Compression test.

I haven't done a six, but the same setup is used in the Series 1 engine, and I did a valve grind on one of these many years ago, with no problems. You may find it useful to remove the LH mudguard, depending on how rusty the bolts are, but there should certainly be no need to remove the engine. The factory manual marks this operation as one that can be done with the engine in place. JD

all bolts lok to be in excellent condition, so i'll take your advice and take it off before trying anything. may not save much time, but may save a lot of frustration, and we all know which one is worth more.

states in mine that "in installations where access is restricted, to replace valve guides on no. 5 and 6 cylinders may first require engine removal" but as i probably wont replace the valve guides i suppose this doesn't concern me.

thanks.

Sam.

The 6-cylinder is great fun! The head/block face is at an angle just to make things interesting. The head is also pretty heavy. Getting it undone is straight forward, but (I did it myself) I'd suggest that having another pair of hands for lifting it off would be a good idea. Lapping the exhaust valves is fun - they are in the block as you say, so you have to sit on the wing to do it, being very careful where the grinding paste ends up. The other bit of fun is the exhaust valve collets - they can drop down into the oil gallery and have to be retrived with a magnet on a bit of wire or string. Putting the head back on is quite a challenge, but if you make up a couple of temporary studs to locate it then its not so bad - some help would be a definate plus. You'll need one of each type of valve spring compressor as well, one for the inlet valves and one for the exhaust.

Richard

I mean seriously, what is the benefit of this ridiculous IOE set-up?? there must be something positive about it.

anyway, fairly certain i will only be doing the exhaust valves as i am confident the inlet valves are OK. JD has suggested i take the wing off before doing it, i'll probably take his advice. which type of valve compressor is need for the exhaust valves, and more to the point, what are the two different types?

i've got a couple of weeks off soon, so i think i'll set aside one of them to doing this operation. even allowing a whole week, it'll end up taking two!

Sam.

The inlet over exhaust setup, in this form was used by Rover from the 1940s until the 1970's and was also used by Rolls Royce in the 1930's-1960's, and probably other manufacturers as well. (not to be confused with the inlet over exhaust setup that was common throughout the motor industry from the

1890's to 1920's)

This setup allows the use of an almost perfectly hemispherical combustion chamber together with an inlet valve which is much larger than could be used with any other valve layout for a given bore - important when the stroke was long compared to the bore, as dictated by UK taxing methods at the time the engine was designed. Properly done, which Rover did, it results in an engine that is very well mannered compared to what could be achieved with conventional overhead valves. However, this particular engine is not all that well suited to an offroad vehicle - it does not seem to stand up to abuse as well as either the 2.25OHV or the similar 2.0 engines, or even the V8. And lowering the compression to make it less fussy about fuel as was done when it was put in the Landrover resulted in pretty abysmal fuel economy. But still a very nice engine if you look after it. JD

It's not a nice engine at all in the Landrover. A shame really, as in the Rover Coupe it is an excellent engine, silky smooth and with an abundance of power and torque.

The 2.6/3.0 IOE is a long-stroke engine from the old horsepower calculation days (ie, prewar) which much prefers to cruise at low rpm, which is where the efficency of the engine is. Unfortunatly in the landrover, to get the required power from the detuned 2.6 the gear ratio is far to low, which results in the engine sitting on the limiter (if you have one fitted) when crusing at A-road/motorway speeds. Even with an overdrive installed 50-60mph is still very high rpm for the engine. This, coupled with the de-tuning results in a very thirsty fuel consumption.

The 3.0 with the performance head would have been a much better engine to put into the landrover, coupled with a higher-ratio transfer box, and it was only Rover's lack of a bigger engine that meant that it continued untill 1980ish by which time the engine was hideously outdated, inefficient and by the emissions standards of the time, very dirty.

If i was to consider continuing to run my 2.6, i'd be looking at some serious work to recondition the engine, despite it having done a genuine 30,000 miles from new (1978) the engine is on it's last legs, including a leaking headgasket which has corroded the head bolts in, two leaking exhaust valves and numerious other faults. Work which is simply not worth it on the engine, it would be far better, easier and cheaper to drop a 2.25/2.5/v8 into it. Consequently i'm scrapping the engine, a step that wasn't taken lightly, as a straight-six is by far my favourite engine layout. TBH, I miss the 6's pulling power and smoothness, but it simply doesn't make economic sense to continue with it.

Alex

My thoughts precisely Alex.

my 2.6 has done only about 60,000 ks and seems to be in excellent condition except for the leaky exhaust valves. i would love to plonk a 2.25 litre landy motor in, but i understand it takes a lot of work. transmission must be changed, as well as custome engine mounts etc. due to the different transmission location. tough decision at the moment, as i dont have the money to do any serious engine swap. but by the same token i don't want to throw money at a lost cause.

Sam.

Well, it isn't going to cost you anything to take the head off, exhaust valves out and have a carefull examination for valve seat recession. The IOE engine was not designed for unleaded and the exhaust valve seats recess if it is run on unleaded. If the valve seats are good, then it's worth grinding them in, doing a decoke and re-assembling the engine. If the valve seats are gone, then i'd stop right there and look at alternatives. Changing the exhaust valve seats is not going to be a cheap job, as you'll have to send the entire engine block away to have it done. It's not worth throwing serious money at the 2.6, it's a better option to use the money on a conversion. Yes, you'll need the transmission from a 2.25 as well, and the engine mounts will have to be changed.

Alex

Ahem - the 6-cylinder has another 800rpm over the 2¼, and mine with overdrive would do 80mph (closely followed by a fuel tanker - 9mpg!), a bit more with a following wind, down hill. I loved mine to bits, and much perferred it to my Stage I. Why-oh-why did I let the ex make me sell it.......

The 3.0 was fitted - for the NAD (US) market.

Ther's going to very little difference in "economy" between the B8 and the 6-cylinder, and the 2¼ is going to seem abysmal. If you must change it for economy, the 2.5 is the best bet by far (relatively).

Richard

how hard is it to put a 2.25 four-cylinder into a landy. am i right in think that custom engine mounts will have to be made up?

Sam.

by that i mean put a four cylinder series motor into a 6 cylinder series 3.

Yes - they would need to be made/moved.

Richard

On or around Mon, 5 Sep 2005 16:23:03 +0000 (UTC), beamendsltd enlightened us thusly:

is the 6 a different chassis then? seems a strange idea. I can easily believe different mounting plates for the engine - would have expected gearbox mounts the same, too - unless the 6 has unique propshafts, in which case the box doesn't have to be in the same place.

Mind, it's be typical of LR to make a different chassis *and* different engine plates.

The six is a different chassis, different bulkhead, floor plates, different propshafts, different gearbox x-member, engine x-member, and the gearlever on a 2a is different (you can't use the cranked 2a gearlever on a 3, you'll bang your knuckles, or strike a cranked 2a one on the seat box in a six) but the S3 gearlever is fine.

The 2.6 wouldn't quite fit behind the rad on a series, so the moved the engine/gearbox back about 3" to accomodate the six. Consequently the bulkhead is deeper, the gearbox x-member is further back and the propshafts are different lengths to a normal 109". It's not as bad as it sounds, as all you have to do is remove the engine mounts and weld

2.25 mounts on in the right place (trial and error fit, i'm afraid, the manuals won't have the right dimensions, and if you weld em on in the 2.25 position they won't fit). The transmission can stay where it is. The only problem you then have is the throttle linkage as a series one won't fit the bulkhead, and won;t be in the right place for the carb if you do.

The gearbox has a different bellhousing, as it mounts to the 2.6 IOE, which is the same as the old 2.0 IOE in the S1/early S2. You can either change the bellhousing (beware! the bellhousing is different at the gearbox end, depending on which model & suffix gearbox you have) or drop a 2.25 in complete with transmission.

Alex

PS. if anybody wants chassis measurments from a S3 2.6, i havn't cut mine up yet (still lyting around with engine etc etc on it) so i can go round and put a tape measure on it.

In terms of engine mounts - yes it is different, and yes, the prop shafts are unique. The bulkhead is also unique. They made an awful lot of 6-cylinders, so they probably count as different rather than unique.

Richard

Given that you're in Aus and it'll be a custom fabrication job whatever you fit, why don't you drop a Holden 6 in? It won't be any harder to do and should be more economical than a 2.25 petrol and certainly a lot more driveable.

i have been giving that option a great deal of thought, but am having trouble finding a conversion kit for the 6 cylinder. it needs a different bellhousing and different mounts to the 4 cylinder conversion. i don't have the money to do a custom job at the moment so i have to keep an eye out for some second hand bits.

Sam.

I want to do a custom fabrication job to mate a GM 30NE lump to a series box, but can i find anyone prepared to make an adaptor plate for anything approaching a reasonable price? And even it it was a reasonable price, i couldn't really afford it. Hence that project has been shelved for another year, untill i can get the required engine in and make a conversion myself

Alex

Bolt a 4cyl bellhousing onto the gearbox, and then it's all easy.