MG Sports Cars

I have done quite a few searches but don't seem to find the information I need. I am in the market for a 215 or Rover derivative for my MGB build but I am really not sure what to look for. Does anybody have a list of cars that had them and of engine types/numbers? I have found a few Range Rover V8s but they are fuel injection and I want carbs. Can they easily & inexpensively be converted to carb or should I just buy an old Olds/Buick engine? Will any of the Range Rover V8s work or are they different? Will they all bolt to a T5 5 speed Gearbox?

Sorry for all the questions - I don't want to buy the wrong thing! If there is a website I would appreciate direction.

Thanks!

You've come to the right place. Go to the Photo Galleries and the MG section. There you will find a list of cars with various engines with "how it was done" articles. Lots of info there.

One suggestion. Consider the '64 300 Buick engine and look at those cars. Overall they are 60 or 80 lbs heavier than the all aluminum BOPR V8s but can give you an easy 300hp and about 350 ft/lbs of torque. We have found the additional weight does not hurt the handling so there is really no down side.

JB

There are so many articles in our archive that touch on this so please keep searching and reading, but to get you started:

For the GM car models, this is a good place to start: [www.britishv8.org] - both Buick and Oldsmobile cars were available with either two or four barrel carburetors.

For Rover, ANY V8-powered car or utility vehicle from the late sixties through 2004 will be suitable, but NONE of them came from the factory with two or four barrel carbs/manifolds. If your Rover engine comes with fuel injection, you can either save it until a day when you want to upgrade OR sell off those extra parts. There's always been a good market for used Rover fuel injection parts!

Putting a four barrel intake manifold on a Rover engine is about as easy as anything gets in engine swap land. You can purchase suitable manifolds from Edelbrock or Offenhauser or others... or you can purchase a used original Buick manifold. I've sold them for as little as $25. I've seen other people sell them for as much as ~$300. The Buick manifold is actually a very good choice - it may not provide the very best high rpm performance but it's a good all-rounder and it has a nice low profile.

A T5 will bolt neatly to the bellhousing Buick used their 4-speed manual transmission option... but they're kinda hard to find. Most people seem to buy an aftermarket bellhousing from D&D Fabrications. You'll need a flywheel and pressure plate too, of course.

If you're not in a hurry and you keep your eyes open, all these parts pop up from time to time at reasonable prices.

You might also consider posting "wanted" ads in our classified section.

Here's an article about intake manifold options: [www.britishv8.org]

I agree with Jim B. on the 300 iron motor. Over the years I have had 215's,300's,340's and 350 Buicks in their original cars and Jeeps. Love them all but the 215(and 3.5 Rover) are a little small. The 3.4 V6 is about the same power stock. Now if you build a stroker using the 300 crank and 64 300 aluminum heads you can have the best of both worlds. The older oiling system is not as good as the newer crank driven gearotor design either. You can modify the front of crank for the newer pump and either use a 93-96 3.9-4.2 interim front cover or 86-88 Buick V6 front cover that has the distributor hole but uses the newer crank driven oil pump. Some have even welded up a hybrid front cover with older top and later bottom. Be careful on the T5. The 92 and older V6 input shafts are about a 1/2" too long for the V8 bell and need to be swapped for a V8 one,trimmed down on tip and splines or use a 1/2" spacer between the tranny and bell. NWC is fine if you use the right lube. Modern Driveline recommends 50wt motor oil,I have used GM Synchromesh and mixed 2Qts 70wt synthetic gear oil with 1 Qt Dexron ATF also. The World Class has needle bearings and requires ATF. You can search here and MGExperience board on gear ratios,rear ratio's etc. Good luck on your parts search.

[www.britishv8.org]



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 11/13/2011 09:36PM by mgb260.

I was kind of stuck on the aluminum block V8 because, from what I have read, the later RB shells do not require modifications to fit them. Is this also true with the 300 Buick engine? I really want to avoid cutting and welding if possible.

