![]() ![]() The aluminium engine was relatively expensive to produce, however, and it suffered problems with oil and coolant sealing, as well as with radiator clogging from use of antifreeze incompatible with aluminium. In addition, some Pontiac models were fitted with the Buick 215, leading to the nickname "BOP 215" for the engine (BOP standing for Buick/Oldsmobile/Pontiac). A comparable number of Oldsmobile 215 engines were produced. Buick produced 376,799 cars with this engine in just three years. Based on sales volume and press reports, the engine was a success. The compact alloy engine was light, at just 144 kg (317 lb), and capable of high power outputs: the most powerful Buick version of this engine rated 200 hp (149 kW), and the very similar Oldsmobile "Jetfire" turbocharged version made 215 hp (160 kW), both numbers SAE gross. The Rover V8 began life as the Buick 215, an all-aluminium OHV pushrod engine introduced in 1960 for the 1961 US model year (it was on their drawing boards in the late 1950s). It has been used in a wide range of vehicles from Rover and other manufacturers since its British debut in 1967. The Rover V8 engine is a compact V8 internal combustion engine with aluminium cylinder block and cylinder heads, originally designed by General Motors and later re-designed and produced by Rover in the United Kingdom. Knock on wood.Stanadyne rotary mechanical fuel injectionīosch L-Jetronic, Motronic or Hitachi Hotwire The timing chain guides I suspect are related to the extended OCI that LR was pushing. ![]() I will do a BG service for the intake and valves next spring before I swap the spark plugs. The DI of the LR4 scares me a little but so far so good. I find the front seats in the LR4 more supportive. That being said I still prefer the cupholder layout, slower ratio steering, front grill design and tailights of the LR3. LR took the shortcomings of the Lr3 to heart and addressed most of them with the LR4. IMO the LR4 is just superior in terms of ride and handling, braking and power. The LR3 does not need a better transmission, it needs more oomph so the transmission won't downshift. Perhaps just lucky with these specific vehicles, my LR3 may have been a lemon. Many problems I experienced on the LR3 (multiple LCA, compressor, height sensors, starter, brakes all the time, weird tire wear ) have not shown up on the LR4 yet. I put 120k miles on a 2006 LR3 before moving onto a 2010 LR4 now with 100k miles. It is a whole different level of performance. It's all about perspective and priorities though so I could totally understand someone 'wanting' a newer peppier feeling LR4. My lr3 feels peppier now with the Magnaflow full exhaust system and rides better than new with all the suspension bushings and struts replaced so that makes up for spending 10' of $k's on an lr4. It's not a practical problem but it is just kind of annoying especially since at one time I also had a VW V10 tdi Touareg which had so much torque it wouldn't need to shift unless you really tried to push it. Now, if I could get a better transmission into the lr3 i'd be happy as hell those of us with a lot of crap on board know how it's hard for it to hold 6th gear on the slightest grades. ![]() Three I've talked to all said the lr3 engine is clearly more reliable in terms of expensive issues to deal with - like mentioned above. Ask a mechanic who's been working on rovers since at least 2007. No offense to above but anyone with a rover under 100k basically doesn't know either way outside of uncommon issues. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |