3500S with a difference

TwinPlenum3500S said:
SD1's in my opinion were a poor substitute for the P5s and P6's
Click to expand...

I have to partially agree as far as quality is concerned. If you do your own work on your P6 you understand and admire the way it was built. However, there were still issues with a very weak driveline (engines, gearboxes, diffs, halfshafts) especially when you compare with Mercedes of the same period. But instead of improving the weak spots with the SD1, they cheapened out the rest...

TwinPlenum3500S said:
As for the K series, buy one and then see how you feel when it gets hot and warps.
Click to expand...

I believe that we should take all those K series stories with a pinch of salt. My dad runs a 214 (R8) since 1991. Once we found signs of oil in the coolant and we had to change the head gasket, but that's it. No overheating stories, no self destructing engines. A very nice engine in my opinion, with a few issues yes, that should have been put right from the factory in the beginning, but as they used to do in the last years, they just did too little, too late...
 
We have to stick up for Rovers of all sorts or else we would join the sheep who think anything with a BMW badge on it must be fantastic
BMW could probably market dog turds as chocolate and people would buy them and say it was delicious
It's become fashionable to slate anything British - anyone remember the I'm backing Britain campaign?
 
K series - was a real shame, a very good engine design, super light weight, makes good / great power straight from the factory, all totally ruined by poor execution on the production line. Liner movement, soft heads... It's all been covered in depth in the car mags. It is possible to build a very good K series, and many people have, but you need all the right bits put together perfectly, otherwise it will fail again, I've seen it many times.

Talking of shames, plenty of the later rover products could have been world class, if it wasn't for poor execution / cost cutting / not being "finished". The SD1 sold well due to it's styling, now if they'd only put it together properly...

How many of the cars sold well to start with only to drop dead once the problems appeared, rover buried it's head in the sand and the press stuck the knife in.

I have to laugh at all these people driving new Mini's claiming they are "BMW's", they obviously don't know that rover did most of the development work, it was a long way into development before BMW took over, just take one appart, half the parts are Lucas. As stated, BMW could stick a "propeller" badge on a turd and sell thousands... Just look at the styling on the most recent models !
 
DaveHerns said:
We have to stick up for Rovers of all sorts or else we would join the sheep who think anything with a BMW badge on it must be fantastic
Click to expand...
By sticking up for everything with a Rover badge stuck on you are doing exactly the same as the sheep do with BMW aren't you (City Rover anyone?)? I have never liked the SD1 but recognise that it was a market leader in cosmetic design. Not mechanical design as it was inferior to P6 in that respect, suspension-wise at least. I agree that SD1 was the last innovative product of the company but Rover lost me there, not to mention most of their customer base due to the build quality. Anything up to P6 I'll stick up for to the last. I also like the 75 though & wouldn't mind a top-spec estate.
 
I'm not trying to be controversial and I wasn't having ago at TwinPlenum3500S, honest .Perhaps I shouldn't have said " Rovers of all sorts "
I had Rover 214's when new and they went like rockets . Never had a gasket go as I always check the coolant . I would also like a top spec Rover 75 / MG ZT Estate
 
Door shuts all prepped and painted out. All new rubbers around door aperture. Ready to fit new carpets now I suppose.
Interestingly, having fitted a new roof from another car, it appears slightly wider than my original. When fully screwed down, gutter drip rails are barely visible????? Anyone throw any light on this??
 
To be fair I dont actually know what year the car it came off of. I believe it was a series 1 car as was not vinyled. I think possibly I may have used too much DumDum. My motor is a 1972 on a K.

I dont think it is super critical to have perfect roof gaps, just curious as to why it happened.
 
I can only guess that that the roofs were stamped out on different press tools ?

How much gap have you got if you even it out both sides ?
 
Hllo V8p6B,

Very nice 8) Yours is the first P6B that I have seen fitted with fuel injection, and no less than the Vitesse too. :D

Ron.
 
Hi reading this with great interest and i know nothing of the sdi rover , buy i tend to agree if a sdi has to die to upgrade a p6 then so be it , the p6 is a great car and i would gladly destroy an sdi for upgrade my p6.
regards
marcus
 
Hi cant wait to see pics of your car and will we be seeing it for real at any shows , you sound a very talented guy im jealous.
good luck with it
marcus :LOL:
 
Hi Twin Plenum.

What spring rates have you chosen and why?

To date the Thai car is +25% at the front, the English car +35%. Rears aren't comparable because I have more weight (lpg tank) and I also have an uprated front anti roll bar, so the rear spring rate needs to be different to maintain handling balance (or devise a rear anti roll bar!!) The P6 handling balance is actually very neutral, the problem is turn in, which leads to apparent understeer. Get it set into a long corner and you'll find this is a false impression, if anything the car tends to very slight oversteer. Turn in is substantially aided by decent shocks and stiffening the front chassis rail.

Have to say I dissaprove of lowering except on cosmetic grounds. Long wheel travel is one of the glories of the P6 and is key to allowing it to hustle fast on indifferent minor roads. Lowering limits your handling performance to billiard table roads - such as race tracks.

Regards

Chris
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top