Have I really got a 2000?

I

ianfordcarr

New Member
Hi all,
I've just bought a 71 2000TC as a minor restoration project. Basically it's in pretty good shape all round but has been badly neglected over the years. It hasn't got any history and I haven't yet done any research on the engine number, but one thing puzzles me that you might have a ready answer for. The car is badged externally and registered as a 2 litre, yet the head casting has 2.2 on it. Also the steering wheel boss and service sticker says 2200.

Clearly the badging proves nothing, but could it have been re-engined as a 2.2 or had a new head if the two engines share the same one? Or is this a normal bit of Rover practice, although I didn't think the 2.2 was available in 1971.

Any comments welcome.

Regards,
Ian
 

Attachments

  • P220511_12.42.jpg
    P220511_12.42.jpg
    757.7 KB · Views: 782
Hi Ian, the 2200 motor did not go into production until 1974 and you can't put a 2.2 head on a 2000 block so you probably have a 1971 car that has had the engine replaced. If the steering wheel badge was done too, then there may be other 2.2 parts fitted to your car also. Nothing wrong with that, the 2200TC motor is smoother and more refined than the 2000TC and has a bit more torque too. A worthwile upgrade!
Can't actually read the engine number in that photo but the first three digits of that will confirm what size it is, also the first three digits of your chassis number will confirm which model you have.
Would love to see more pictures of your car by the way and welcome to the forum!
 
Welcome to the forum :)

Sounds good to have a 22 engined 2000 as it will have more ooomph :)

Rich
 
Many thanks for the welcomes and replies guys. This is my first Rover so I have a lot to learn about it yet. I've posted some pix and as you can see its green - which shade of green is another matter......!!! It's had a sort of professional respray on the bits you can see, but its been brush painted inside the doors and boot etc and I can see at least one other shade of green lurking in the corners. Oh, and the paint code sticker says it should be Lunar grey!!

Now to the engine. Yes, you're right, I can now see it's been re-engined. What a pleasant surprise. The chassis number listed on the registration doc is 43605069A - an SC home market RHD I think from a quick internet search. I can't find a VIN sticker anywhere. The reg doc engine number is 40085691L - presumably a 2000SC?? The actual car engine number is 49108931A.

It certainly performs well and likes to be kept above 2000 rpm, running very smoothly up the range. Below 2000 rpm pulling away is a bit lumpy and it has some clutch judder, all of which makes for an interesting take-off.

I'm looking forward to a long and happy relationship with Henry and plan to restore him to his former glory over the coming years.

Ian
 

Attachments

  • Resized1.jpg
    Resized1.jpg
    180.8 KB · Views: 759
  • Resized2.jpg
    Resized2.jpg
    109.1 KB · Views: 757
  • Resized3.jpg
    Resized3.jpg
    197.6 KB · Views: 758
Looks a nice car
As for the lack of go below 2000rpm, check to see if the carbs are balanced
Next step is a compression test
 
Hi Ian

Welcome to the forum! Lots of people and knowledge to help and amuse here.

The reason Grim and Kiwi are testing each other is that you can put a 2200SC head on a 2000 but a 2200TC head won't go on a 2000 (the valves are too big to fit inside the 2000 bore).

These cars were built before the VIN system was invented, so it hasn't got one to find! It does have a chassis number on a plate under the bonnet fixed to the bulge of the passenger side inner wing towards the screen. There will also be a base unit number stamped into the metal on the ledge immediately inside the boot lid rubber seal, again on the passenger side.

There are a few other things we ought to ask you. It actually requires a little ingenuity to put a 2200TC engine where an SC once was, because the throttle arrangements are very different - cable vs lever and rod. So let's make sure you haven't got a 2200TC complete car masquerading as an older 2000. First question - do you have round speedo and rev counter behind a perspex panel? Or a strip speedo? If the answer to that was round, it could still have been swapped across, so the clincher is to have a look under the rear. Is there a crossmember supported on rubber bushes at the outer ends supporting the front of the differential and the suspension trailing arm bushes or are they bolted directly to the car? If you have a crossmember then it is definitively a 2200, if bolted to the shell it's a 2000.

A tax exempt 2000 rebuilt with a 2200TC engine, round dial instruments and backlit switchgear is one of the most desirable P6 options! If you decide you really have a 2200TC with a V5 from something else we'll talk about how to go on from there!

Enjoy

Chris
 
Many thanks Chris. Wow, this car gets more interesting by the minute!! Yes, I've found the chassis number and it does tally with the V5 so if my interpetation of the first 3 numbers is correct and nothing has been switched, then it started life as a 2000SC. Can anyone confirm that its current engine number 49108931A relates to a 2200TC?

The throttle arrangement is 50:50. Lever and then cable (see pic) with the adaption taking place in front of the bulkhead on the passenger side. There is indeed a rear crossmember mounted in bushes each side and supporting the diff and suspension arms, and the instrument binnacle is Series 2 (see pic).

Where do you think that leaves me?

Ian
 

Attachments

  • Resized4.jpg
    Resized4.jpg
    154.2 KB · Views: 737
  • Resized5.jpg
    Resized5.jpg
    145.2 KB · Views: 736
ianfordcarr said:
There is indeed a rear crossmember mounted in bushes each side and supporting the diff and suspension arms, and the instrument binnacle is Series 2 (see pic).

Where do you think that leaves me?

Ian
Click to expand...

If it has the wide diff pinion crossmember then the base unit is 2200, not 2000.
 
arthuy said:
My old engine had a 2000 bottom and a 2.2 head. it did run ok as far as I recall.
Click to expand...

Can't see how it could have done unless the 2000 block had been bored out to 2200 dimensions.
 
chrisyork said:
Hi Ian

A tax exempt 2000 rebuilt with a 2200TC engine, round dial instruments and backlit switchgear is one of the most desirable P6 options! If you decide you really have a 2200TC with a V5 from something else we'll talk about how to go on from there!

Enjoy

Chris
Click to expand...

Hi Ian
Welcome to the Forum. It's impossible to tell from the photos but, as Chris says, there must be a possibility this is a 2200TC on another car's log book.
Another area is under the rear panel (behind the rear windscreen, in front of the boot, visible from inside the boot) there may be another chassis number stamped in just to the left hand side of centre. Either that's there or there may be fresher paint/filler hiding it. Here's an example:

1stSeptember20107.jpg


Right at the back of the car, on the lip inside the boot, concealed under the rubber lip, behind the spare wheel will be a Pressed Steel number, this can also be very revealing as to what the car is. Here's one, and no prizes Mr. Birch for identifying the car:

23rdJanuary201120.jpg


A shot of the interior would enlighten us a bit as well.

Cheers
Nick
 
ianfordcarr said:
Many thanks Chris. Wow, this car gets more interesting by the minute!! Yes, I've found the chassis number and it does tally with the V5 so if my interpetation of the first 3 numbers is correct and nothing has been switched, then it started life as a 2000SC. Can anyone confirm that its current engine number 49108931A relates to a 2200TC?
Click to expand...

Yes

ianfordcarr said:
The throttle arrangement is 50:50. Lever and then cable (see pic) with the adaption taking place in front of the bulkhead on the passenger side. There is indeed a rear crossmember mounted in bushes each side and supporting the diff and suspension arms, and the instrument binnacle is Series 2 (see pic).

Where do you think that leaves me?

Ian
Click to expand...

The choke and reserve pulls are the 'crushable' rounded type, introduced in late January 1973 (it's still possible to have a non-tax free car with the earlier 'umbrella' types).

The ignition barrel is later 2200 as well.

2200TC's don't generally have a 'TC' script badge on the speaker grille (it was deleted for the 1974 year although a lot of have been retro-fitted, but yours not having one is another sign). Plus the heated screen switch is the later, post October 1974 version (it was originally a pull switch).

Without seeing the car in the flesh I'm getting very suspicious indeed you have a ringer (e.g. a later car with a 'K' plate and log book to get free tax). This is a frequent, and worsening problem at the moment.
 
Harvey - If it was an SC head all would have been OK as the valve sizes are the same as the 2000SC - it's only the TC head that has different valve sizes to the 2000 version. That's right isn't it - save me from pulling the manual out!

