Engine and Transmission Tech

tips, technology, tools and techniques related to vehicle driveline components

Go to Thread: PreviousNext
Go to: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicLog In
Goto Page: 123Next
Current Page: 1 of 3


GT8MX
Bill Wessale
Houston
(43 posts)

Registered:
01/10/2014 11:28AM

Main British Car:
1968 Spitfire GT6 BOP 215 / Rover of some lineage

Low profile oil pan for Rover V8
Posted by: GT8MX
Date: January 14, 2015 05:24PM

I need a low profile oil pan for a Rover 4.6 V8. I searched the drivetrain forum, and found some discussions around dry sumps, which would be fun, but they appear to cost more than my engine. I am trying to make the engine as low as possible, but I had positioned the engine mounts and tranny with a BOP 215, and now the Rover V8 oil pan is significantly deeper.

I read the www.seight.com/baffle.html article and now I don't want to just shorten the Rover pan, which was my first instinct. I plan to drive mainly on the street. but I do intend to take the car to a local road course for track days.

Any leads?

Thanks,

Bill


Moderator
Curtis Jacobson
Portland Oregon
(4411 posts)

Registered:
10/12/2007 02:16AM

Main British Car:
71 MGBGT, Buick 215

authors avatar
Re: Low profile oil pan for Rover V8
Posted by: Moderator
Date: January 14, 2015 06:07PM

I presume you're using the 4.0/4.6 style timing cover, and that's why you don't want to use your Buick 215 pan and pick-up (with some sort of baffle added)?

This old article might possibly help: BOPR Oil Pan Options (e.g. Buick V6 pick-up?)


GT8MX
Bill Wessale
Houston
(43 posts)

Registered:
01/10/2014 11:28AM

Main British Car:
1968 Spitfire GT6 BOP 215 / Rover of some lineage

Re: Low profile oil pan for Rover V8
Posted by: GT8MX
Date: January 14, 2015 10:00PM

Curtis:

I thought it might be important to have a cast pan (like the 4.6 OEM pan) to act as a girdle around the mains. I figured the reason Rover converted to a cast pan instead of the BOP sheet metal pan was for rigidity to aid longevity of the mains.

Plus I like the looks of the Rover pan, except for how much hangs down exposed below the frame.

Bill


mstemp
Mike Stemp
Calgary, Canada
(197 posts)

Registered:
11/25/2009 07:18AM

Main British Car:
1980 MGB Rover 4.6L

Re: Low profile oil pan for Rover V8
Posted by: mstemp
Date: January 14, 2015 10:56PM

Bill,

Most of us with 4.6L changed over to Buick timing cover and Rover SD1 pans. No clearance issues then on a RB car. As for rigidity, not sure there is any issue with older steel pans. Main benifit from cast pan is superior sealing. Rights stuff gasket sealer can give the similar results.


GT8MX
Bill Wessale
Houston
(43 posts)

Registered:
01/10/2014 11:28AM

Main British Car:
1968 Spitfire GT6 BOP 215 / Rover of some lineage

Re: Low profile oil pan for Rover V8
Posted by: GT8MX
Date: January 16, 2015 04:42PM

Mike:

I'm not familiar with the Rover SD1 pan. Is it interchangeable with the BOP 215 pan, so that i can use it, or do I need to find an SD1 pan?

Thanks,

Bill


afirover
Gary Grey

(5 posts)

Registered:
01/14/2015 06:49PM

Main British Car:


Re: Low profile oil pan for Rover V8
Posted by: afirover
Date: January 16, 2015 04:45PM

I know you said you don't want dry sump but I bought a pan from A.R.E a very nice cast alum low profile intended for d/s

[www.drysump.com]

its a beast of a Pan fyi


mstemp
Mike Stemp
Calgary, Canada
(197 posts)

Registered:
11/25/2009 07:18AM

Main British Car:
1980 MGB Rover 4.6L

Re: Low profile oil pan for Rover V8
Posted by: mstemp
Date: January 16, 2015 06:30PM

Bill,

Actually I may have used a LR pan, not sure. The SD1 pan is from 1980 Rover 3500 car. May be hard to find but the LR pans from a 3.5 or 3.9L should also work. BOP pans may also be hard to find today so look for LR. What ever you use you will need the oil pickup tube and the a different timing cover. Have you looked at Jim Stuart's car? He was able to get the cast LR pan to fit in his 4.0 conversion, should be the same as your 4.6.

