LDV 400 V8

conrod · Post by **conrod** » Mon May 24, 2010 8:37 am

Something a bit different to the usual cars on here, I have just bought this van a couple of weeks ago to use as a tow vehicle for my race car (my second 400 actually, I have just sold a 1991 Daf 400 V8 )

I gave up looking for a Mk1 or Mk2 Transit, as finding a good one for sale here (I wanted LWB) is almost impossible.

It is a 1995 LDV 400 V8, ex Police, and this one is a 5 speed with the LT77 box. Kind of rare in that it is:
-a panel van
-has only done 53000 kms (30 000mls) from new
-has virtually no rust in it!
-still has the protective plastic on the door trims - it is REALLY tidy!

I have given it a tidy in the engine bay, and did some baseline runs on the dyno before some "tuning" work commences! Initially it made 102 hp at the rear wheels, and after trying several different settings on the ignition timing ended up at 108 at the rear wheels - pretty good increase for no expense! I have since removed the factory fitted restrictors in the intake and exhaust, and will run it again on the dyno to see where that puts us. These run the 3.5L Rover V8 8.13:1 engine on SU's and make around 125hp stock at the flywheel, interestingly this van has the later crossbolt type block, but without the crossbolts. The oil pump is also the early style, and drive is by V belts instead of serpentine. I might possibly go to a 3.9 or 4.6 engine later for a bit more torque, we shall see. It has single leaf tapered springs on all four corners (yes beam front axle!) and the big four pot AP front calipers as per Rover Vitesse.

Kind of an ugly old thing, but it sounds great and goes like hell for an old van!

Conrad

kev_the_mole · Post by **kev_the_mole** » Mon May 24, 2010 9:05 am

Excellent buy. Now I'm jealous

kiwicar · Post by **kiwicar** » Mon May 24, 2010 10:17 am

Hi Ian
don't let envy spoil your day, have a look here, I am sure you can find somthing to love!

http://www.tanksforsale.co.uk/Diesel%20 ... 20sale.htm
Best regards
Mike

conrod · Post by **conrod** » Mon May 24, 2010 10:22 am

kiwicar wrote:Hi Ian
don't let envy spoil your day, have a look here, I am sure you can find somthing to love!
http://www.tanksforsale.co.uk/Diesel%20 ... 20sale.htm
Best regards
Mike

Hahaa, those are even uglier than the LDV!

Spotted something today, which was kind of a cross between my van and one of those army things. A forward control Land Rover 101. But it was a pickup truck, which I had never seen before, and looked factory built. Poor old RV8 must have struggled to haul its fat ar$e along!....

ChrisJC · Post by **ChrisJC** » Mon May 24, 2010 10:35 am

That engine block (3.5 with the castings for crossbolts) is the rarest and best block to have!!!

It can be modded to have a bulletproof bottom end (by machining / drilling in the crossbolts), but won't suffer from the cracked liners of the larger bore versions (4.0 / 4.6).

Definitely don't let it vanish!

Chris.

DaveEFI · Post by **DaveEFI** » Mon May 24, 2010 12:18 pm

I used to work on The Bill as a sound engineer, and a version of those were our first camera cars. Until about '90. Coachbuilt, with twin sliding side doors for the crew cabin and a fitted storage area behind for the gear. They had Stromberg carbs and a low compression engine but were still quite lively in town. Worst problem was fuel evaporation on a hot day- they were all set to about 1200 rpm idle to try and keep things cool.

BTW, overall fuel consumption never made double figures...

Could find some pics if anyone's interested.

ChrisJC · Post by **ChrisJC** » Mon May 24, 2010 1:22 pm

DaveEFI wrote:
Could find some pics if anyone's interested.

Yup!

Chris.

kiwicar · Post by **kiwicar** » Mon May 24, 2010 2:16 pm

Hello Mr Conrod
you are talking 101FC on a GS body, the soft top comes off and the sides pull off and bingo you have a flat bed (pick up truck just leave the sides on) they have the 92 bhp low comp engine give a whole 92 bhp (pull out the restrictor plates about 108 put the right needles in for a whole 118 ish BHP. They haul that along OK but with 5.3:1 salsbuy diffs and a low ratio in the transfer box they run out of revs at about 65mph (105 kmh) despite the 35" wheels.
And here is the object of such desire!

http://staging.motorbase.com/classified ... =4;pager=1
Best regards
Mike

conrod · Post by **conrod** » Mon May 24, 2010 7:36 pm

Hello Mike,
I found a pic of a similar 101, the rear deck was slightly different but the same thing with a full cab on the drivers compartment. I also noticed the cab has rounded corners and the front wheelarch "flares", unlike the usual slab sided 101's you see with square edges everywhere. Same as this one :

Hello Chris, small world! Didn't put the 4.6 in the other van, GEMS system looked impossible to transplant without the BEM so gave up. Didn't want to cough for a separate engine management system.

