Just curious why there seems to be so many that are against LS swaps into DI's, DII's, RRC's and P38's. Now I've heard some state that doing an LS swap is taking away from a Land Rover because the engine is what makes them what they are. Personally I don't see it that way. Up until 2004 Land Rover used the same engine. And that engine was what, nothing but a Buick aluminum V8. And what is Buick? A division of General Motors. RRC's, DI's, DII's and P38's all had GM small block motors from the start. If you look at a stripped LS block, at first glance you'd think you were looking at Land Rover block. So to me, an LS swap is just an engine update because you're swapping an old GM motor for a newer one. Land Rover didn't design the engine, a division of GM did and it's just an old GM small block. In fact the 4.0 and 4.6 were blocks that were changed back to the original specs. It's the reason you can put Buick 300 engine heads on it or use the 300 crankshaft on the 4.0/4.6 and why a timing gear and chain set for a 65 Buick Skylark with a 300 V8 is a direct replacement. Lifters and other parts are completely interchangable with the 64/65 skylarks. What we call a long nose cam is also called a Buick cam because that's exactly what it is. The Buick 300 V8 is it exact same engine but made of cast iron instead of aluminum. When the 4.0 same 4.6 came out, that was Land Rover reverting back to the original design with the cross bolting and larger cam and crank journal sizes making the 4.0 and 4.6 even more of a GM engine than the 3.9 and 4.2. So since we have GM engines from the get go, why would replacing it with a stronger, more reliable and newer GM engine make them any less of a Land Rover? Just curious to hear people's opinions on why so many are against it.

 

There are also a number who are for it. Check out the Engine Swaps section of this forum.

 

Because the Rover v8 is an excellent engine.

It is absolutely tiny for a 3.5l v8 and is a masterpiece of packaging. The 2.8l M110 straight six in my 1970's mercedes must be over 100kg heavier by guessing to look at it, and is physically massive compared to the old 70's rangie engine. it's chalk and cheese in performance, the torque from the Rover stomps on the merc. True, the merc matches it in horsepower, so certainly on paper, the merc is the superior engine, but on the road, there is no comparison. And this is a comparison between an M110 and a Rover v8, the M110 was a good engine in it's day, and so was the rover v8.

I could disrespect a few details on my rangie, but not many to be honest, and definately not regarding the engine. The motor is probably it's best feature. Very very brave of rover to go with it back in the era of the fuel crisis. They must have know they were onto a winner and it would win over the customers even though they had to dig deep at the petrol pump.

Also, the rover sounds amazing, and this coming from a guy who has owned a busso V6 in the past also. The rover v8 is the best sounding motor I've ever had.

The LT95 gearbox is horrible. Sure, it is as tough as old boots, but it's massive, heavy, and like a bloody truck gearbox. I'd be changing the 4 speed gearbox for something nicer long before I consider and engine swap, unless you already have a later 5 speed or an auto.

Leave the LS swaps for people with GQ patrols and the likes. the Nissan TB42/TD42 are reliable, but as boring as bat poo and as slow as a snail for a massive 4.2 litre. now that is a chassis in need of a v8 if ever there was one.