Engine swaps
 

We often see questions regarding possible engine swaps. One of the big issues is an apadter to mate the new engine to the driveline.

Since this is an older Buick engine , were there any similar buick powerplants that share the same interface as ours such that an adapter would not be an issue like it is with say a 350 crate motor?

It would be interesting to see a 350 in but, is there enough room in the engine compartment to accommodate?

I have seen one posted with the 350, it fits well. But the adapter required to mate it is made in Australia and cost a good bit plus shipping. Seems those Aussie's do quite a bit of high performance mods.

There are a lot of smaller engines that also would be interesting. A friend of mine I worked with in Florida drove a Saab Sonnet. It was a four cylinder Ford motor. He gave me a ride one day, I was amazed by how that beast moved.

An in-line six might also be an interesting choice. I remember my 280ZX was an in-line six, as was the 260. I think the 240 was an inline 4 wasn't it?

Does a Buick 350 have the same flange pattern as the Buick 215...???

Yah believe the 240 was a 4cyl. I'm familiar with the AMC straight 6, nice torque but, wondering if it would be able to pull the disco around. But then again, all the power of the 350 you've got to be a little careful.

Why not take the V12 out of the Lambo and make it a mid-engine rover :)

If land rover did not change the bell housing between the 215 and the 350, then you should be able to drop a Buick 350 under the hood. But bear in mind the Buick 350 is not the same as the typical SBC.

I worked on a radar trainer that had a large detroit diesel that merely provided hydraulic power to the wheels. Each wheel had a hydraulic motor, there were six wheels, 2 front, 2 center and two rear. It was based on a Russian SA6. Exact copy to be correct. Original was obtained from Israel after Camp David accord. Captured from the Egyptians, made in Soviet Union. I wired the two trainers.

Not very high top end, but it could go almost anywhere, sand dunes, water crossings, no problems, it could even turn a circle in it's own length pivoting on the center tires asboth front and rear steered. Awesome vehicle.

Radar dishes and missile launcher mobile platform.

Yeah, back then Buick was Buick and Chevy was Chevy, lots of differences between the two.

One of those Buick Gran National turbo sixes would be sweet if that would mate up easily.

Olds had some very good engines as well. A friend of mine had one of the little Cutlass convertibles when they were really small (62-64?). I had a 64 Lemans with an aluminum 326.

Why not just keep the Rover V8, which is a VERY good engine, rebuild it, convert to a HEI distributor and drop on a 4bbl carb and intake?
That would still be cheaper and a hell of alot easier to do than any engine swap.
I have no idea why everyone hates the Rover V8 so much, in the rest of the world it is the 350 equivalent in modifications and build ability.

one of those later model GM v6s could be interesting. i tuned one of those that had been swapped into a classic MG convertible, and as i seem to remember it made quite a bit of power, and oughta be a far sight more efficient than the rover motor. with a good tune should be able to burn nice and lean on the freeway to save gas.... and those motors are cheap.

Speaking of the 240, since I never traded Claire for one :)

Do you think we could ever hook up their SR20DET engine in our Rovers? The KA24DE that comes stock in our American versions of the 240 kinda suck but the stock motor in Japan is BEAST!

i think you really wouldnt have a fun time with a high reving turbo motor in a large heavy truck...

Oh this is true, but it would be interesting :) Since we all have problems putting RB26's in the 240s (my uncle drifts professionally and has 3 of them) THAT WOULD BE COOL to put in our fat rovers :) 6 speed turbo charged monsters. Who cares if it screams as you drive?

Caleb, I do not know how similar the 240SX engine was to the original 240Z motor. Those were bad to the bone. The SX came much later. And much wimpier.

I just picked up a copy of Motor Trend, it has two awesome Nissans in it:
The New Nissan NISMO370Z 350 HORSE WITH 276 LB.-FT. OF TORQUE. It has a world's first SynchroRev MatchManual Transmission, what ever that is.

Nissan Juke R - They took a GT-R driveline, shortened it 10 inches and put a Juke body on it. 3.8 liter/480 HP/436 lb.ft/ twin turbo dual overhead cam 24 valve V6
3.6 seconds 0-60, 11.9 quarter mile @ 117.5 mph without launch control. 6 speed twin clutch automatic tranny. THEY ONLY BUILT TWO SO FAR.

lol, good lord!

the new GTR i drove was already capable of acheiving some speeds you wouldnt ever want to do with other people in traffic... cant imagine how unstable a juke would feel with that same sort of power hah

interesting cars though, if a bit too heavy/big feeling/techy for my tastes.

Its as if a jeweler decided to start making plastic wedding rings with $10k diamonds in them.

Its like, why?

Nobody is questioning the integrity of the Rover V8 Spike, I think it's just one of those thoughts that pop in and expound on. Just thoughts on what else would work.

I for one like my idea of making it a mid-engine vehicle. :D

I drove a GTR R32 or R34 I can't remember. We have one in town. The thing is SEXY! :)

The 240, 260, and 280 were all inline six cylinder powered. The model number actually referred to the displacement, 2.4L, 2.6L, and 2.8L.

Fair enough.

Theyclaim it was really good handling because the shortening made it a lot stiffer and it held turns really well. You could power thru. It was on a closed track and they compare something like 30 different cars. They even ran the newest Porsche Supercar against the newest Corvette Supercar.

But the Nissan 370 NISMO caught my eye. Especially the body style. It is a return to the original Z appearance. The 240, 260, and 280 all had that long lean look. That all changed a lot with the 300 and up.

I enjoyed my 280ZX2+2. Almost as much fun as my 928 was.

The only reasons I would ever consider a swap is if the engine and parts were much cheaper and readily available (and locally) and/or improved fuel economy and power/torque for off-road performance.

So either a cheap american alternative and parts-a-million available, or a diesel that will run for half-a-mil miles and get 20+mpg's.

I would think it would be worth while to creep on an old buick forum with a bunch of old hot-rodders that could easily tell you the possibilities with these blocks. Less guessing needed.

300TDI with the EGR blocked is said to get 35mpg average and increase hp. Just some info I read on the web and on different 300tdi and 200tdi websites. The 200tdi can't block off the egr but is a lot simpler to fix. Like I said it's all hear say I have no personal experience...yet. ;)

i would want to see fuel receipts before i trust that number...

So why not spend the $1k on an adapter including shipping from Chevy V6 & V8
to drop a SBC under the hood? Best bang for your buck if you want to stick with a petrol engine.

Gallons are bigger in England.

ah, imperial gallons. good point.


looks like theyre ~16% bigger, which could bring that 35mpg down to ~29. still a lot...

out of all things why not go 4 or 6 cylinder turrbo diesel ehh. good trque to ge tteh rover rolling and lower fuel consumption. the only reason i'd swap is to get the almost or the same power with a more efficent engine.

i have often thought of putting a toyota 2L Lte in a rover and mod it a little bit. that little engine cranks out 200ftlbs and its a 2.L diesel.

or a toyota 1u from a lexus . more hp for torque and its a pretty efficent 32v v8. my ls 400 gets 26 on the freeway but it also only ways 3800lbs .

untill i can figure what to do. the rovers sbv8 will do.

a 1j would move a rover pretty good. too

There are only 3 routes to go in the NAS market. One is diesel(200-300TDI, Mercedes om617, cummins 4bt, 6.2L...) for fuel economy(mainly so you can go farther on each tank of fuel), and second for parts availability(small block chevy drop in). The third is for a customized/one-off LR.

As for option #2, Only engine that makes sense is the SBC because of parts availability and cheap proven performance. Any other engine would be a waste of time and money given the fact that the parts are not as readily availabale inexpensively. That, coupled with the fact that an adapter already exists and is available commercially for the SBC swap.

As for option #1, the most desireable engine swap, it is expensive...either mucho buckos, or mucho time invested.

One of those new NiCad powered engines for each axle, independently switchable would be ideal.

Seriously on HPTV they talk a lot about the availability of the newer GM short blocks with all kinds of goodies that make plenty of power and get great mpg, but it is an extensive swap.

I think with new O2's my engine should still have lots of life left in it.