Discussion
Hi..
Much to my surprise, my August 96 Griff 500 is not cross bolted. According to Des Hammill's book (Powertuning a Rover V8) I have a type 5&6 Interim or Intermediate 38A block. Rover started cross bolting their engines from Sept 94..and I assumed a 96 TVR would have been the same.. until I looked!!.
Did TVR strengthen the big ends .. and why did they not perceive the need to cross bolt 500s?
Also, just out of interest, what size block would a 96 500 have oringianly been.. did it start off as a 3.9 or 4.2??
No real concerns.. just curious!!
Much to my surprise, my August 96 Griff 500 is not cross bolted. According to Des Hammill's book (Powertuning a Rover V8) I have a type 5&6 Interim or Intermediate 38A block. Rover started cross bolting their engines from Sept 94..and I assumed a 96 TVR would have been the same.. until I looked!!.
Did TVR strengthen the big ends .. and why did they not perceive the need to cross bolt 500s?
Also, just out of interest, what size block would a 96 500 have oringianly been.. did it start off as a 3.9 or 4.2??
No real concerns.. just curious!!
just to open the discussion further, is the 5.0l engines not cross bolted anything to do with the cranks bearing sizes?
Maybe the 5.0 cranks have the smaller journal sizes and TVR couldnt get the caps in this size?
Whereas the 450 probably used a 4.6 crank with larger journals?
Of course looking at the dates of the engines history this may all be a load of shite....
Maybe the 5.0 cranks have the smaller journal sizes and TVR couldnt get the caps in this size?
Whereas the 450 probably used a 4.6 crank with larger journals?
Of course looking at the dates of the engines history this may all be a load of shite....
All the 450's are cross bolted purely because they are a standard 4.6 range rover short engine, the 500's used the 3.9 block so ran with a small journal crank, i guess they could have cross bolted them at tvr but it boils down to manufacturing cost i guess, when tey could no longer get the 3.9 block they had to have there cranks re cast as large journal so moved onto the 4.6 block, so the last of the 500's are cross bolted.......
antonyj said:
just to open the discussion further, is the 5.0l engines not cross bolted anything to do with the cranks bearing sizes?
Maybe the 5.0 cranks have the smaller journal sizes and TVR couldnt get the caps in this size?
Whereas the 450 probably used a 4.6 crank with larger journals?
Of course looking at the dates of the engines history this may all be a load of shite....
Maybe the 5.0 cranks have the smaller journal sizes and TVR couldnt get the caps in this size?
Whereas the 450 probably used a 4.6 crank with larger journals?
Of course looking at the dates of the engines history this may all be a load of shite....
I considered this but aren't the 4.5's produced using stroker Iceberg cranks ay 80 mm? In otherwords small journal cranks. I'd suggest that TVR were just using whatever bottom ends were availabole from landrover at the time and modding as required. It could be that there was a surplus of intermediate blocks after rover went dizzyless.
Boosted.
Boosted LS1 said:
antonyj said:
just to open the discussion further, is the 5.0l engines not cross bolted anything to do with the cranks bearing sizes?
Maybe the 5.0 cranks have the smaller journal sizes and TVR couldnt get the caps in this size?
Whereas the 450 probably used a 4.6 crank with larger journals?
Of course looking at the dates of the engines history this may all be a load of shite....
Maybe the 5.0 cranks have the smaller journal sizes and TVR couldnt get the caps in this size?
Whereas the 450 probably used a 4.6 crank with larger journals?
Of course looking at the dates of the engines history this may all be a load of shite....
I considered this but aren't the 4.5's produced using stroker Iceberg cranks ay 80 mm? In otherwords small journal cranks. I'd suggest that TVR were just using whatever bottom ends were availabole from landrover at the time and modding as required. It could be that there was a surplus of intermediate blocks after rover went dizzyless.
Boosted.
The early 4.5's used the iceberg cranks such as the wedges and very early griffs, but all the late chims had the 4.6 crank.. to be honest i have heard of 4.5 late griffs but i have never seen such a beast so i cant comment on that one although i would suspect it has the 4.6 crank!
Last time I looked there were a set of x-bolt end caps on ebay.
Physically, the end caps in my 500 (96) were identical to x-bolted caps other than not being drilled - they fit flush to the machines sides of the block as per x-bolted caps, no gaps as per Quinny's engine detailed in the link above.
It doesn't seem on the face of it that there would be a lot to do to fit x-bolts on some of these engines.
Physically, the end caps in my 500 (96) were identical to x-bolted caps other than not being drilled - they fit flush to the machines sides of the block as per x-bolted caps, no gaps as per Quinny's engine detailed in the link above.
It doesn't seem on the face of it that there would be a lot to do to fit x-bolts on some of these engines.
Edited by victormeldrew on Monday 2nd October 16:52
Quinny said:
Hi Phil how's it going?
You're right. It wouldn't be a massive job to X bolt your block, but my old block with the non flush fitting caps would have required new caps and therefor line boring to suit.
If any one's tempted by the caps on ebay, first find out if your main bearing size is 2.3" or 2.5". Most early 500's are 2.3".
If they match you'll still not be able to use them without line boring to suit.
Still think you did well to get an 86 Chimm 500 though
hehe:
Der! Yes, that should have been 96 of course! You're right. It wouldn't be a massive job to X bolt your block, but my old block with the non flush fitting caps would have required new caps and therefor line boring to suit.
If any one's tempted by the caps on ebay, first find out if your main bearing size is 2.3" or 2.5". Most early 500's are 2.3".
If they match you'll still not be able to use them without line boring to suit.
Still think you did well to get an 86 Chimm 500 though
hehe:It's not going at all to be honest, way too much work. Engine is still on the bench waiting to be swung back in, I just can't find the time to do it. I suspect the ever present threat of having to sell it to pay tax bills may have a little to do with that as well
It's nearly a year now, so some digit extraction is in order I think.
PS for anyone thinking of going the x-bolting route there were a set on ebay last time I looked.
Edited by victormeldrew on Monday 2nd October 16:53
Aaron C. Reskew said:
I've also noticed this.
All the 4.5 litre Chimaera models are, but the 500 was not crossbolted until the SE or LE or whatever it is called.
I just found out that my pre 'se' griff has a crossbolted blockAll the 4.5 litre Chimaera models are, but the 500 was not crossbolted until the SE or LE or whatever it is called.
,but it is one of the last made before they started building the 'se',(sept 2000).I wonder when they started using the crossbolted blocks?Would you find one on an early 2000 car,or even a late '99?victormeldrew said:
There have been a number of snapped cranks, so its not an unreasonable precaution to stiffen up the crank area.
The ultimate would be a cross bolted block with a mains girdle, all strapped down with ARP studs.
The ultimate would be a cross bolted block with a mains girdle, all strapped down with ARP studs.
Mines a non cross bolted chim 500 and is currently dead due to a bent crankshaft. Don't know if it has owt to do with it thou just thought I would tell everyone of my woes!!!
Gassing Station | Griffith | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff