adam73bgt
Club Retro Rides Member
Posts: 4,869
Club RR Member Number: 58
|
|
Oct 19, 2012 17:46:20 GMT
|
Hi all, I've been thinking about ways to get a bit more speed and economy from my MGB, it doesn't take long on the internet to realise that modifying the B series lump isn't going to get you too far.. So engine conversion it is.. A bit of research has thrown up that the rover T16 could make for a (relatively) easy swap as it should mate to the MGB gearbox fairly easily as the T is an improved M series which is an improved O series which is an improved B series.. also managed to find a pretty decent 'how to' guide on how to fit one So really what I'm asking is, what is the T series like as an engine? i know you can get 140ish bhp from a standard non-turbo lump (got no room for a turbo version in the B), does anyone know what economy is like? And alsooo, why aren't there more conversions around? there seem to be more zetec than T16 B's about that I can see... is there something hidden about the T16 i should know?... Sorry if this is a bit more of a musing than a direct question but I'm trying to gauge if this is a conversion worth thinking about ;D cheers in advance for any replies!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 19, 2012 18:46:54 GMT
|
|
|
|
|
squonk
Part of things
Posts: 858
|
|
Oct 19, 2012 23:11:26 GMT
|
Unfortunately you have to be a member of rovertech to follow that link. But it leads you to this link: forums.mg-rover.org/showthread.php?t=434947I have a Rover 620Ti. All I can say is that in turbo form the engine is excellent. A couple of points to watch if you are considering using a T16. Firstly, earlier engines used a distributor mounted on the end of one camshaft. This will point straight into the bulkhead if the engine is mounted north-south and may cause clearance issues. Later engines (1996 onwards) use a coil pack and a cam sensor so no bits sticking out the end. Secondly, they have a rather clever immobiliser that is linked into the ECU. You will need to have a specialist remove this function from the ECU if you want to stick with the standard engine management.
|
|
2004 Chevrolet Avalanche Z71 2005 Mercedes CLK320 Cabriolet 1996 Mercedes C180 Elegance Auto Saloon 1996 Rover 620Ti (Dead fuel pump) 1992 Toyota HiLux Surf 1987 Range Rover Vogue (Rusty) 1992 Range Rover Vogue SE (More Rusty) 2006 Chrysler Grand Voyager 2008 Corsa 1.4 Design
|
|
ChasR
RR Helper
motivation
Posts: 10,195
Club RR Member Number: 170
|
|
Oct 19, 2012 23:54:47 GMT
|
Kevin Leaper from PPC has been putting a turbocharged T Series into his 'B for years now!
A few other things to bear in mind with a T Series:
AFAIK, you will still need an adaptor plate made up between the gearbox and engine (although this will be simpler than most it would seem). Final thing I seem to remember is that with the stock exhaust manifold the turbo goes where the chassis leg is, meaning you need to either get creative in that area (some have with a good chunk of the leg reshaped) or to get an exhaust manifold which mounts the turbo higher up.
On the basis you don't wish to go for a Turbo you should be fine for one of those points.
As for why people avoid them, I reckon it is down to a variety of things IMHO.
Perceived reliability is one of them it seems. Many a T Series (especially the earlier derivatives) had a habit of having a leaking headgasket. The tell tale sign (but generally considered to be benign) was oil coming out of the rear right of the head. Whilst a small leak is just about bearable, this can (and in most cases it seems to) get much bigger. A Klinger head gasket set is said to cure the problem and makes the T Series a very sturdy engine.
Electrics as above will play a part too me thinks.
Off the shelf tuning goodies are available but from what I have seen do not compare with the Ford derivatives in terms of options and availability. In the case of the turbo it is said that to go much above the 200BHP threshold, new pistons and rods (or a combination of the mentioned items from various T Series engines) is required in order to prevent something breaking.
Whilst they are not a common conversion I have seen at least 2-3 cars in the flesh that have been converted to T Series power.
|
|
|
|
adam73bgt
Club Retro Rides Member
Posts: 4,869
Club RR Member Number: 58
|
|
|
yeah I think I'd come across that link before, it just seemed like any build thread I found online seemed to stop before anyone finished the conversion haha mm I think I'd have to go with a later coil pack engine as the distributor would probably end up in the heater somewhere.. and yeah ecu's are something I don't like thinking about.. (this is why I bought a car with a simple old engine in the first place... ) yeah as much as I'd love a turbo, adjusting or modifying the chassis leg to accomodate it doesnt sound particularly cheap.. especially on my earlier B without the wider engine bay of later models. Hopefully the n/a version would provide an adequate amount of power argh not headgaskets! that's why I didn't even bother mentioning the K series I suppose I'd arrived at the T16 also because I'd like to do something a little different, for instance my other pipedream idea was to fit a KV6 from an MG ZT but I think that would be rather outside my budget
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
didn't an MG Maestro have one of these engines fitted when it held the world record for fastest fwd car 0=60 couple of years back?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 20, 2012 12:16:33 GMT
|
Rover L series diesel
|
|
You're like a crazy backyard genius!
