daimler V8 was the same designer for the Triumph  Twin? {Edward Turner?]....who based the combustion chamber design on that which he developed for the Triumph motorcycle engine.

There is also another [vague] Triumph link to Daimler..in that the chassis used for the  DAimler Dart / SP250 sports car was the item used in the Triumph TR [2, 3?] sports car range.

Possibly also there is some confusion because of Triumph's own V8, used in the Stag...which was rumoured to be two Triumph fours glued together?

 

The Daimler V8 was prominent in drag racing, being used in Tony Densham's ''Commuter'' slingshot..the first 'British' V8 dragster.

 

 

Thanks for the reminder that the Dart used the TR3 chassis. IIRC it also had the Moss gearbox as used in the Morgan. 

[johnlambert]

1 hour ago, Phil Traxson said:

And, for long lasting, no one has yet mentioned the old BMC inline 6, the basics of which which lasted from the old long nosed RWD Police  Wolseleys through to the FWD Princess 2200. I had one of the Princesses, twin carbs, heavy engine, not particularly quick off the mark, but soooo smooth.  

I don't think the Wolseley straight six of the police cars (the 6/80 or something like that) had anything to do with the motor fitted to the Landcrab and Wedge Princess other than the "W" badge.  The old OHC engine was copied from Hispano-Suiza aero engines that Wolseley manufactured during the First World War; there were fours and sixes that also found their way into Morrises and MGs as all three were "Nuffield Group" companies.  They had a gear driven camshaft with a vertical shaft and helical gears to transmit motion between crank and cams; some also had the dynamo in unit with the vertical shaft (causing problems when the oil seal failed and dumped oil in the dynamo).  I think the engines had a reputation as being a bit demanding of maintenance, which is cited as one of the reasons for the apparently retrograde step of adopting overhead valves actuated by pushrods for the replacement C-series six-cylinder engine.

 

The OHC engine fitted to the Landcrab Wolseley Six and Austin/Morris variants, was designed for transverse installation, so it had siamesed bores to keep the block short and a chain driven overhead camshaft; I think it was the same family as the E-series four cylinder engines of 1,500 and 1,750cc (roughly) fitted to Allegros and Maxis.

[alastairq]

I seem to recall, the old C series BMC motor was primarily a lorry engine? Certainly Austin Healey liked it in their lorries...

Wolseley offered 1100cc & 1300cc sixes before the Wawer....

[johnlambert]

2 hours ago, Rugd1022 said:

I never had any real trouble from the four Rover V8s I owned, I know that one of them was completely rebuilt just before I bought it but can't vouch for the other three. Very smooth with bags of go, but by Jimminy they could get a tad warm in heavy traffic.

 

Interesting that someone mentioned how V6s can be troublesome earlier - one of the '90s Maseratis I've got an eye on at the moment has the quadcam, 24 valve twin turbo V6 in which has its origins in a much earlier engine, is considered to be about the most bullet proof example in the Maserati range. It's also interesting that the optional auto 'box that was mated to it was considered just as good as the manual in the period road test reviews. Why would anyone want an auto 'box in a Maser...? A good question but quite a few did at the time.

Having tried the clutch in a Maserati Biturbo I can say that it was probably the heaviest pedal I've ever pushed, that alone might be justification for ticking the box for automatic transmission.

 

It's interesting to hear @Kickstart comment on living with a Biturbo (a car I'd like but whose running costs are beyond my means).  And my general observation is that automatic transmission is not necessarily an inhibitor of performance or driving enjoyment; it's quite often easier to be in the right tear with an automatic, without having to take your hands off the steering wheel, it is possible to cover the brakes with your left foot (and, no, that doesn't mean you'll end up headbutting the windscreen the left foot can work the brakes perfectly well) and most gearboxes allow you to hold a lower gear to stop the transmission hunting or changing up when you don't want it to.

[alastairq]

1 hour ago, PhilJ W said:

IRC it also had the Moss gearbox as used in the Morgan. 

 I'm not sure it was the 'same' box { My old Morgan 4/4 Series 1 had a Moss box....the gate was back to front, very annoying if not concentrating]...but certainly Jagwar also used Moss boxes.... 

Morgan used the Moss box in a remote  location for better weight distribution..the box being close to one's thighs...There was a shaft from the clutch to the box. All went very modern once Ford engines & boxes were used...

[Oldddudders]

14 minutes ago, alastairq said:

I seem to recall, the old C series BMC motor was primarily a lorry engine? Certainly Austin Healey liked it in their lorries...

Presumably the same lump went into the MGC. Motor Sport asked "When is a sportscar not a sportscar? When it's an MGC!"

[alastairq]

5 minutes ago, Oldddudders said:

Presumably the same lump went into the MGC. Motor Sport asked "When is a sportscar not a sportscar? When it's an MGC!"

 

Yes, it did....resulting in a front suspension re-design [to torsion bars] which , in the opinion of a chum who is an MGB aficionado [he's has had an awful lot of them!!]  ...is a vast improvement over the original suspension design...he often considers using the front off a MGC for one of his B's.....

 

As an aside, and harking back to the Ford inline six [170, 200, & 250 CI engines from the USA].... I have hear of at least two MGC owners in the  US who..when presented with a stuffed BMC C series motor, have , or are fitting, a Ford 200 inline 6 in its place. This engine is lighter than the C-series by a good way....and with modeest [street] tuning is more powerful....

