The V8 Owners Forum -

Hello
I have An 11D engine (dismantled with worn-out camshaft)
and a 17D engine (which i suspect has a worn camshaft) Both 9.35:1 compression from a Range Rover:
They should both be rated about 124-126 HP DIN there is no restrictor in the inlet manifold!
The cylinder heads have cast number ERC0216, same as SD1 Carb

I would like to know what the set up difference is compared to a 157 HP DIN 3.5 Rover v8 engine from a 1979 Rover SD1 engine: cam ? Carburettors ? Anyone ?
It seems that when they introduced the 9.35:1 comp engine they fitted a low lift camshaft:
- High compression engine 9.35:1, 125bhp @ 4000rpm, 185lb/ft @ 2500rpm,
requires 97 octane fuel
- Low lift camshaft,

- 3.5 ltr V8 Compression: 8.13:1 :
3528 cc V8, Max power: 130.2 bhp (97.1 kW) at 5000 rpm. Max torque: 186 lb ft (251 Nm) at 2500 rpm

And what is the experience with the 3.9 EFI cam in the 3.5 engine with dual strombergs ?


Best regards
Søren
Denmark
1967 Volvo Amazon with Rover 17D engine

Volvo_AmazonV8 wrote:And what is the experience with the 3.9 EFI cam in the 3.5 engine ?

Go for it, you won't be sorry. Get new lifters, too and follow the assembly and run-in procedure closely.

Any one?

Only difference is CR and cam, IIRC.

Volvo_AmazonV8 wrote: ↑

Sun Sep 24, 2017 9:38 am

17D engine (which i suspect has a worn camshaft) Both 9.35:1 compression from a Range Rover:
They should both be rated about 124-126 HP DIN there is no restrictor in the inlet manifold!
The cylinder heads have cast number ERC0216, same as SD1 Carb

I cannot answer your question but those power numbers you quote seem a bit low. I have the standard 3.5 in my Landrover FC101 and it is rated at 120 HP but is a low compression engine. It is basically the same as the RR 3.5 with strombergs and does not have restrictors. What it does have are different exhaust manifolds - the 101s need more torque low down and the exhaust manifolds are designed for this so rob higher end power.

So if my low compression 3.5 can produce 120 HP with restrictive exhaust manifolds, I would have thought the power from a Hi Compression engine with better exhaust manifolds would have been better than 124-126 HP.