|
|
sowen
Club Retro Rides Member
Posts: 2,245
Club RR Member Number: 24
|
|
Oct 20, 2012 15:10:03 GMT
|
So really what I'm asking is, what is the T series like as an engine? I know you can get 140ish bhp from a standard non-turbo lump (got no room for a turbo version in the B), does anyone know what economy is like? I've got an M/T series in my Rover P6, it's a good steady engine, I've only done a few hundred miles on it so I don't really know what the economy is like yet but it goes well enough compared to the old 8 valve lump. And alsooo, why aren't there more conversions around? there seem to be more zetec than T16 B's about that I can see... is there something hidden about the T16 I should know?... It's a Rover engine, so automatically the general masses dismiss it and highlight any reliability issues. The leaky headgasket should be an easy fix with a light re-face of the head and block and modern replacement headgasket. As you're aware it can be made to fit with relative ease, but some of the key parts to convert them to rwd are rare, such as the bellhousing and flywheel to fit to the LT77 or R380 gearbox and Discovery inlet manifold with the throttle body on the front. As you are considering using the MGB transmission that is not as much of a problem.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 20, 2012 18:52:51 GMT
|
The t16 is a good engine providing you find one thats had the uprated headgasket fitted. In truth they will probably have all had it done by now anyway. don't bother buying just an engine either as a 620ti can be picked up for peanuts now. Good luck.
|
|
sweaty palms slip off joystick
|
|
squonk
Part of things
Posts: 858
|
|
Oct 20, 2012 18:56:24 GMT
|
I just stumbled across this which you may find interesting: www.kewengineering.co.uk/upgrades4mgs/Engines/rover_t16_engine.htmlHead gaskets are only a problem on abused engines. This is really no different to any other car with an alluminium head that is allowed to overheat. The standard power output of the turbo version is 199 bhp which was enough to propel a 620Ti to 60 in less than 7 seconds and on to a top speed of 155 mph. The N/A version is in the region of 140 bhp which is still more power than either an MGC or a B V8 so should give adequate performance in stock form. The torque is good at low revs too. Like a lot of Rover engines, this one is much maligned mainly by those who know little about them. The people who actually have cars with them fitted know how good this engine really is.
|
|
2004 Chevrolet Avalanche Z71 2005 Mercedes CLK320 Cabriolet 1996 Mercedes C180 Elegance Auto Saloon 1996 Rover 620Ti (Dead fuel pump) 1992 Toyota HiLux Surf 1987 Range Rover Vogue (Rusty) 1992 Range Rover Vogue SE (More Rusty) 2006 Chrysler Grand Voyager 2008 Corsa 1.4 Design
|
|
|
squonk
Part of things
Posts: 858
|
|
Oct 20, 2012 19:05:35 GMT
|
don't bother buying just an engine either as a 620ti can be picked up for peanuts now. Good luck. I would advise you not buy a cheap 620Ti, it will be abused and under maintained. The engine will be seriously knackered and a pile of trouble. Good 620Ti's are making good money, its only the bad ones that are cheap!! Mine is excellent and I have already turned down £1200 for it!! (its not for sale anyway). You would be well advised to buy a complete car as you will get all the electronics and can hear it running before buying it. As you don't want a turbo motor a better choice would be an 820. Most of these have had an easy life cruising up and down motorways and have been maintained as company cars. It's a large old barge that is bland and forgettable so has little appeal to anyone now. Hence prices are low for very good examples.
|
|
2004 Chevrolet Avalanche Z71 2005 Mercedes CLK320 Cabriolet 1996 Mercedes C180 Elegance Auto Saloon 1996 Rover 620Ti (Dead fuel pump) 1992 Toyota HiLux Surf 1987 Range Rover Vogue (Rusty) 1992 Range Rover Vogue SE (More Rusty) 2006 Chrysler Grand Voyager 2008 Corsa 1.4 Design
|
|
|
|
Oct 20, 2012 19:14:38 GMT
|
I was looking into a similar conversion in an Ital pick-up a while ago. As said a Discovery Mpi inlet manifold is needed (I have one going spare) and ideally an O-series sump from a Sherpa or SD1, and you can also use the gearbox from them also, though I can't remember where this locates the starter motor (possibly where the turbo is). Ended up going L-series in that which was a complete PITA!
|
|
|
|
sonus
Europe
Posts: 1,386
|
|
Oct 20, 2012 21:53:31 GMT
|
I'd worry about the MGB gearbox's ability to handle the extra power and torque.
