Let me bend your all's ear on this. I might be picking up a Buick 300 on trade which of course shares architecture with the Rover V8. Taller deck height, but lots of interchange.

I'm curious what your all's thoughts are? Worse comes to worse I can just use the heads, but I'm curious about swapping it whole including carb and distributor. I'm going to read thru some of the LS swap stuff on what it might take for the transmission to be happy. Theoretically a Disco 1 transmission could work I supposed, but I'd like to keep this as cheap as possible by sourcing as few replacement parts as possible. Any input there?

Exhaust and fuel systems would have to change of course.

Give me your thoughts.

 

Maybe the EFI could even be retained and spacers could be made for the Rover intake manifold. I've seen that done for 4.6 to 5.4 triton (ford) swaps.

The 300 crank could also be swapped into the 4.0 block, but part of the benefit here is the toughness of the iron block 300.

 

I'd take a look at this, lot of info on Buick 300 vs Rover V8, parts, and performance builds: Affordable Aluminum Buick / Rover Stroker Motor, by Kurt Schley

With different crank length at the rear end (article mentions this), you'd probably need a different flex plate setup for trans. I don't know how similar bell housings are either. To me it looks like a lot of work for not a ton of upside to use the 300 block. Seems potentially feasible to use the heads and some other parts to build a performance Rover V8 though.

 

Thanks for that, I've been doing some reading there but I haven't done a deep dive yet. I picked up the 300 today, so I can start digging into it soon and see what works and what doesn't.

 

I've been doing more reading. If I end up using the Buick crank in a 4.0 block, the main journals are the same 2.500". Therefore, if it's clean enough to avoid the machine shop for the crank, I'll only have to get a set of rods (and maybe pistons, depending on rod length availability).

The crank snout will have to be modified for the longer Rover woodruff key to drive the oil pump. This may end up being an issue in terms of avoiding the machine shop.

One other thing is that the RV8 is internally balanced and the 300 is external, however I think I can sort that out at home, modifying the stock Rover balancer. This will have to happen, along with the elongated woodruff key, no matter which block I use.

I'll continue to update as I learn more.

 

Watching with interest. Cheers @Alex_M !

 

Thanks!

I've been doing even more chewing on this. I've got a couple 4.6l cranks. The rod journals are larger than the 300 crank and the front and rear snout are already correct for the rover. I could possibly have the 4.6l crank offset ground to the 300 rod size while increasing the stroke. That would allow me to use either block if I had the correct rod/piston combo.

I'm also reading the 300 will accept a .060 overbore. More if it's sonic tested. That brings us into the territory of 305 SBC pistons which brings cost down.

Alternatively, just use the 300 rods with the offset ground 4.6 crank in a 4.0 block, might get us close. I'll post up the numbers in a bit to do some actual figuring.

 

All right! A plan is coming together.

I had traded a guy a truck and he was going to build me another motor, but I've since changed gears on that project and have no need for that motor... So! In turn he's going to cover the machine work for this build. That opens up some options!

I'm including pictures of my notes below, but here's the short version. I think we're going to use the 300 block (again, pending confirmation that the bellhousing will mate up... I'm almost positive it will). We're going to use a 4.6 crank, offset ground to increase stroke. This will make using the Rover flexplate, oil pump, and balancer much simpler. If need be we will use the 300 rods, but I'm hoping we can find another set of rods with an even smaller big end which would allow us to go that much further with the stroke. Block will be bored, most likely .060. Pistons are yet to be determined, but you're getting into the size of 305 chevy pistons there. That will help decrease cost as long as the length will match up with our rods.

I've got a Crower Level 3 cam that we're going to use. Specs below. I'm going to port the 300 heads some and we're going to put big valves in. I've got three different sets we can choose from. We'll also do a 3 angle job I'm sure.

The idea here is going as big as possible. To address fuelling demands I'm considering the idea of keeping the 4.0 ECU and using a (larger) 4.6 MAF in conjunction with larger injectors. That is, if the numbers line up right. I need to measure the MAF bodies and crunch the numbers.

Intake will have to be adapted for the taller deck height, but I don't think that will be too difficult. The rover starter bolts up according to my research. The trickiest part, I think, is going to be adapting the crank sensor. The ear on the block will have to be drilled out and a couple holes tapped. May have to shim or grind out for depth.

Anyway, here's all the numbers.

 

Bellhousing is different.

 

I do believe you are correct Robert this was discussed a lot about 10 years ago