Is the 2000 SC really that slow...?

T

tedlit

Member
I'm working on a '67 2000SC automatic which has recently come out of hibernation. I'm used to the v8, but I couldn't pass up a chance to give a good home to a near-immaculate earlier P6.

However.. after a good tune-up, it runs just fine.. but it's *so* slow to pickup, and I'm wondering where the problem might lie. Once you're actually moving at about 10mph, it picks up and moves through the gears just fine.. kickdown is great.. gearchange is smooth.. autobox fluid looks good and is the correct type.. but from a standing start, it's just got no power at all. Even flooring it, the engine revs rise slightly and the car just kinda sets off. It hasn't got enough oomph to start on a 1 in 7 slope.

The carb's been checked out, the timing is (apparently) spot-on, the vacuum advance is working, and the engine revs freely in park/neutral. None of the brakes are binding, and it really does feel just fine when it's moving. To my untrained ear, it feels like the gearbox is taking ages to come up to pressure.. whatever that might mean.

Has anyone come across anything similar - or is single carb plus auto really that sluggish? :)
 
Didn't you know that the "SC" stands for "Slowcoach"! :LOL:

If it does kickdown then the gearbox pressures can't be that low, but after making sure that it is getting full throttle then I'd roadtest it to see what the shift speeds are, and I'd adjust the cable to get within those speeds if they're not already, and if they are within the speeds suggested, adjust so they are at the upper rather than the lower end of the range. The one thing to remember is that the 4 pot flexplate is weak, and raising the pressures is going to put more load on it. The only other thing I can think of that could cause it would be a faulty converter, but that's rare, and they do tend to affect how they rev up in P & N.
When the cable is set correctly the SC does perfom OK, so if it's really as bad as you say there is something there that needs to be sorted. Comparing it with a V8 is a bad idea, because the SC will never be a ball of fire, but performance should be adequate, which by the sounds of your description it isn't. Most of these problems are engine rather than gearbox related though, so I'd be starting there.
 
Harvey, thanks for the speedy follow-up. My only experience with the BW35 in non-v8 cars is in the mk1 Triumph 2000.. where it's also a bit of a dog, but nothing like as slow as this!

I'll check the shift speeds. To my unscientific ear, they sound and feel just fine - but I haven't done a stall test as the idea of it kinda worries me. :)
 
A stall test won't tell you anything much unless you think the converter is faulty, and that would be down my list at the moment. Check the engine tuning, make sure it's getting full throttle, check in the book for the shift speeds, and then road test it and see how far out they are. Only once you've checked and set everything else and come to the conclusion that it is the converter, then do a stall test to prove the diagnosis. Doing a stall test with a faulty engine could make you think it's the converter when it isn't.
 
Well, I did my homework.. there's a busted bushing on the throttle linkage, but it doesn't seem to be affecting movement all that much - I've got the full range of throttle travel available. The shift speeds equate to what it says in the workshop manual - they're right in the middle of the range for both 1-2 and 2-3 in drive.

I measured engine RPM using my screamingly inaccurate mechanical tacho gauge (probably older than the car!), but it's got plenty of pull from about 2000rpm upwards. I did a brief stall test, and got a result of about 1500rpm. This seems stunningly low to me, but I'm borrowing a digital tacho tomorrow to confirm.
 
I think your next step is to explore what top end performance is like - so as to satisfy yourself that the engine is good order. A well known '72 2000 Auto owner is only happy when his car can demonstrate its ability to reach the ton on the level....

Chris
 
A few things I did to improve the performance of my 2000 automatic.

1. Set timing advance a little further advanced. I am running 8 degrees BTDC. I run 98 octance fuel with no pinging.
2. Check your exhaust system. I ended up getting a whole new system including custom exhaust headers, and new pipes. Previously I had a hole in the exhaust manifold about 1 inch in diameter.
3. I got the transmission serviced by a competent trans specialist.

Mine was a real dog taking off at one stage. No one changed made the difference, it seemed to the the affect of all three changes.
I agree with Harvey about the flexplates. I have had 2 break on me, and now carry a spare, along with a spigot bush.

If you really want performance for a 2000, then buy a twin carb, 10:1 compression model!


James.
 
Thanks for the feedback, guys - it's *really* useful. :)

1) I've yet to fiddle with the timing. I checked it with a timing light and it's spot-on per the book.. but running a little more advance doesn't sound like a bad idea.

2) I do have a holed exhaust - right under the centre of the car is a 1" hole that's been badly patched in the past. I didn't think it'd negatively affect performance though.

3) I actually do have a good twin-carb set with linkages just sitting on the shelf.. but I don't have a twin-carb manifold. I've kept my eye out, but finding one in the US is kinda unlikely. :(

4) I will admit that the transmission was my first thought, but I've had nothing but bad luck with the BW35 in various other cars... so I'm a little biased. I'm trying to eliminate everything else first. :)

I know it's never going to be a ball of fire or anything, but if fully-loaded log trucks are outrunning me at traffic lights there's surely *some* scope for improvement!
 
It sounds that way though some of those big-rigs have plenty of power under the hood.
Any hole in the exhaust will adversely affect performance due to back-pressure won't it?
I'm sure I'd have a TC inlet manifold I could send you for a small consideration but you'd need the TC head too as the SC manifold & head are one casting, unless I'm completely mistaken. I'd probably have a head too though.
It would just be a case of sorting out the most cost-effective method of shipment. If you want to look into it then feel free & get back to me.
 
tedlit said:
Thanks for the feedback, guys - it's *really* useful. :)

1) I've yet to fiddle with the timing. I checked it with a timing light and it's spot-on per the book.. but running a little more advance doesn't sound like a bad idea.

2) I do have a holed exhaust - right under the centre of the car is a 1" hole that's been badly patched in the past. I didn't think it'd negatively affect performance though.

3) I actually do have a good twin-carb set with linkages just sitting on the shelf.. but I don't have a twin-carb manifold. I've kept my eye out, but finding one in the US is kinda unlikely. :(

4) I will admit that the transmission was my first thought, but I've had nothing but bad luck with the BW35 in various other cars... so I'm a little biased. I'm trying to eliminate everything else first. :)

I know it's never going to be a ball of fire or anything, but if fully-loaded log trucks are outrunning me at traffic lights there's surely *some* scope for improvement!
Click to expand...

You would need a twin carb head, as well as the manifold. Then you would either have to have a custom exhaust made, or find a good TC exhaust manifold. The TC exhaust manifolds are not known for reliability. The Rover Club of Canada may be able to help with a cylinder head. Also there is an automotive business in Portland where they have parted out some Rover 2000 TC's. I can probably workout some contact information for you. I bought some brake rotors from them a few years ago.

Kiwi Rover has an automatic car set up with twin carbs. Do a search here for information. You would need to make a bracket for the kick down linkage. It is not hard to do.

A one inch hole would make a difference from my experience. I would recommend getting that fixed.


James.
 
Well.. I do have a twin-carb head sitting on the shelf.. I actually had a complete 2000TC engine/trans sitting spare, but I sold the long block and 4-speed a few years back. I didn't actually realise the TC exhaust manifold was different, so that's useful to know.

The good news is.. I think I've sorted it out. The car came with a huge folder of receipts, notes, and all the usual stuff when I bought it.. and on the inside cover is a bunch of "normal" service notes - oil filter alternative part#, plug gap information, brake pad part#s.. all stuff that's written elsewhere but can be useful to have in one place. I noticed yesterday that it also said 'timing - 4 degrees ATDC'. I think Harvey mentioned timing earlier in the thread, but I hadn't played with the timing until yesterday - I'd only made sure the dizzy bolts were tight and the vacuum and centrifugal advances were working properly.

Turns out the timing was actually set at 6 degrees ATDC, so I'm kinda surprised it moved under its own power at all. The book says 8 degrees BTDC, and setting it somewhere close to that gives me what feels like a million billion extra horsepower. I'm not sure how many bhp a 2000SC has to start with, as I have books that say anywhere from 80-107bhp.. but it'll now get up my driveway without a run-up!

So.. thanks to all who responded; I've learned way more about my poor car than I'd planned to this week. I'll be pursuing a TC conversion, but I'm going to drive it how it is for a while I think. :)
 
tedlit said:
I think Harvey mentioned timing earlier in the thread,
Click to expand...

Not that I remember, but I do remember saying it was most likely going to be engine related.


tedlit said:
Turns out the timing was actually set at 6 degrees ATDC,
Click to expand...

That's not a recipe for good performance.


tedlit said:
The book says 8 degrees BTDC,
Click to expand...

That must be an American thing, because UK spec is 4 degrees BTDC.

A roadtest should be an enlightening experience. Careful with all that power now....... :LOL:
 
The roadtest was rather enlightening. GPS-timed 0-60 took about 16 secs, and it still had pull at 75. Now, if only the speedo worked.. I wouldn't have to tack my phone to the dashboard. :)

I have both the US workshop manual and the original US handbook.. both say 8 degrees BTDC for 97 octane fuel, but the workshop book also says 10 degrees BTDC for 100 octane.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top