I decided on Zetec based upon another chaps advice who had done the T16 swap including turbo in his MGB.
|
|
Current 1968 TVR VIXEN S1 V8 Prototype 2004 TVR T350C 2017 BMW 340i
Previous BMW 325d E91LCI - sold Alfa Romeo GTV - sold Citroen AX GT - at the breakers Ford Puma 1.7 - sold Volvo V50 2.0d - sold MGB GT - wrecked by fire MG ZT 1.8T - sold VW E-golf Electric - sold Mini Countryman 1.6D -sold Land Rover Discovery TD5 - sold
|
|
squonk
Part of things
Posts: 858
|
|
Oct 20, 2012 22:45:19 GMT
|
Thats not exactly comparing eggs with eggs is it. A T16 turbo puts out 199 bhp, a 2.0 litre zetec around 136 bhp. Hardly surprising the turbo caused gearbox problems. The T16 NA puts out 140 bhp so is a better match. If the box can take the Zetec it should be fine with the extra couple of bhp of the T16.
|
|
2004 Chevrolet Avalanche Z71 2005 Mercedes CLK320 Cabriolet 1996 Mercedes C180 Elegance Auto Saloon 1996 Rover 620Ti (Dead fuel pump) 1992 Toyota HiLux Surf 1987 Range Rover Vogue (Rusty) 1992 Range Rover Vogue SE (More Rusty) 2006 Chrysler Grand Voyager 2008 Corsa 1.4 Design
|
|
sonus
Europe
Posts: 1,386
|
|
|
Thats not exactly comparing eggs with eggs is it. A T16 turbo puts out 199 bhp, a 2.0 litre zetec around 136 bhp. Hardly surprising the turbo caused gearbox problems. The T16 NA puts out 140 bhp so is a better match. If the box can take the Zetec it should be fine with the extra couple of bhp of the T16. Well i'm not using the original gearbox with my zetec. I'm using a type9 as its much easier to use and has more upgrade parts available for it. I'd still worry about gearbox durability with only 140 bhp aswell. My mgb b-series engine managed 71bhp on the rollers after adjustment, half of what the NA T-series will but out.
|
|
Current 1968 TVR VIXEN S1 V8 Prototype 2004 TVR T350C 2017 BMW 340i
Previous BMW 325d E91LCI - sold Alfa Romeo GTV - sold Citroen AX GT - at the breakers Ford Puma 1.7 - sold Volvo V50 2.0d - sold MGB GT - wrecked by fire MG ZT 1.8T - sold VW E-golf Electric - sold Mini Countryman 1.6D -sold Land Rover Discovery TD5 - sold
|
|
adam73bgt
Club Retro Rides Member
Posts: 4,869
Club RR Member Number: 58
|
|
Oct 21, 2012 11:39:29 GMT
|
thanks for all the advice here guys, while my brain says the n/a version is a better proposition regarding not knackering the drivetrain, making it actually fit etc. 200bhp in a car which weighs about/under a tonne is a very attractive prospect (though i would expect the insurance company would have the last word here...) if i was buying an engine to swap i'd possibly get the head gasket changed anyway, just for peace of mind really, and if people in general are put off by rover engines then i'll happily take advantage of the low prices haha did the MGBGTV8 use the standard gearbox? cos that had nearly 200 lbft of torque i believe? so the drivetrain should be fairly beefy?.. actually thinking about it, the rear axle was different so there could be a different 'box too theres always the type 9 conversion i suppose, but i like playing with the overdrive too much haha i think the main issues are going to be with finding those bits to actually make it all fit together, the disco manifold and the odd sherpa bits which id imagine are a bit like hen's teeth these days.. also L-series conversion suggestion made me laugh ;D as amusing as it would be to have a diesel mgb (and to see what some of the 'mg establishment' made of it) i don't want to get a diesel car just yet haha
|
|
|
|
ChasR
RR Helper
motivation
Posts: 10,195
Club RR Member Number: 170
|
|
Oct 21, 2012 20:25:21 GMT
|
Yes, the V8 did use a similar 'box (gears may have been different mind you) although the V8 was detuned (to around 137BHP) and well, smooth power/torque seems to be easier on a gearbox than a brutal rush of it (this may be one reason why supercharged Mini owners do not seem to blow up as many gearboxes as the Turbo'd engines). Overdrive however was disabled in 3rd on the V8, with it only being available to use in top gear.
|
|
|
|
m1keh
Part of things
Posts: 278
|
|
Feb 15, 2017 13:41:02 GMT
|
Did anything happen with this? I always fancied doing this with an NA T Series lump in an MGB.
|
|
Last Edit: Feb 15, 2017 13:54:43 GMT by m1keh
|
|
adam73bgt
Club Retro Rides Member
Posts: 4,869
Club RR Member Number: 58
|
|
Feb 15, 2017 14:42:05 GMT
|
Oh wow this is a blast from the past! I still have the B but I went off the idea of the T series in the end. My current plan is to boost the old B series and see what I can manage out of it. Once that blows up, who knows From what I'd read up on them though, the T series swap does look pretty straightforward and if you go the turbo route then there is some tuning following for them, not so much for the NA though, but the standard NA lump would still make a B a decent drive I reckon
|
|
|
|
m1keh
Part of things
Posts: 278
|
|
Feb 16, 2017 13:42:44 GMT
|
I was thinking NA would be more than enough if properly mapped. I think the T series was 138(?) bhp as standard. Should get 10% more with proper management - no need to run a cat, or be lean for emissions, and a bit more still if you go carbs or ITBs.
|
|
|
|
|