[www.britishv8.org]



GT8MX
Bill Wessale
Houston
(43 posts)

Registered:
01/10/2014 11:28AM

Main British Car:
1968 Spitfire GT6 BOP 215 / Rover of some lineage

Re: Low profile oil pan for Rover V8
Posted by: GT8MX
Date: January 16, 2015 08:42PM

Gary:

I would like to *have* a dry sump setup, but I don't want to *pay* for a dry-sump setup. :)

I looked at the A.R.E link you supplied. I assume you have dry sump setup if you can use that pan? If so, did you invest less than $1000 for the pan, pump(s) and tank?

Thanks,

Bill


GT8MX
Bill Wessale
Houston
(43 posts)

Registered:
01/10/2014 11:28AM

Main British Car:
1968 Spitfire GT6 BOP 215 / Rover of some lineage

Re: Low profile oil pan for Rover V8
Posted by: GT8MX
Date: January 16, 2015 08:50PM

Mike:

I have a pan and timing cover from the BOP 215 that I had bought (in pieces) to put in before I decided to switch to the Rover 4.6 in search of 300 HP. I'm not sure about the pickup tube....I'll have to dig through my tubs of parts.

In regard to Jim Stuart's car, I looked at what's posted under "Galleries", but I have not seen it in person and I could not find pictures of the oil pan arrangement. It may not apply anyway since I have a GT6, not an MGB, and I don't know if their frames are similar.

The BOP 215 pan fits fine, since I sized the engine mounts for the BOP 215, so if I can get by using the BOP 215 oil pan and timing cover with the Rover 4.6, I'm in good shape.

Thanks,

Bill


mstemp
Mike Stemp
Calgary, Canada
(197 posts)

Registered:
11/25/2009 07:18AM

Main British Car:
1980 MGB Rover 4.6L

Re: Low profile oil pan for Rover V8
Posted by: mstemp
Date: January 17, 2015 09:46AM

Bill,

No idea you were doing a GT6.
BOP should work but you need the pickup, oil pump, pump drive via cam change, distributor etc.


GT8MX
Bill Wessale
Houston
(43 posts)

Registered:
01/10/2014 11:28AM

Main British Car:
1968 Spitfire GT6 BOP 215 / Rover of some lineage

Re: Low profile oil pan for Rover V8
Posted by: GT8MX
Date: January 17, 2015 03:30PM

Mike:

Yikes...that's a lot of changes just to effectively raise the oil pan 2"....I'll have to take the current Rover pan off and explore my options. I would like to make as few changes as possible (for durability).

Stand by...

Bill


afirover
Gary Grey

(5 posts)

Registered:
01/14/2015 06:49PM

Main British Car:


Re: Low profile oil pan for Rover V8
Posted by: afirover
Date: January 17, 2015 05:27PM

Bill
I have less than $1000 in the set up
the pan was 500 bucks ish I had them bring it to me at PRI show last year :-)
the pump was 250 ish (ebay) patterson unit
I bought the tank on ebay 80 bucks ish
the hoses I will have made
the mount and drive I will make work .


ptschram
PT Schram
Churubusco, IN
(6 posts)

Registered:
11/24/2013 05:32AM

Main British Car:
'67 through 2001 Land Rovers.

Re: Low profile oil pan for Rover V8
Posted by: ptschram
Date: January 18, 2015 12:56PM

Who will make the mount and drive work???

LOL


GT8MX
Bill Wessale
Houston
(43 posts)

Registered:
01/10/2014 11:28AM

Main British Car:
1968 Spitfire GT6 BOP 215 / Rover of some lineage

Re: Low profile oil pan for Rover V8
Posted by: GT8MX
Date: January 21, 2015 09:45PM

I removed the RR cast oil pan and checked the fitment problems that would occur if I used a BOP 3.5L (215 ci) oil pan that I have instead. The RR cast pan is a cast rigid piece. The BOP pan is thin sheet metal. The oil pan mounting bolt holes seem to line up except at the timing cover. The RR cast pan is 21" from the holes for the timing cover studs to the holes for the bolts at the back (center to center), but the BOP pan is only 20". The BOP pan is not long enough to reach the RR timing cover mounting studs. (You probably knew that.)

I have a BOP timing cover, and maybe that would solve the BOP oil pan fitment problem, but then: the RR oil pickup would be partially covered by the BOP pan, and I don't even see how the pickup could be routed differently; using the BOP timing cover changes the oil pump (does the BOP pump even deliver enough capacity?); the BOP timing cover has a distributor drive that isn't needed and it might get in the way of the RR serpentine system; the RR timing cover has crank timing and oil pressure sensors wiring that are not provided for on the BOP timing cover, and since I am going to use Megasquirt EFI, I need to maintain the crank sensor.

Overall, switching the RR 4.6 over to the BOP oil pan seems like a lot of bother.

Maybe an SD1 oil pan and timing cover has fewer of these problems?

I can't run with the RR cast oil pan since I would have about 1" ground clearance at the bottom of the oil pan, but it's beginning to seem like $1000 for dry sump is reasonable.

Ulp....


mstemp
Mike Stemp
Calgary, Canada
(197 posts)

Registered:
11/25/2009 07:18AM

Main British Car:
1980 MGB Rover 4.6L

Re: Low profile oil pan for Rover V8
Posted by: mstemp
Date: January 22, 2015 09:29AM

Bill,

You would change the entire front end of the motor! Timing cover, oil pump, pick up, pan, belt system, crank damper, spacer for damper and camshaft etc. The cam is not really suited to the light weight car anyways. For MS you could maybe use the trigger wheel that is in the flywheel but you likely have a drive plate since it was automatic. The distributor could then be modified so you could run sequential injection if you have a newer MS system, look at Curtis's car on this site. Sounds like you have 90% of the parts already, just a new cam. As for the oil pump yes it will handle the 4.6 also you can get different gears etc if you want higher flow or pressure. Jim B can help you on this.



BlownMGB-V8
Jim Blackwood
9406 Gunpowder Rd., Florence, KY 41042
(5812 posts)

Registered:
10/23/2007 12:59PM

Main British Car:
1971 MGB Blown,Injected,Intercooled Buick 340/AA80E/JagIRS

authors avatar
Re: Low profile oil pan for Rover V8
Posted by: BlownMGB-V8
Date: January 22, 2015 09:54AM

I could NOT recommend longer gears in the Buick style oil pump. This has been clearly demonstrated to be a poor band-aid for improper engine setup and is now considered a "Very Bad Idea" in particular because it often does not work, and destroys distributor gears in the bargain.

Use the stock length gears, they are more than adequate. Enlarge the oil pickup and galley to 5/8" (use a piloted drill). Set oil pump gear end clearance to the absolute minimum (the housing will expand more than the gears and give additional running clearance). Use the "booster plate" to stabilize the housing and give a new wear surface. Port the plate, housing, and turns in the oil passages to ease the corners and bends. Set bearing clearances to the minimums, usually .0015". Make sure the lifter fit is close. Consider restricting oil flow to the top end (pushrod oiling is a good choice but make sure the rocker shafts get oil as that is where the wear occurs). Fit an uprated pressure relief spring and/or adjustable cap. Running pressure should hit 10lbs/1000rpm and 5-15psi at idle.