Ian, there is no doubt that you have bought a 2200TC which has had the chassis number tag from a K reg 2000SC transferred onto it.

Now, we on the forum would almost certainly have spotted that (wouldn't we chaps :roll: ). But there's absolutely no reason why the DVLA should do. I suggest your next step should be to inform them of a change of engine, with the no from your current 2200 engine. Then your V5 will be completely correct and officialdom will be happy. I read between the lines that you probably didn't pay a huge amount for this car, so there's no risk of losing money on it. Even if you had paid top dollar, I'm not completely convinced this would count against the value. For every potential buyer put off by the number mismatch, another will be attracted by the tax free status.

From a technical point of view, you've got a much better car than is reflected on the V5. There are potential snags - later 2200's are spectacularely prone to rust as they 1) had the base unit sit around in the rain for a long time before it went into a car, and 2) then went through the SD1 paint shop so that all the paint fell straight off again. So probably worth having a careful look in all the important little places - search around on here, you'll soon get the picture! Also the 2200's have a steering box by a different manufacturer to 2000's, these are much heavier to steer. No reason not to retrofit a 2000 one if it's a problem though - or convert to power steering,

Just in case anyone here thinks I'm advocating doing such a thing, Its Strictly Illegal to change a car's identity in this way. There is an outside chance of being caught - VoSA man might jut know about rear crossmembers, or the additional chassis number hidden under the rear decker, or the base unit number. And what if a buyer reported you for selling something that wasn't? I think if Ian were to sell I'd recommend he said something on the lines of " appears to have been updated to 2200TC build specification in all respects ".

Chris
 
chrisyork said:
Harvey - If it was an SC head all would have been OK as the valve sizes are the same as the 2000SC - it's only the TC head that has different valve sizes to the 2000 version. That's right isn't it - save me from pulling the manual out!
Chris
Click to expand...

No, SC or TC makes no difference, 2200 exhaust valves are bigger than 2000 ones and foul the block if fitted.
 
This is fascinating. Thanks Nick, you've certainly made a prima facie case for it being a '74ish car. I'll have a good look later for any other numbers, but I can confirm there's plenty of paint slopped around the areas where you suggest I look. I'm happy to accept now that it has been made to look like an earlier model, and its external only 2000 badging adds to that impression.

As Chris rightly surmises I've no concerns about its cost or value. With classic cars these tend to be in the eye of the beholder anyway and enthusiasts spend money on their hobby with no expectations of getting it back on resale. In my case I took a 1965 Anglia I'd had for 18 years into a friend's garage for MOT. He had the Rover in for carb tuning, I liked it and he brokered a straight swap. Love at first sight........ The only downside is I'm not popular with the family for getting rid of a Harry Potter car!

Looking at it on the ramps, before I bought the car, the base unit appeared solid, but I hear what you say about rust and will keep an eye open, as It now seems to have been built in the age of Austin/Morris's awful quality standards and not by Rover staff.

Ian
 
I'd be quite suspicious, this car seems to be a 2200TC yet is badged 2000TC and a K reg (like our 2000Auto was). Unless I'm wrong, isn't Kevin's lovely white 2000TC an L reg?

I know this has been touched before, but how difficult is it really to fit a round TC instrument panel into a strip-dashed SC car? Isn't the wiring significantly different? Remember, the round dash has an oil pressure gauge (and therefore wiring in the harness), an SC doesn't have an oil pressure gauge, so I'm wondering does an SC car have the same wiring harness as a TC? Or, maybe more precisely, does the SC harness have the oil-pressure gauge wiring in it, just it's not used? I certainly don't recall any unused wires in our old 2000Auto in the dashboard area (which also was K reg) Of course, the wiring varies wildly on similarly aged models, so I accept that's not real concrete proof! :)

The heated rear-window switch on our old 2000Auto was the pull-type, not the rocker switch as like with this car. (Nick has pointed this out, I hasten to admit!)

I have to say I'd have to get the car's identity checked...
 
Darth Sidious, there's no mecahnical problem fitting the round instruments to a strip speedo car. And it's easy enough to change the loom complete.

Harvey, I had to get the book out for a look! You're quite right! 2200 SC and TC both have the larger valves.

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