Buick/Rover aluminum v8 to 914 conversion Options

[Krank]

I have two 215 Olds engines. The Olds engines have 6 head bolts and the Buick versions have only 5. One is rebuilt sitting on an engine stand waiting for oil pump issues to be ironed out and the other is still in the donor car. I originally was going to rebuild my 2 DR '62 Olds F85 and use the motor in that but as with most uni-bodies there is only so much work you want to put into a project. The amount of sheet metal work was just too much for this cowboy. So I found a '74 914 roller to drop my motor into. BTW, anyone looking for 1962 Olds body parts? LOL
As far as the expansion section in that manifold that Streetover has, it is just as mentioned, it is for compensating for expansion in the steel. There may be a stainless steel weave sound blanket that you can steal off a Lexus exhaust connector and wrap then secure but personally I don't think you would reduce the exhaust noise very much at all. Headers of all type are noisy! Period! With an engine that close to your ear expect a lot of engine noise to start with. On the up side you can save your money by not selecting a very expensive sound system for the car.
Steel headers, as a result of their design, are also a lot more prone to cracking than cast manifolds.
Now this being said it all depends on your driving habits, planned use for the car, passenger comfort needed (wife, girlfriend, other) as to manifold/header choice.
Thanks to everyone with all the ignition tips. I just may change over to distributorless. I had converted the OEM distributor for points to solid state but just because I already had a good distributor. For clearance I just may change over.
Is the manifold you picked up an Edelbrock 2198? I am going to use my stock one but there is some moderate pitting around the coolant passages at the rear of the manifold so the Edlebrock one may be the replacement.

[codices]

Krank,

If you have the engine mounted in your "teener" we need pictures. Thanks.

Dave

[rick 918-S]

Yep, that's an expansion joint. My 928 engine has one.

[andys]

That Olds 215 was the better motor of the two. There was also the Jetfire turbocharged version in '62 or '63; that would make an interesting 914 conversion.

Andys

[Cheapsnake]

Krank,

If you have the engine mounted in your "teener" we need pictures. Thanks.

Dave

x2. C'mon, cough em up.

I have to question andys comment that the Olds engine was the better of the two. Yes, it had the extra bolt in the heads, apparently to accommodate the pressures from the turbo, but aside from that the engines are 100% identical. Even the value of the extra head bolt is questionable, since Rover dropped it from all their configurations. This is not to start a "Olds vs. Buick" debate, they are both great little engines that are perfectly suited for our teeners. The fact is, they are getting hard to find and if you can find either one in good shape, grab it, regardless of its maker.

Tom

[andys]

Krank,

If you have the engine mounted in your "teener" we need pictures. Thanks.

Dave

x2. C'mon, cough em up.

I have to question andys comment that the Olds engine was the better of the two. Yes, it had the extra bolt in the heads, apparently to accommodate the pressures from the turbo, but aside from that the engines are 100% identical. Even the value of the extra head bolt is questionable, since Rover dropped it from all their configurations. This is not to start a "Olds vs. Buick" debate, they are both great little engines that are perfectly suited for our teeners. The fact is, they are getting hard to find and if you can find either one in good shape, grab it, regardless of its maker.

Tom

Tom,

Being that the block, heads, and pistons were different between the two makes them rather far removed from 100% identical. Back in those days, the Olds was always prefered over the Buick version mostly because the heads were much better due to the prefered exhaust port arrangement. Being that the Buick version continued on with modern development, it of course prevails today. Agreed however is that these are great little motors even by todays standards.

Andys

[streetrover]

Ok, so here's the latest...I took the Rover flex plate to Kennedy Engineering. Spoke with Brett. After extensive measuring it looks like it's indeed possible to machine the flywheel to accept the stock trigger-wheel. Should be ready in another week. I'll post some pix as soon as I pick it up. At that point it's time to try the first shoehorning of this motor into the engine compartment!

[codices]

Bob,

The ignition approach that you are taking sounds really cool. However we still have a waterpump problem that may or may not be solved with a remote electric. I will try to get back to that problem as soon as possible and let everyone know what is happening.

