Rover 200 BRM - 1.8 K-Series turbo project
Discussion
BricktopST205 said:
Wow. It is quite amazing how many cars and how big the fan base is. I have been a member of several car clubs and you always see the numbers drop off after 10-15 years due to the less number of cars on the road but that is something else 
Yeah it's pretty special. Real mix of cars too. British Leyland, Austin, MG, Mini, as well as modern stuff. Huge metro turnout. Special groups for the later z-cars just because they had a special type of monogram paint. ZRs, ZSs, ZTs. The new MG3 and MG6. We had a few of the awesome and hugely ill-advised SV-Rs including Rowan Atkinson's old car. Rusty sheds on their last legs and loved low-mileage restored minters side-by-side. All once made on the same site by one community.Fans tend to be fairly die-hard.
BRM has been running well and pretty much just been enjoying it and going to car shows, meets, etc. Engine's covered around 3,000 miles now and hasn't blown up yet! Still sounds like a diesel with the noisy head but I'll be changing that when I take her off the road for winter.
I'm at Tunerfest at Brands Hatch tomorrow and I thought I'd try out a public track session. It's only 15 minutes but it'll give me a chance to open up the taps a bit. Knowing I had this coming up, I booked into AMD Essex for an alignment check. Results:
Nothing especially concerning. Being solid rear axle you can only adjust the front toe,which they tweaked. The front camber being a little more negative than spec is due to being lowered but actually a desired outcome so not studied about that.
Rear camber is way out of spec which is deliberate - I have camber plates. However, the rear being slightly toe-out on the left, and too far toe-in on the right, is a bit of a pain because it's not adjustable as such. That said, I know the rear beam mounts to brackets which themselves mount to the chassis, and the mounting holes in those brackets allow a little movement. Seeing as I had some time today, I thought I'd try lining it up.
I took some base measurements using fishing line and some axle stands. I just measured how far away the line was from the sill at a point near the front of the car. Sure enough, the line was 10mm closer to the sill on the right hand side (indicating that wheel is toeing-in more than the left). I slackened off the brackets (thankfully you can get to them without removing the rear beam) then hooked up a series of ratchet straps to pull everything in the right direction before re-tightening! It's proper ghetto but seemed to do the trick. I could see the brackets had moved and I kept measuring throughout. When I was done and had dropped the car back down and let it settle, the lines were exactly the same distance from the sill on both sides. I'll have the alignment checked again at some point to see what effect it had, and maybe dial in very slight toe out on the front which the brm manual specifies.
(Axle stands were in use - you just can't see them!)
Catching some rays with my daily scooby (love that car!)
If you see me at Brands feel free to come and say hello.
I'm at Tunerfest at Brands Hatch tomorrow and I thought I'd try out a public track session. It's only 15 minutes but it'll give me a chance to open up the taps a bit. Knowing I had this coming up, I booked into AMD Essex for an alignment check. Results:
Nothing especially concerning. Being solid rear axle you can only adjust the front toe,which they tweaked. The front camber being a little more negative than spec is due to being lowered but actually a desired outcome so not studied about that.
Rear camber is way out of spec which is deliberate - I have camber plates. However, the rear being slightly toe-out on the left, and too far toe-in on the right, is a bit of a pain because it's not adjustable as such. That said, I know the rear beam mounts to brackets which themselves mount to the chassis, and the mounting holes in those brackets allow a little movement. Seeing as I had some time today, I thought I'd try lining it up.
I took some base measurements using fishing line and some axle stands. I just measured how far away the line was from the sill at a point near the front of the car. Sure enough, the line was 10mm closer to the sill on the right hand side (indicating that wheel is toeing-in more than the left). I slackened off the brackets (thankfully you can get to them without removing the rear beam) then hooked up a series of ratchet straps to pull everything in the right direction before re-tightening! It's proper ghetto but seemed to do the trick. I could see the brackets had moved and I kept measuring throughout. When I was done and had dropped the car back down and let it settle, the lines were exactly the same distance from the sill on both sides. I'll have the alignment checked again at some point to see what effect it had, and maybe dial in very slight toe out on the front which the brm manual specifies.
(Axle stands were in use - you just can't see them!)
Catching some rays with my daily scooby (love that car!)
If you see me at Brands feel free to come and say hello.
Edited by Stuballs on Monday 7th August 09:14
Had a blast at Tunerfest yesterday. Took the BRM around the track during the public track time in the morning. Thought it would be fun to push it a bit and see how it faired under stress.
Stock suspension (albeit mg zr struts with X-power springs) was woefully inadequate and I had a bit of a moment on paddock Hill bend when I didn't even feel I was pushing it. So coilovers are defo in the future. Also very scary moment when the guy in the mx-5 behind me didn't notice everyone bunching up on the sighting lap and nearly rear-ended me!
Oil temps got a bit silly. 116 degrees peak. If I was doing more track timeI would refit the oil cooler (which I removed because it was over cooling oil on the road). As it is, I think I'll fit an oil/water laminova which will also help warm the oil up from cold.
Cheeky video with a posh data overlay:
https://youtu.be/fm1eZc_S4Ng
Stock suspension (albeit mg zr struts with X-power springs) was woefully inadequate and I had a bit of a moment on paddock Hill bend when I didn't even feel I was pushing it. So coilovers are defo in the future. Also very scary moment when the guy in the mx-5 behind me didn't notice everyone bunching up on the sighting lap and nearly rear-ended me!