Jim


MGBV8
Carl Floyd
Kingsport, TN
(3749 posts)

Registered:
10/23/2007 11:32PM

Main British Car:
79 MGB, Buick 215

authors avatar
Re: Low profile oil pan for Rover V8
Posted by: MGBV8
Date: January 22, 2015 11:16AM

I was under the impression that, at some point, Rover improved the oiling for these engines.


mgb260
Jim Nichols
Sequim,WA
(1978 posts)

Registered:
02/29/2008 08:29PM

Main British Car:
1973 MGB roadster 260 Ford V8

Re: Low profile oil pan for Rover V8
Posted by: mgb260
Date: January 22, 2015 11:36AM

They went to the crank driven Gerotor type oil pump but didn't do the block mods or larger pickup Jim suggests.


GT8MX
Bill Wessale
Houston
(43 posts)

Registered:
01/10/2014 11:28AM

Main British Car:
1968 Spitfire GT6 BOP 215 / Rover of some lineage

Re: Low profile oil pan for Rover V8
Posted by: GT8MX
Date: January 22, 2015 10:36PM

Well I must say that if I were a "real" hotrodder, I would want to modify my Rover 4.6L as y'all have detailed using the pieces from my BOP 215 so that the Rover 4.6 would have the shallower oil pan I need, but the side effects of using the BOP 215 oil pan seem to ripple too much into pickups, oil pumps, distributors (or not)...

So I am going to wimp out and take Gary's advice and go the dry sump route using the ARE pan. Yes, I will end up spending nearly $1000, but I hope to avoid several months of engine fiddling, which is what I had originally intended by installing a running 4.6 complete with induction, accessories and serpentine belt. I want to minimize the time I spend on the engine until I have driven it a bit.

Besides, from the research I've done, the cast pan does add some rigidity to the bottom end, and I hate to give that up.

So now I am seeking a lead on a dry sump 3-stage oil pump.

Thanks for all your inputs and advice.

Bill


BlownMGB-V8
Jim Blackwood
9406 Gunpowder Rd., Florence, KY 41042
(5812 posts)

Registered:
10/23/2007 12:59PM

Main British Car:
1971 MGB Blown,Injected,Intercooled Buick 340/AA80E/JagIRS

authors avatar
Re: Low profile oil pan for Rover V8
Posted by: BlownMGB-V8
Date: January 23, 2015 11:12AM

Bill, since this is going in your GT-6 that might make sense, to keep it below the hood as even the Buick pan may be a bit deep for what you are doing. But understanding that, it seems to me it'd be cheaper and easier to modify the cast rover pan than to go dry sump. Can you find someone to do TIG welding for you? That cast Rover pan can be mated easily to some aluminum sheet of about 12 ga thickness and bulged out wherever needed to bring the sump bottom up. Bending the pickup neck isn't terribly difficult either.

As for the oil passage mods recommended above, they apply to ALL Rover engines as well as the Buick and Olds 215. Yes, the gearotor pump is considered an improvement, yet still it is a production piece and can benefit from easing sharp corners and such. The block itself is no different, and although I do believe Rover did increase the pickup journal size at some point (better, and maybe good enough) enlarging it a bit more is pretty cheap insurance. Buick saw fit to go with a 5/8" pickup on the later V6 and this part is now standard fare for all SBB and Rover builds Doesn't it make sense to increase the journal in the block to the same size? It's a straightforward operation and can even be done in the car. However, even 9/16" represents a significant improvement over the stock 1/2" passage, and blending the corners is just a good practice as it greatly reduces turbulence.

Your dry sump system is going to be a big challenge and you will have to have a large custom tank built and find a place it can go, plus the lines will be in the way of everything. Sure, it'll have the WOW factor, but fir the street it's really a bit much.

Jim
Goto Page: 123Next
Current Page: 1 of 3


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.