I think it is about 1" wider and taller. There are spacer plates to enable use of 215 intakes. Must be port matched. Use Glen Towery's low AC engine mounts to set back as low as possible. Might need a MGC or RV8 hood lump. There are a few on this site in the picture gallery. Or find a 4.0 or 4.6 Rover crossbolt block and build like the link for 4.8 cu in displacement,same external dimensions as 215Buick/3.5Rover. Here are some examples of 300V8,one with stock hood:



[www.britishv8.org]


[www.britishv8.org]


[www.britishv8.org]

300V8 found in 64-67 Buicks,looks just like 215 except iron(64 had aluminum heads),215 found in 61-63 Buick Special,Pontiac Tempest,Olds Cutlass. Olds have angled valve covers,extra bolt hole per cylinder for turbo, Buick and Pontiac valve covers are straight up like Rover.



Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 11/14/2011 12:05AM by mgb260.

Thanks for posting that link Jim, I had forgotten about Don Bode's car. I wonder what he did to get the engine that low?

JB

I'm not sure, but am thinking with a shorter rubber mount pad and maybe trimming the front of the oil pan(or Ford type crossmember mod), then using Glen's lowest mounts?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/14/2011 10:54PM by mgb260.

Possibly. I think he would have had to lower the rack at least. I'm not really sure, but that was the big thing with the 340 and the 455 installs. The pan in front is generally within 1/4" of the crank throws, and I'm not sure you can move the rack down enough that trimming the x-member would make any difference.

JB

Jim B, I know how Don got his 300 so low. His car is a 68. He installed a 77(rubber bumper crossmember) which gave him at least another inch to drop the motor.

Wow. So then on a RB car the 300 goes in without hitting the hood?

JB

Look at the engine mounts. He has lowered them down considerably from the stock location. Maybe that in combination with the rubber bumper cross member made it work?

[www.britishv8.org]

Good eye Chris! The mounts look about 2" lower than the stock mounts. So, lower mounts and RB crossmember. Jim, I read the thread on the Buick board where Eric (long rod) was arguing over the Hot Rod build. I thought about using the Supercharged V6 pistons and 350 capscrew rods a while back. I have a friend that happens to have a 65 300 also. I think with the right combo of parts the stroker mod is the way to go. I'd be tempted to use a newer crossbolted Rover block if you can't find a 300 iron block.

Makes some sense, depending on which stroker you are talking about, and the combination of parts will change accordingly. The nice thing about the 300 based stroker is that you can retain the 300 rods using Olds pistons which leaves you with a decent rod ratio and about 350 ci. The 350 rods would be a bit long I imagine, though with about 5/8" of compression height to play with you might find something. Sounds like TA has about 25 sets of heads for shipment early next year and with those that would be a very potent engine, and no need to find a '64 so a much wider selection of blocks.

JB

Jim, 350 rods would be just right with the 3800 Series II Supercharged piston. Eric in the thread made sense even though he was a little confrontational. Nothing wrong with the Hot Rod stroker with stock rods and Olds pistons either. I also like the stud mount Chevy rocker idea. Here is the link for others interested in the 300 stroker idea.

[70.86.163.37]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/15/2011 11:56PM by mgb260.

I just don't get it about the chevy rocker conversion. Here they were adding bars to the top using extended nuts and u-bolts and stuff like that to try to make them as stable as a rocker shaft, so to me it seems like going in the wrong direction. You've already got this massive shaft mounted on sturdy pedestals, what is wrong with that? Fancy stuff like adjustable rockers, needle bearings and stouter pedestals and shaft end supports are available too if you need them. It just seems to me that the chevy conversion is not going to be anywhere near as rigid. There's no way that a 3/8" stud is going to flex less than a 3/4" diameter shaft. I think they are just doing it to be like a chevy, or to change it because someone wanting to sell something said it was better without having any reason other than his profit motive. Just being chevy does not mean better. In many cases it means worse.

JB

I think you guys might have just blown Rick's mind with information overload! ;)

I'd bet on it!

Rick, have you driven any MGB V8s yet? If not, that's a great place to start. It will help you define what you want/need as an end product. Can we help arrange that? Where are you physically located? If you can better describe your project goals, we can give you better grounded advice.

Hi Jim,
Thanks for the link to the 300 build.
Some pretty interesting info there.
It's sad however that the flavor of that site is so caustic.
They blew off some very respectable contributors and really did nothing to further their cause.
I think I'll just stay over here with people who have a little more substance.
Cheers
Fred