I have some rust/welding fixing to do and also want to find/build an engine test stand to run the engine in before installation. Will let everyone know what is happening with pictures.

Dave

[streetrover]

Excellent Dave! Please post as soon as you have a breakthrough/epiphany. I've also been pondering the issue and thus far its a toss-up electric vs. belt. Electric seems sooooo much easier but I have absolutely no personal experience with these pumps. Still, the Maziere guys make some amazing claims in terms of gallons-per-minute as well as dependability and durability. ($325) I like the renegade hybrids solution too but it would require extra machining/engineering of brackets. Again, let us know what progress you make. Tom said he's had to cut the front firewall area and relocate the brake fluid booster to accomodate the crank pulley and I'm going to assume that more pulleys will equal more cutting.

[914GT]

If it helps any, I've been running a Dedenbear remote water pump on my 350 V8 with air conditioning since 2002 with no cooling problems. This is under highway or city traffic conditions at well over 100 degree summer temps.

Guy

[codices]

Guy,

That is really encouraging to know. I have the Davies Craig EWP setup for my 215 conversion. The pump speeds up at idle and slows down at speed and being an Aussie unit is well tested on Rover equipment "down under" in the outback. I will test mine (with the radiator/fan unit that will be installed in the 914) on a test stand before installation. Also a good time to check for water and oil leaks especially sice the original rope seals have been replaced with neoprene from D&D.

Dave

[914GT]

Dave,

I know nothing about the Rover engines, but if they are prone to leak from around the oil pan you may want to set up your stand to match the angle when engine installed in the car - if that's possible. My chevy motor does not set level, with the front of the block lower than the back. And my suspension and wheels have the rear of the car just a bit higher than the front. Hence there's more oil in contact with the front pan gasket, resulting in a little seepage from that area. Just something to consider.

Guy

[codices]

Guy,

Thanks for the information. I will try to replicate the angle on the stand.

Dave

[Krank]

Krank,

If you have the engine mounted in your "teener" we need pictures. Thanks.

Dave

x2. C'mon, cough em up.

I have to question andys comment .......The fact is, they are getting hard to find and if you can find either one in good shape, grab it, regardless of its maker.

Tom

Tom,

Being that the block, heads, and pistons were different between the two makes them rather far removed from 100% identical. ...... Agreed however is that these are great little motors even by todays standards.

Andys

Hey Guys,
I haven't looked at this post for awhile and I know there is a way to tag a post but I don't know how on this kind of forum. Yes, there is differences between the Buick and the Olds engines. The Olds block was the only engine used as a "stock block" engine in F1 racing - ever! Both by Dan Gurney and Mickey Thompson used these engines and I believe there used to be high performance con rods designed by Dan Gurney available. They apparently worked very well with the later Rover forged crank and the GM 300 cu in heads (the 215 replacement engine available in 1964). This set-up resulted in a 5.0L engine around 450 lbs fully dressed. I don't know the torque and HP values but this would certainly be a sweet setup.

As far as this thread goes how can I tag it so I can find it again or be notified of a post because all this information here is invaluable!! Great work. As far as pictures go, the only one I could send in are the ones that the majority of members cameras and computers are full of. The same rusting/bent heap found in some in the back yard of some derelict crack house. Actually I am approaching this project differently. As i remove an item in need of overhaul or replacement I do what is required for that item and store it away as a ready to install part. that way after the shell is fully fluffed all I have to do is assemble a kit car so to speak. No painful waiting, searching, hoping, stealing, borrowing, beggi...you know what I mean.

My plans are to use a remote water pump, dry sump oil system is too expensive/complicated for me, and put it in to get on the road. the winters here are long and cold so i have lots of time for tweaking between seasons. some of the posts here do however have my loins quivering on the FI options. I am in the process of repowering my '53 1300 GMC as the regular fuel tap of a Holley washed out the main bearings in the SBC in it. So many things...so little time.

Wow....is that what that little check box "Enable email notification of replies? " at the bottom is for??? DUH!

