Dave, thanks for the interest. I have tried to put together bits and pieces I
could find about the BOPR or is that BORP : - ) engines, check out
http://pages.prodigy.net/larryhoy/V8EngineSpecs.htm and let me know if what is
there is correct, if anyone can fill in the blanks I'd appreciate it.
My first challenge with the engine I have found is it is missing a rod and
piston. Go figure. I spoke with Glenn Towery, and plan to speak with Ted
Schumacher about this. But rather than go back stock ... since I have the 300
crank ... well you know, I can't pass up a good challenge. This will be an on
going project, something that doesn't have to happen now.
I know the 4.6L engine is a rather new configuration and not a lot of people
have done much with it but it seems to me that someone, somewhere has thrown in
the 300 crank. It seems like a natural.
My crude calculations tell me that if you bore the 4.6L .020 over, and stroke it
with the 300 crank, you have a 326CI or 5.3L, have I made a mistake?
Larry Hoy
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-mgb-v8@autox.team.net [mailto:owner-mgb-v8@autox.team.net]On
>Behalf Of David Kernberger
>Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2000 7:30 PM
>To: Larry Hoy
>Cc: mgb-v8@autox.team.net
>Subject: Re: Stroking a 4.6 Rover?
>
>
>10/4/00
>
>Larry,
>
> The stroke on the 300 Buick crank is 3.400". I would love to know
>the stroke on the 4.6 Rover because I am trying to compile specifications
>on all the Rover engines for my own information. The main bearing size is
>also something I want to know. Awhile back listers were saying the 4.6 had
>"larger" mains but nobody stated the actual diameter. The Buick 300 is
>2.500". I suspect rods have remained 2.000" on all of these engines. Is
>that the case anybody? Meanwhild the Buick 300 crank has a different rear
>flange arrangement; and what about these new style crank driven oil pumps
>and distributorless front covers? There may be several considerations to
>work out here.
>
>Regards,
>
>Dave Kernberger
|