Rover v8 weight!
Discussion
Any normal stand will be able to cope easily.
But from a stability point of view for any stand, Id get the one with teh single middle leg, with the extra bit across the front of it.
The twin legged stands are better of course, but more awkward around the garage, and also more awkward from lifting an engine on and off using a crane.
But from a stability point of view for any stand, Id get the one with teh single middle leg, with the extra bit across the front of it.
The twin legged stands are better of course, but more awkward around the garage, and also more awkward from lifting an engine on and off using a crane.
Thanks!busa_rush said:
Have heard they weigh 160Kg but not having had one myself, can't be 100%.
The whole engine weighs a lot more than that, more like 220Kg.
This whole "RV8 is incredibly light weight" mantra is rubbish. It may have been true when the competition consisted of massive iron blocked units but any modern engine will be just as light for the size if not lighter. It's actually only slightly lighter than a modern SBC which has a lot more power and much more capacity.
stevieturbo said:
I think 220kg is a bit of an exaggeration.
No exageration at all. The RV8 is over 200Kg
Marquis Rex said:
Am tired of the hype surrounding the RV8 engine. Man, I've heard figures as low as 130 Kgs being banded about for its weight. It's a widely used readily available engine- and there's a lot of tuning knowledge out there for it (some of the tuning is questionable).
But lets put things into perspective here:
These are the true weights of a late disco 4 litre engine, compliant with all the modern emissions and refinement criteria.
Accessory Drive Belt - (1) 0.341kg
Air Cleaner Body 0.977kg
Air Cleaner Element 0.299kg
Air Cleaner Top 0.467kg
Air Flow Meter 0.226kg
Air Hose/Duct - (1) 0.325kg
Alternator 7.196kg
Engine Complete 177.000kg
Engine Management - E.C.U. 0.390kg
Starter Motor 4.060kg
Viscous Coupling 2.942kg
Engine Oil 5.676kg
The above comes to 200 kgs. Now an earlier vehicle will probably NOT have the reduction gear starter motor fitted and so you can expect that to weigh about 8 kgs, the accessory drive won't be poly belt driven but individually driven So that will weigh quite a bit more. The above also does NOT include the flywheel, which on the Rover is very very heavy compared to it's contemporaries. So we're already looking at way over 220 Kgs. The extra capacity over the 3.5 litre will lose some in the crank area, but because the RV8 doesn't have a fully counterweighted crankshaft- not as much as you might imagine. The block has been reinforced since the early days, but I can't see that adding much more then about 5-6 kgs. So these silly figures of around 140Kgs are Science Fiction.
Other points of note are the fact that the valve timing does its own thing about about 4000 rpm due to the flex in the pushrods and rocker shaft location-this has a HUGE effect on top end power, an area where the undervalved Rover V8 struggles already- enlargening the capacity further will just boost low speed torque with little effect on peak power due to the restrictive nature of the cylinder heads- you’ll end up having to go to specially made Wildcat heads to get the top end back unless you’re particularly fond of the feel of a “diesel-esque” torque curve. Now don't get me wrong, the RV8 is a great "working class hero" of an engine- readily available. I TOTALLY understand the emotional reasons behind choosing this legendary stalwart powerplant, or retaining it for a sense of originality- fair play. But when biased folk start to pitch this motor, on function, against the Chevy C5 motor or a twin cam Jag, BMW, or Porsche V8s spending thousands upon thousands and seriously believing all the hype, they're on shaky ground. It's the engine equivalent of chavving up your Vauxhall Corsa with 20,000 pounds instead of buying a thoroughbred. Probably the same kind of people who think that MGBs, Triumphs or other BL stuff were "British Engineering at its best". They were characterful, fun cars, that perhaps can leave some of us with a warm feeling inside- but woefully under developed. It's a shame, because I for one would have loved the opportunity in developing the Rover V8 the way the Chevy C5 or Porsche 911 air cooled flat-6 engine was…..
But lets put things into perspective here:
These are the true weights of a late disco 4 litre engine, compliant with all the modern emissions and refinement criteria.
Accessory Drive Belt - (1) 0.341kg
Air Cleaner Body 0.977kg
Air Cleaner Element 0.299kg
Air Cleaner Top 0.467kg
Air Flow Meter 0.226kg
Air Hose/Duct - (1) 0.325kg
Alternator 7.196kg
Engine Complete 177.000kg
Engine Management - E.C.U. 0.390kg
Starter Motor 4.060kg
Viscous Coupling 2.942kg
Engine Oil 5.676kg
The above comes to 200 kgs. Now an earlier vehicle will probably NOT have the reduction gear starter motor fitted and so you can expect that to weigh about 8 kgs, the accessory drive won't be poly belt driven but individually driven So that will weigh quite a bit more. The above also does NOT include the flywheel, which on the Rover is very very heavy compared to it's contemporaries. So we're already looking at way over 220 Kgs. The extra capacity over the 3.5 litre will lose some in the crank area, but because the RV8 doesn't have a fully counterweighted crankshaft- not as much as you might imagine. The block has been reinforced since the early days, but I can't see that adding much more then about 5-6 kgs. So these silly figures of around 140Kgs are Science Fiction.
Other points of note are the fact that the valve timing does its own thing about about 4000 rpm due to the flex in the pushrods and rocker shaft location-this has a HUGE effect on top end power, an area where the undervalved Rover V8 struggles already- enlargening the capacity further will just boost low speed torque with little effect on peak power due to the restrictive nature of the cylinder heads- you’ll end up having to go to specially made Wildcat heads to get the top end back unless you’re particularly fond of the feel of a “diesel-esque” torque curve. Now don't get me wrong, the RV8 is a great "working class hero" of an engine- readily available. I TOTALLY understand the emotional reasons behind choosing this legendary stalwart powerplant, or retaining it for a sense of originality- fair play. But when biased folk start to pitch this motor, on function, against the Chevy C5 motor or a twin cam Jag, BMW, or Porsche V8s spending thousands upon thousands and seriously believing all the hype, they're on shaky ground. It's the engine equivalent of chavving up your Vauxhall Corsa with 20,000 pounds instead of buying a thoroughbred. Probably the same kind of people who think that MGBs, Triumphs or other BL stuff were "British Engineering at its best". They were characterful, fun cars, that perhaps can leave some of us with a warm feeling inside- but woefully under developed. It's a shame, because I for one would have loved the opportunity in developing the Rover V8 the way the Chevy C5 or Porsche 911 air cooled flat-6 engine was…..
cymtriks said:
stevieturbo said:
I think 220kg is a bit of an exaggeration.
No exageration at all. The RV8 is over 200Kg
Marquis Rex said:
Am tired of the hype surrounding the RV8 engine. Man, I've heard figures as low as 130 Kgs being banded about for its weight. It's a widely used readily available engine- and there's a lot of tuning knowledge out there for it (some of the tuning is questionable).
But lets put things into perspective here:
These are the true weights of a late disco 4 litre engine, compliant with all the modern emissions and refinement criteria.
Accessory Drive Belt - (1) 0.341kg
Air Cleaner Body 0.977kg
Air Cleaner Element 0.299kg
Air Cleaner Top 0.467kg
Air Flow Meter 0.226kg
Air Hose/Duct - (1) 0.325kg
Alternator 7.196kg
Engine Complete 177.000kg
Engine Management - E.C.U. 0.390kg
Starter Motor 4.060kg
Viscous Coupling 2.942kg
Engine Oil 5.676kg
The above comes to 200 kgs. Now an earlier vehicle will probably NOT have the reduction gear starter motor fitted and so you can expect that to weigh about 8 kgs, the accessory drive won't be poly belt driven but individually driven So that will weigh quite a bit more. The above also does NOT include the flywheel, which on the Rover is very very heavy compared to it's contemporaries. So we're already looking at way over 220 Kgs. The extra capacity over the 3.5 litre will lose some in the crank area, but because the RV8 doesn't have a fully counterweighted crankshaft- not as much as you might imagine. The block has been reinforced since the early days, but I can't see that adding much more then about 5-6 kgs. So these silly figures of around 140Kgs are Science Fiction.
Other points of note are the fact that the valve timing does its own thing about about 4000 rpm due to the flex in the pushrods and rocker shaft location-this has a HUGE effect on top end power, an area where the undervalved Rover V8 struggles already- enlargening the capacity further will just boost low speed torque with little effect on peak power due to the restrictive nature of the cylinder heads- you’ll end up having to go to specially made Wildcat heads to get the top end back unless you’re particularly fond of the feel of a “diesel-esque” torque curve. Now don't get me wrong, the RV8 is a great "working class hero" of an engine- readily available. I TOTALLY understand the emotional reasons behind choosing this legendary stalwart powerplant, or retaining it for a sense of originality- fair play. But when biased folk start to pitch this motor, on function, against the Chevy C5 motor or a twin cam Jag, BMW, or Porsche V8s spending thousands upon thousands and seriously believing all the hype, they're on shaky ground. It's the engine equivalent of chavving up your Vauxhall Corsa with 20,000 pounds instead of buying a thoroughbred. Probably the same kind of people who think that MGBs, Triumphs or other BL stuff were "British Engineering at its best". They were characterful, fun cars, that perhaps can leave some of us with a warm feeling inside- but woefully under developed. It's a shame, because I for one would have loved the opportunity in developing the Rover V8 the way the Chevy C5 or Porsche 911 air cooled flat-6 engine was…..