Nobody has yet mentioned the Nissan Datsun 6 cylinder Z engines?  The 240Z really was what the  MGC and AH 3000 should have evolved into....

[Hobby]

48 minutes ago, johnlambert said:

I don't think the Wolseley straight six of the police cars (the 6/80 or something like that) had anything to do with the motor fitted to the Landcrab and Wedge Princess other than the "W" badge.

 

The OHC engine fitted to the Landcrab Wolseley Six and Austin/Morris variants, was designed for transverse installation, so it had siamesed bores to keep the block short and a chain driven overhead camshaft; I think it was the same family as the E-series four cylinder engines of 1,500 and 1,750cc (roughly) fitted to Allegros and Maxis.

 

Quite right, the 4 and 6 cylinder engines for the Landcrab, Maxi, Princess and others was a new design and were all designated as the E series as far as I was aware.

[Kickstart]

32 minutes ago, johnlambert said:

Having tried the clutch in a Maserati Biturbo I can say that it was probably the heaviest pedal I've ever pushed, that alone might be justification for ticking the box for automatic transmission.

 

It's interesting to hear @Kickstart comment on living with a Biturbo (a car I'd like but whose running costs are beyond my means).  And my general observation is that automatic transmission is not necessarily an inhibitor of performance or driving enjoyment; it's quite often easier to be in the right tear with an automatic, without having to take your hands off the steering wheel, it is possible to cover the brakes with your left foot (and, no, that doesn't mean you'll end up headbutting the windscreen the left foot can work the brakes perfectly well) and most gearboxes allow you to hold a lower gear to stop the transmission hunting or changing up when you don't want it to.

The automatic has quite a heavy throttle! To be honest though with cars in general, clutch effort can vary massively with the age of the clutch (and where wear has occurred).

 

I actually far prefer manual gearboxes with a clutch pedal, but on the Maserati it works well at avoiding lag. Holding a lower gear (auto or manual) doesn’t work that well to avoid lag as it isn’t so much rpm dependent. Rather needs the turbo to spin up, and in a lower gear you are using less throttle, so less air flow to keep the turbo spinning.

 

Biturbo running costs were actually not that bad , beyond petrol consumption. Issue now appears to be lack of spares, hence prices rocketing of those that are available. Strangely when Ferrari first took over Maserati the spares prices dropped ; almost as though Ferrari were embarrassed that Maserati could charge more for spares. Quite a few bits are nabbed from other cars; years ago we needed a fog light which turned out to be from the late Lancaster Thema, and they were £108 from Maserati and £38 from Lancia.

 

If you do buy a Biturbo (or the later coupes after they stopped calling them that) one trick they have up their sleeves is that the relays do not have the common pin outs! The positions of the pins are the same but they do different things, and using a common relay can have fairly disastrous results.

 

All the best

 

Katy

[alastairq]

35 minutes ago, Hobby said:

 

Quite right, the 4 and 6 cylinder engines for the Landcrab, Maxi, Princess and others was a new design and were all designated as the E series as far as I was aware.

 O series [too] ....

[Enterprisingwestern]

4 hours ago, APOLLO said:

 

Not quite the full story, 

 

https://www.aronline.co.uk/engines/engines-rover-v8/

 

I don't doubt the Daimler V8 was "better" - no experience of it, but I have owned and run my 1973 Rover 3.5 P5B (Post War 5th car produced and the B of course stands for Buick) saloon since buying her in 1982. Quite simply superb (though thirsty) engine. Gave her a run yesterday in fact.

 

Brit15

 

 

 

I understood the P stood for project?

 

Mike.

[johnlambert]

1 hour ago, Oldddudders said:

Presumably the same lump went into the MGC. Motor Sport asked "When is a sportscar not a sportscar? When it's an MGC!"

Not quite, the MGC and Austin 3-litre used a seven bearing update of the C-series that managed not to be much (if any) of an improvement over its predecessor by all accounts.  

 

As for the virtues or otherwise of the MGC, one thing it isn't (despite how it may feel) is nose heavy.  contemporary road tests quoted the front/rear weight distribution as 51/49 or something like that and part of the problem with the initial batch of road test cars was that they went to the press with the tyre pressures incorrectly set.

[Hobby]

47 minutes ago, alastairq said:

 O series [too] ....

 

The O was a development of the B, wheras the E was a new engine.

 

https://www.aronline.co.uk/engines/o-series/

https://www.aronline.co.uk/engines/engines-e-series/

[steve1]

4 hours ago, Oldddudders said:

Wasn't the Vitesse a bit nose-heavy due to the engine, thus losing some of the joy of the base model Herald, much lauded for its chassis in the day?

 

Nothing wrong with handling after changing the rear lever arms to Spax adjustables.

 

It was still a light car. I know this as I ran over my own foot whilst push starting it...

 

steve

[duncan]

The Triumph straight 6 engine weighs less than the old 4 pot, not really surprising as the 4 is an old wet liner.  The 6 is like a turbine, just keeps spinning up, lovely, mated to a TR6.

[Hobby]

1 hour ago, Enterprisingwestern said:

 

I understood the P stood for project?

 

Mike.

 

Quite probably, the Rover P1 and 2 were both pre war!

[APOLLO]

P = Grey area, I have read it stood for post war in several books though.

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/motoring/features/rover-p4-5531385.html

 

Brit15