My Hot Rod Rover

I would love to see a pic of the shifter, did it come thru the original hole? One of the details of the swap I'm working/worrying on is which gearbox to use and whether I want the shifter to be futher back, as I drive with the seat all the way back on its rails, and reclined quite a bit. I have trouble comfortably reaching the stick. EDIT--Duh, I didn't read your thread in the Welcome forum first. I'd still like a pic of the shifter.
 
Your Rover looks and is superb Tom.. :D

It is interesting that there is different sound between the Ford and Rover V8 engines. The firing order is different so that must be the key.

Ron.
 
I'm of the opinion that the V8 sound is critically affected by how far the Y piece junction is from the manifolds. Lucky's system joins well behind the gearbox (to give space for the yet to come HP22) and the result is a sound more like a straight 8 than a V8.

Chris
 
Hi Tom,

In Australia, the Ford 302 was known as a 4.9 litre. Were they always known as a 5 litre engine in the United States?

Ron.
 
302 cubic inches works out to 4.948 litres.

To answer Ron's question, I am pretty sure they have always been referred to as the 5.0 - as in the Mustang 5 point 0
 
I feel with the worlds adopting Swedish Rounding that the USA may well be out of step :mrgreen:

Graeme
 
KiwiRover said:
Really? All the V8 Falcons i've seen are badged as 5 litre if they've got the 302
Click to expand...

This is more a modern day terminology...the age Ron speaks of is a much earlier vintage. :)
Basically XT to XE Falcon IIRC.

As i am sure Ron will know, Holden also had a 4.9 litre...a 304 in the Brock VK "Blue Meanie'
And also a 5 litre 307 Chev in the HK Brougham and Monaro
 
Another strange one is the Range Rover LSE fitted with the 4.2-litre V8, but...
4278cc=261.05958cu-in.
4278cc=4.3litres :?

Who was it that said we are all different countries separated by a common language :roll:
 
LeeEFI wrote,...
Another strange one is the Range Rover LSE fitted with the 4.2-litre V8, but...
4278cc=261.05958cu-in.
4278cc=4.3litres
Click to expand...

I suspect Lee that Land Rover called the 4278cc engine a 4.2 litre so as to avoid confusion with the much earlier stoked versions of the 3.5 litre which took those engines to 4.3 litres. Otherwise they would have two 4.3 litre engines that were quite different internally.

Ron.
 
GrimV8 said:
I've had a little forum holiday.

Had to post on this one to show my approval 8)
Click to expand...

I trust you're sabbatical did the trick :)

Good idea on the approval. Interesting topic this one 8)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top