But lets put things into perspective here:
These are the true weights of a late disco 4 litre engine, compliant with all the modern emissions and refinement criteria.
Accessory Drive Belt - (1) 0.341kg
Air Cleaner Body 0.977kg
Air Cleaner Element 0.299kg
Air Cleaner Top 0.467kg
Air Flow Meter 0.226kg
Air Hose/Duct - (1) 0.325kg
Alternator 7.196kg
Engine Complete 177.000kg
Engine Management - E.C.U. 0.390kg
Starter Motor 4.060kg
Viscous Coupling 2.942kg
Engine Oil 5.676kg
The above comes to 200 kgs. Now an earlier vehicle will probably NOT have the reduction gear starter motor fitted and so you can expect that to weigh about 8 kgs, the accessory drive won't be poly belt driven but individually driven So that will weigh quite a bit more. The above also does NOT include the flywheel, which on the Rover is very very heavy compared to it's contemporaries. So we're already looking at way over 220 Kgs. The extra capacity over the 3.5 litre will lose some in the crank area, but because the RV8 doesn't have a fully counterweighted crankshaft- not as much as you might imagine. The block has been reinforced since the early days, but I can't see that adding much more then about 5-6 kgs. So these silly figures of around 140Kgs are Science Fiction.
Other points of note are the fact that the valve timing does its own thing about about 4000 rpm due to the flex in the pushrods and rocker shaft location-this has a HUGE effect on top end power, an area where the undervalved Rover V8 struggles already- enlargening the capacity further will just boost low speed torque with little effect on peak power due to the restrictive nature of the cylinder heads- you’ll end up having to go to specially made Wildcat heads to get the top end back unless you’re particularly fond of the feel of a “diesel-esque” torque curve. Now don't get me wrong, the RV8 is a great "working class hero" of an engine- readily available. I TOTALLY understand the emotional reasons behind choosing this legendary stalwart powerplant, or retaining it for a sense of originality- fair play. But when biased folk start to pitch this motor, on function, against the Chevy C5 motor or a twin cam Jag, BMW, or Porsche V8s spending thousands upon thousands and seriously believing all the hype, they're on shaky ground. It's the engine equivalent of chavving up your Vauxhall Corsa with 20,000 pounds instead of buying a thoroughbred. Probably the same kind of people who think that MGBs, Triumphs or other BL stuff were "British Engineering at its best". They were characterful, fun cars, that perhaps can leave some of us with a warm feeling inside- but woefully under developed. It's a shame, because I for one would have loved the opportunity in developing the Rover V8 the way the Chevy C5 or Porsche 911 air cooled flat-6 engine was…..
You know I was going to say 460lbs .. but as Marquis say 440lbs (200 kg) then I'd say that was pretty spot on.
He has some really interesting points here and I was talking to someone on the BL Rover development program a few weeks ago - and this guy used to pull his hair out about many aspects of the design .. as Marquis says - not only poorly designed but ofter designed by very young inexperienced engineers.. with not enough idea of the engines future pottential.
Anyway - it was nice to see a 6 litre Rover and 50 mm inlets valves..
The 3.9 in my Capri with flywheel and clutch,tubular manifolds,alternator and Ford pas pump/reservior(plus a big lifting chain still draped over it) came in at 171kgs.
The multi-belt crank pulley that mine came with originally must have weighed 15kgs alone and the fan and viscous coupling another 5.
The multi-belt crank pulley that mine came with originally must have weighed 15kgs alone and the fan and viscous coupling another 5.
The Rover V8 weighs circa' 230kg depending upon the type of ancillaries/vehicle. Agree with above tale of the RV8, simply, all in the MGB an RV8 weights are very similar.
If you're looking for a good engine stand that's very stable, buy from these guys. Superb service and very competitively priced.
http://www.sgs-engineering.com/garage-equipment/en...
Picture of engine on stand...
And now installed...
If you're looking for a good engine stand that's very stable, buy from these guys. Superb service and very competitively priced.
http://www.sgs-engineering.com/garage-equipment/en...
Picture of engine on stand...
And now installed...
Gassing Station | Engines & Drivetrain | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff