Physical dimensions of MGB engine

MG themselves built one with the Daimler V8 in, just the one IIRC, as an experiment.

I believe it was probably the best MGB ever.

Dave - just curious - why so expensive? Years since I had one, but wasn't it a straightforward iron block pushrod lump? To be contentious, four Triumph parallel twin bike engines (same designer). Can't see why it should be difficult to manufacture. And these were the people who gave us the Stag engine....

Geoff MacK

Twin cams, for a start. Hemispherical combustion chambers which required machineing after casting. Unlike the Rover V-8.

Nor was that used elsewhere for the same reason.

In article , "Dave Plowman (News)" writes

Surely not?

I'm trying to remember how this thread started. Was someone looking for an MGB engine? It's just that I seem to have bought myself a basket case MGB and will most likely end up selling it off as parts unless the bodywork turns out to be a pleasant surprise.

Collecting it tomorrow, so will report on Monday.

Trouble is, I'm also picking up a P100 pickup I've just bought and haven't told my wife yet. For 67 and 53 quid each, it was hard to resist.

Sorry, no. I started it by asking if anyone had some basic external dimensions of an MGB engine. I was pondering what less obvious unit would be a suitable replacement. I really liked the idea of squeezing in a Triumph six cylinder, if only to upset the purists in both camps..... Cheers, Bill.

Gotcha. Unless I've managed to flog the thing before it reaches home, I'll get my tape measure out. May as well measure the Vitesse too while I'm at it, to answer the question fully. Meanwhile, I'm wondering whether the B's engine, overdrive 'box and rear axle would go into a Minor. The axle alone could be a bonus really.

Should be nice if you can get it in. The 2 litre one goes into an AC Ace very well when the original AC six gets a bit tired. Length might be a bit of a problem in an MG, but from what I remember of staggering about with B cylinder blocks I wouldn't think the Triumph 6 is a lot heavier. Could be wrong though.

Ron Robinson

Single cam, I think - basically it was 4 BSA A10 engines flying in formation. (Not Triumph engines as is so often said...) Same designer though, I think, Val Page??

There's a distinct resemblance to the Dodge Hemi and I've always wondered if there's a connection.

In article , Stan Barr writes

I'm sure it was.

Edward Turner.

It was/is a pushrod engine. There aren't many pushrod twin cams.

The message from Dean Dark contains these words:

The Riley engines of the early 50s were (well 2 1/2 anyway) but I can't remember if this was a development or completely new. (What I can remember even after 40 years is that the dismantled block was so heavy I couldn't lift it on my own).

Classic Riley design - twin high mounted cams but still in the block. Lee Francis too.

I *thought* the Daimler engine was similar because of the hemispherical combustion chambers.

I've tried a Google but can't find a description of it.

He was in overall charge, but I'm pretty sure Val Page did most of the work. I've got an article on Mr Page in a magazine somewhere, but finding it might prove difficult.

Pre-War as well. The Riley is said to be the inspiration for the Triumph motorcycle engine. Wasn't one of the Humber engines like that too?

There have been quite a few motorcycle engines with twin cams and pushrods (I'm not counting single cylinder models...) - Triumph, Ariel and Indian parallel twins for starters, and any number of early T-Head car engines.

Hi Ron, The engines are pretty close in weight, the Triumph is a little heavier but not drastically so. I'd like to get both engines alongside one another to take comparative measurements. It's whether there's enough clearance over the front crossmember without angling the driveline that concerns me. There should be enough length to the engine bay, though the front cylinders would inevitably overhang the front wheels. Shoudl sound nice at least, Cheers, Bill.

It would probably handle better if you got the engine as far back as you can. Might mean changing the back two sparking plugs from inside the cockpit though.

Ron Robinson

Riley and Lea-Francis used two camshafts in the block to work valves in a hemi-head with rockers and short pushrods. Rileys had the tappets in the block, LeaFs in the head. The last Humber Super Snipe used a single camshaft in the block working opposed angled valves with pushrods at different angles and two rocker shafts, one for inlet, one for exhaust. Peugeot and Armstrong Siddeley did the same - rather earlier, especially in the case of Peugeot.. BMW and Bristol worked their valves in hemi-heads from one camshaft in the block and pushrods to rockers on the inlet side. The exhaust rockers were on a separate shaft on the exhaust side, worked by short transverse pushrods from rockers on the shaft on the inlet side.

Ron Robinson

Knowing what access under the dash is like on an MGB, that really doesn't appeal! It would make far more sense to re-engineer for a stat-of -the-art modern engine, but sense has never been one of my strong points. Cheers, Bill.