2000 Head replacement

#1
Hi All,
I've found a NOS Rover 2000 head for sale and I was thinking of buying it but noticed that it has a SC inlet manifold for a Rover 2000sc where mine is a 2000tc. My question is, is it a matter of just replacing the SC inlet manifold with my TC inlet manifold. I would also be getting this new head converted to run on unleaded and maybe having it skimmed.
Regards Terry H
 
Last edited:

harveyp6

Well-Known Member
#2
No, the head casting is totally different. To use that head you would have to convert to SC. That's a bit of a b*st*rd really, because about 40 years ago I needed a new 2000SC head and I couldn't get one anywhere....
 
#5
Sorry I meant have the head converted to run on unleaded fuel, not manifold. Not that any of that matters at the moment as there doesn't seem to be a head available for a 2000TC engine. There are a few 2000SC heads and at least one 2200SC head for sale.
Regards Terry H
 
#7
"They already have hard seats, you don't have to do anything for unleaded gas."

I'm a little confused now. Why do we have to put a lead additive in then, and why do we get valve seat recession if additive is not used.
Regards Terry H
 

cobraboy

Well-Known Member
#8
I ran a 289 high performance Mustang for a number of years. This had cast iron heads with no valve seat inserts, the engine also had solid lifters, so you had to set the valve lash and keep an eye on it.
I spoke at length with a cylinder head specialist at Goodwood one year about my concerns regarding seat recession. He assured me that as long as I was not racing, or towing a heavy weight I need not worry.
I always used super unleaded in the car with NO ADDITIVE and rebuilt the engine to as new, and in all the years I had the car the valve lash never changed. THIS WITH CAST IRON HEADS !
With an alloy head with valve seat inserts you do not need to worry about recession - it will not happen.
PS I have never used any additive in any Rover engine I have owned.
 
#9
They already have hard seats, you don't have to do anything for unleaded gas.

Yours
Vern
I remember reading years ago that they heads are fine to run on unleaded. Just set the valve clearances up right and all will be good. Check periodically and readjust if needed. My 2000tc was still to spec 10 years later. I did have to adjust my 2000 SC but I do not know if it was ever done right to begin with.
 
#11
If it's any help, I have a 2000 TC head that's surplus to requirements, and all the valves, springs etc to go with it. There's a bit of aluminium erosion to one side of an exhaust valve seat but I don't think it's anything to worry about. I have a NOS head gasket too.

Re unleaded fuel compatibility, I've been told by someone very knowledgable who worked at Rover back in the day that all heads, both SC and TC, made after the launch of the TC have valve seats hard enough for unleaded, and all TC exhaust valves are unleaded-compatible.

John
 
#12
"both SC and TC, made after the launch of the TC have valve seats hard enough for unleaded, and all TC exhaust valves are unleaded-compatible."

If that's what they did back then, that's good enough for me. But doesn't alter the fact that I have a problem with a loss of 20psi compression on two cylinders and a number of compression tests point to valves having put 10ml of oil in all cylinders to help seal the rings and run another compression test. So will have to do something about getting it sorted. May be interested in your head, any chance of a photo or two.
Regards Terry H
 
#14
I only bought the car in February and very little history apart from the previous owners ramblings in a ledger. None of it makes a lot of sense. A few invoices but they are dated 1989 and earlier. I always keep all my receipts in a folder and pass them on to the next owner when I sell a car as part of it's history. I don't think the valve clearances have been tampered with since new.
Regards Terry H
 
#16
"both SC and TC, made after the launch of the TC have valve seats hard enough for unleaded, and all TC exhaust valves are unleaded-compatible."

If that's what they did back then, that's good enough for me. But doesn't alter the fact that I have a problem with a loss of 20psi compression on two cylinders and a number of compression tests point to valves having put 10ml of oil in all cylinders to help seal the rings and run another compression test. So will have to do something about getting it sorted. May be interested in your head, any chance of a photo or two.
Regards Terry H
Did the motor sit for a while. 20 psi variation is right on the limit. I would drive it and see what happens. Sometimes with some running the rings bed in better I think. I have heard of compressions that were marginal but not horrible improving themselves after some driving. I would check the valve clearances on any Rover 2000 that I bought and rectify if needed. If it not blowing blue smoke with 20 or less variation in compression I would not be pulling the motor apart.
 

cobraboy

Well-Known Member
#18
If your only concern is a mismatch on compression readings, then as per post #16 give the car some good long runs to see if the low ones come up before ripping it all apart.
 
#19
I suppose part of the problem is that with these Covid restrictions on travel a long run is not possible. I have been trying to use this P6 instead of the other cars I have (maybe I have to many). Will try and get a run around the town and take another compression test after 60-80 miles.
I would like to get a little more power out of this Rover P6, it is a little disappointing, my 1977 MGBGT is much faster.
Regards Terry H
 

Demetris

Well-Known Member
#20
Although i cannot compare a 2000 TC with (a significantly lighter!) MGB GT, i know that when not set up correctly, they are indeed disappointing. In your case i would check first (with the engine stone cold) that the valve clearances are within the specs. Then move on to camshaft timing, ignition timing, and finally the carbs.
 
Top