O.K. enough is enough, I am old...I tend to ramble

[J P Stein]

The Olds was the only "stock block" in F1 to win the drivers & constructors championship in the modern F1 era. BMW used a "stock block".....again in a Brabham, IIRC.... back in the turbo era. I don't think Gurney ever used that engine....he was a Ford guy, but Bruce MaClaren used them to good effect in the early Can Am era.....before the rule of elephants.

[rick 918-S]

The Olds was the only "stock block" in F1 to win the drivers & constructors championship in the modern F1 era. BMW used a "stock block".....again in a Brabham, IIRC.... back in the turbo era. I don't think Gurney ever used that engine....he was a Ford guy, but Bruce MaClaren used them to good effect in the early Can Am era.....before the rule of elephants.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/agree.gif) Same block used in the BMW 2002. BMW was able to make a 1000 hp from their 4 cylinder.

[Krank]

Hello everyone! OK, I've got an empty 914 in my driveway and a 4.0 liter Rover engine in my garage. A Buick 4bbl intake is en route as is an Edelbrock carb. I've got lots of questions about clearance, most notably about the distributor. The Rover engine came stock with a "crankshaft angle sensor" and individual coils. It'd be great to use this instead of the distributor but I don't know if I can run this ignition system without the "computer" that also controls the fuel injection. If I need to go with the distributor instead that's fine but then how do I overcome clearance restrictions? I would REALLY love to talk to someone with this conversion completed!!!

Thanks,
Bob

I guess we should get back to the issue at hand. Streetrover was asking if you were to convert backwards to a distributor/carburator style manifold, what clearance issues would he encouter. One big question I have is why would one want to convert it to carburetor when FI is so much better? What is to be done with the bottom of the distributor that drives the Olds oil pump when you do convert? How is the later Rover blocks set up for oiling? I guess I have more questions than answers for you except for one...You wanna swap that Rover for my olds engine? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

And on the flip side a question for others, anyone converted the 215 to a distributorless ignition...what did you do about driving the oil pump?

[Cheapsnake]

To answer your question Krank, I'm in the process of going distributorless (EDIS/Megajolt). Eliminating the distributor will eliminate a huge hit with the firewall and give you at least an inch of forward movement of the engine. To drive the oil pump I simply took an old distributor, cut everything off it I didn't need, put a protective cap over it and it's good to go. This is on an early Rover, but it'll be the same on your 215. If you wanted to go crazy you could get yourself a a later Rover timing cover with the oil pump driven off the crank, but you'll have to do some mods to the crank I think.

Oiling is pretty much the same on Rovers and BOP 215's. Valve train is fed through the pedestals, but there is a rather simple mod to oil via the pushrods. Check Britishv8.com. Not sure of the advantage, but if you really need to make a change, there's one for you.

Tom

[Krank]

Tom,

Did you use an original 215 distributor or will something else a little more common fit? Since my motor is already built and on a stand I don't think I will look into changing out the front cover to make an oil pump change, although I guess they changed things for a reason, but still...

Jim

[streetrover]

Ok, so here's the latest... I picked up my goodies from Kennedy engineering - conversion plate, custom flywheel, pressure plate, disc, bearing, etc. If you'll recall, I asked them to modify the flywheel to accept the trigger-wheel that came stock with the '96 Range Rover engine. Below are the pics. Also, after much thought (and wasting $180 on a '63 buick intake manifold I've thought better of it and am going to try to use the fuel injection. Gonna try to get my brain past the simple physics of a carb and try to understand the electronics of EFI. We'll see...

(IMG:http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd306/Hopwood_Bob/914%20Rover%20Project/100_5010.jpg)

(IMG:http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd306/Hopwood_Bob/914%20Rover%20Project/100_5014.jpg)

(IMG:http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd306/Hopwood_Bob/914%20Rover%20Project/100_5016.jpg)

(IMG:http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd306/Hopwood_Bob/914%20Rover%20Project/100_5016.jpg)

(IMG:http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd306/Hopwood_Bob/914%20Rover%20Project/100_5023.jpg)