Does anyone have the dimensions on where to drill the holes through the block for the main caps? And will this have the 4 bolt bearing caps? Will they need drilling and tapping too?

Conrad

edit: after a bit of googling it seems that this vehicle I saw is not a 101, but a 110 inch forward control pickup. Odder than odd!

kiwicar · Post by **kiwicar** » Tue May 25, 2010 9:17 am

Hi Yes that is the earlier FC, bassed on a IIa chassis with either a 2.5 petrol, a 2.5 deisel or a 2.6 6 cylinder petrol, possably one of the slowest most underpowered vehicles ever built! (think when converted to a perkins deisel they went faster, but they have there loyal fans

.
Mike

conrod · Post by **conrod** » Tue May 25, 2010 9:56 am

I can see what you mean about slow, it must have weighed well over two tons, and with a 50 or 60 hp engine, you would be measuring acceleration on a sundial!

conrod · Post by **conrod** » Wed May 26, 2010 10:09 am

Well, I took the van for a drive after pulling out the intake and exhaust restrictors, and it felt no different! This was a bit surprising, as well as disappointing, as I had just sold another similar van, and when I removed the restrictors from that one it made a huge difference. So back to the dyno, and it confirmed what the bum dyno told me - no increase! A bit puzzled by this, I tried a few different things, we did a power run without the air cleaner assembly and elbows, but the AFR just shot over 14:1 and the power dropped about 20hp at the wheels, it appeared to be getting way too much air and leaning out. So I refitted the air filter and elbows, (but without the paper elements) and the power jumped to 112hp, but still very lean. Paper filters refitted, and a bit more tweaking on the timing and I managed 110hp, so only 2hp more than the other day. I think there would be more power to be had by derestricting the intake, say by fitting a pair of K&N's and rejetting the carbs to compensate for the increased airflow. But I will leave it at that for now. I am thinking an Edelbrock Performer manifold and carb might be the next step.

Conrad

First graph is hp and torque

second graph is hp and AFR

ChrisJC · Post by **ChrisJC** » Wed May 26, 2010 11:39 am

I would fit a pair of SU's from an SD1, and get the needles set up properly. They'll easily breath enough for a 3.5l motor.

Chris.

kiwicar · Post by **kiwicar** » Wed May 26, 2010 1:27 pm

Hi
don't rush to chuck away the elbows and stuff, the bit that mounts onto the carb only flows well with the elbow bits atteched, it is rubbish without them, also if you just stick K&Ns on them then the engine gets hot air from above the manifolds and lousey flow and this really kills power. Some form of ram stack on the SU (or stromberg) works well but you still have to sort out filtering the intake air and feeding in cold air, or you are still better off with the standard set up.
Best regards
Mike

conrod · Post by **conrod** » Wed May 26, 2010 7:43 pm

ChrisJC wrote:I would fit a pair of SU's from an SD1, and get the needles set up properly. They'll easily breath enough for a 3.5l motor.

Chris.

I think they are similar to the SD1 carbs, except with a manual choke.(how many 1995 built vehicles can you think of with a manual choke!) they look like the HIF44's, although I have not measured the choke size.Looking at them again, the dashpot looks a bit short for an HIF44 doesn't it?

kiwicar wrote:Hi
don't rush to chuck away the elbows and stuff, the bit that mounts onto the carb only flows well with the elbow bits atteched, it is rubbish without them, also if you just stick K&Ns on them then the engine gets hot air from above the manifolds and lousey flow and this really kills power. Some form of ram stack on the SU (or stromberg) works well but you still have to sort out filtering the intake air and feeding in cold air, or you are still better off with the standard set up.
Best regards
Mike

I tried a run with just the elbows, and no air filters, I think that is the run that made most power. Leaned off horrendously near the top though, probably because it was getting too much air. The OE air filter intake is pointed at the back of the rad, so it gets a nice supply of hot air! (thats it, just above the distributor in the pic below) I tried power runs with the bonnet up and it made 2hp more at the wheels, probably due to the colder air being breathed in.

It would be nice to find some more power without having to bin the lot. All the tests yesterday point to a restrictive intake system, as soon as I pulled parts of the intake off the mixture went lean. It has two little paper air filters inside the big can on top of the engine. Even running the engine with the paper filters removed, but the elbows, housing etc. fitted made a noticable difference.

Conrad

edit: can't be an HIF44 as these had automatic chokes. Maybe an HIF6 or HS6????