Oil temps got a bit silly. 116 degrees peak. If I was doing more track timeI would refit the oil cooler (which I removed because it was over cooling oil on the road). As it is, I think I'll fit an oil/water laminova which will also help warm the oil up from cold.
Cheeky video with a posh data overlay:
https://youtu.be/fm1eZc_S4Ng
Edited by Stuballs on Monday 26th June 10:06
Edited by Stuballs on Monday 7th August 09:10
Guys sorry about all the broken images on here. Stitched up by the photobucket ransom demand as many have been recently! Working on a solution!
In the meantime, not much to report - I was planning some coilovers until the guy I have booked in to do my respray said he could fit me in end of September. So all of my attention and funds are going into that for now. I have a few ideas for subtly tweaking the styling but will be mostly staying true to the BRM design.
Once that's done it'll pretty much be time to take her off the road over winter and will fit the new head. Considering running shorter rods for less compression and possibly milder cams. I noticed I have quite a lot of blowby so that'd be a good chance to have everything checked over (cylinders round, etc. Chassis-wise I'm going to fit an MG ZR steering rack (not a simple swap) and KW coilovers.
More to follow...
In the meantime, not much to report - I was planning some coilovers until the guy I have booked in to do my respray said he could fit me in end of September. So all of my attention and funds are going into that for now. I have a few ideas for subtly tweaking the styling but will be mostly staying true to the BRM design.
Once that's done it'll pretty much be time to take her off the road over winter and will fit the new head. Considering running shorter rods for less compression and possibly milder cams. I noticed I have quite a lot of blowby so that'd be a good chance to have everything checked over (cylinders round, etc. Chassis-wise I'm going to fit an MG ZR steering rack (not a simple swap) and KW coilovers.
More to follow...
Stuballs said:
It is. The valve-over configuration of the zr rack is supposed to give better steering feel than the valve-under of the r200/r25 rack. It's also quicker.
I've read that the newer rack doesn't rattle like the older one sometimes did - that was certainly something that was noticeable with my 200vi on very rough roads. I thought the steering feel on the 200 was excellent and I don't recall the ZR being any better, but the larger tyres on the ZR probably didn't help.Apparently the ZR rack is 2.8 turns lock to lock, whereas the 200 rack is 3 turns, but that might reflect reduced lock (so the larger wheels don't rub) rather than a quicker rack. Irrespective of those details, I'm sure either rack gives more feedback than any modern EPAS and most contemporary hydraulic systems too.
gweaver said:
I've read that the newer rack doesn't rattle like the older one sometimes did - that was certainly something that was noticeable with my 200vi on very rough roads. I thought the steering feel on the 200 was excellent and I don't recall the ZR being any better, but the larger tyres on the ZR probably didn't help.
Apparently the ZR rack is 2.8 turns lock to lock, whereas the 200 rack is 3 turns, but that might reflect reduced lock (so the larger wheels don't rub) rather than a quicker rack. Irrespective of those details, I'm sure either rack gives more feedback than any modern EPAS and most contemporary hydraulic systems too.
I'll report back once I've switched over. The zr rack is supposed to be quicker AND at the same time have different stops to restrict the amount of lock to stop tyres rubbing the inner arches. Internet hearsay mostly though. If that was the case, I can't imagine the rack being that much quicker, if at all. Generally, it seems to be the case that you either get good steering or sloppy steering with ZRs. But that might not be the rack and could be any component in the steering or suspension. They're getting on a bit now and, let's be fair, they were made by Rover. I'll take my rack from a donor car I'll strip myself after driving it and making sure it's nice and tight working fine.Apparently the ZR rack is 2.8 turns lock to lock, whereas the 200 rack is 3 turns, but that might reflect reduced lock (so the larger wheels don't rub) rather than a quicker rack. Irrespective of those details, I'm sure either rack gives more feedback than any modern EPAS and most contemporary hydraulic systems too.
Stuballs said:
They're getting on a bit now and, let's be fair, they were made by Rover. I'll take my rack from a donor car I'll strip myself after driving it and making sure it's nice and tight working fine.
Try TRW. Rover or its antecedants have never made steering racks, or boxes. They buy them in.Stuballs said:
will fit the new head. Considering running shorter rods for less compression and possibly milder cams. I noticed I have quite a lot of blowby so that'd be a good chance to have everything checked over (cylinders round, etc.
More to follow...
If you just fit shorter rods, you reduce squish/quench. I found my SC Rover K engine to be less knock sensitive AFTER removing a 1mm shim despite the now increased compression ratio. More to follow...
Ive said:
If you just fit shorter rods, you reduce squish/quench. I found my SC Rover K engine to be less knock sensitive AFTER removing a 1mm shim despite the now increased compression ratio.
I did consider this. With my rod piston combo as it is, my squish clearance is too high for squish to be effective and I actually think that's a source of the epic detonation. To be honest Marko, I'm so det limited I can't imagine a setup that eliminates squish completely could be worse. With 2mm shorter rods and the head gasket I want to run, clearance will be more like 4mm - I.e. Zero squish.The stock rover k-series turbo is not a "detty" engine, and they have 1.5mm shorter rods and no squish. I've basically managed to build a forged engine that's less reliable that the stocker!
My only reservation about the shorter rods, is the increased side load on the thin liners. We'll just see what happens!
Gassing Station | Readers' Cars | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff