Something a Little out of the Ordinary!

Don't like the boot, but I do like the bare bonnet!
I've thought for a while that the 4-cylinder valances (whether sharks tooth or square chin) suit the de-bumpered look better than the V8s.
In the first photo, there is more than a hint of Jensen Interceptor about that car - especially as the rear quarter is in the shadows so you can't see that it's not a fast back.

Michael
 
Think that would be a good project, not too sure about the engine choice but it's a start, and a fair price me thinks :)
 
Was offered this about two months ago, by a friend of the owner. He said the engine was a BMW. Made arrangements to go and see it three times. He always had an excuse not to go. He wouldn't tell me where it was, so I assummed it did not exist.
If anyone wants me have a quick look it's not too far away.
 
I know wikipedia isnt always most accurate but with these power figures:

Layout: 4-cylinder, in-line
Block/head: Cast iron/cast iron
Valves: OHV, belt-driven camshaft, push-rod operated
Capacity: 2,495 cc (152.3 cu in)
Bore × stroke: 90.47 mm × 97 mm (3.562 in × 3.8 in)
Compression ratio: 21:1
Fuel injection: Lucas-CAV DPS rotary pump and CAV Pintaux injectors
Power: 68 hp (51 kW) @ 4,200 rpm
Torque: 114 lbf·ft (155 N·m) @ 1,800 rpm
Production: 1984–1994

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_R...e_.28Engine_Code_12J.2C_13J.2C_14J_and_15J.29

i think you'd have to consider it a stepping stone to an lseries or similar conversion (Assuming the gearbox fits!)

Rich.
 
Compression ratio of 21:1 - that's a bit high isn't it? Or is that standard diesel engines, and I'm just used to petrol engine ratios?
 
20:1 compression ratio isn't unusual for a diesel. That's why they are built like brick s!@#$ houses in comparison to petrols :) . You need the extra compression to get ignition.

Interesting car though.
 
The basic idea for the body looks very similar to the Chapron cars. Essentially they just took the roof panel off and tidied up the edges. Then a single cross stretcher a la Triumph Stag and remove the section of roof perimeter over the rear window. On this one, I can see the original roof stretchers under the canvas, so it would be very easy to return to a closed car if you wanted.

I think the jury must be out on the engine. If it is the Land Rover engine, I would have thought it did better than that in turbo form. But it could also be a Transit engine at 2.5ltr - they were in later LDV's. You'd have to see it to know what was in it1

Chris
 
$T2eC16N,!)EE9s2ufg+sBQ,K0d5WGg~~60_12.JPG

25nasherpaengineinseriesiia.jpg

Snap! It's definitely a Land Rover 2.5NA engine.
I had one for a while and really can't see it being suitable for a car, especially one designed for a lightweight engine.
The turbo version didn't have a good reputation as the engine supposedly wasn't up to the stress. A 200TDi or 300TDi would make more sense, but still weighs far too much.
Oh, and it has a cambelt - mine snapped, but only resulted in bent pushrods so was easily fixed.
 
I cannot understand why anyone would want to put such a crude diesel engine in a P6, other than the "It was there, doing nothing, and the Rover had an empty engine bay" train of thought, on the way back from the pub. Maybe the roof conversion was done to let the noise out. It would be very interesting with a modern petrol, the roof looks well suited to the car.


John.



John.
 
According to the ad the lump came from a Freight Rover van. I always assumed that the Freight Rover models had Peugeot diesel engines? That would make sense in so much that IIRC, the 5 speed box would bolt straight up ( LT77 type?) where as the Land Rover lump would need an adaptor? Im happy to be educated if im wrong! :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top