Moss Motors, Ltd

The car is 1964, 1979 is the age of someone else :).  Anyway, idea of a V6 is pretty good one.  One thing that I noticed on BritishV8 web site is that a lot of the cars use stock rear axle and stock suspension.  Kind of surprising I think especially that a V8 is much bigger, I wonder what the difference is in weight between old i-4 and new V-8 from a corvette or camaro. 

 I already looked at pre-existing kits based on Buick and Ford 302, but the price is rather out of my range.  I was quoted 6K for a Rover V8 engine only, no tranny.  Yes it would be a complete engine, but I know GM is much less.  Corvette power plant costs 2K from 1991, and similarly to rover it was rebuilt/remanufactured. 4K difference is a lot of money.

The new generation of LT engines by Chevrolet are pretty light, depends on the version and if it has the iron or aluminum block. With the iron block and aluminum heads the weight should be comparable to the Ford 302 with aluminum heads. The Buick/Rover was and probably still is the most popular choice because of it's light weight, actually lighter than the original four, and the fact that it was the engine used by the factory when they built the GT V8s. If you are considering buying a crate engine, the they all are going to be expensive. If you're going for a "salvage yard" enigne then they should be fairly comparable, but the Rover might be a bit more expensive since they came in "expensive" cars and the salvage yards tend to charge more for those type of parts than say for a Chevy engine.

A lot depends on what your experience level is as far as electronic engine controls goes. If you're well up on that then the modern Chevrolet engines would be fine, but they have to have the computer controls and can't be retrofitted with conventional carbs and ignitions. The Ford or Buick/Rover can be retrofitted with conventional distributors and carbs as well as the GM V6, so if you're not well versed with the engine managment computers I'd go for one of those choices.

For someone on a limited budget and with limited experience with engine control systems my vote would be for the GM 3.4V6 from a Camaro along with the T5 transmission. You can install a distributor from an early 2.8 S-10 truck and have a conventional ignition system and an intake manifold from Classic Conversions for a standard Holley carb. About the cheapest way to go and you know that there are step by step instructions as well as plenty of support along the way. I have two friends here in KC that are doing just that in early body cars. I don't think you will be unhappy with the performance and the weight is reasonable for the suspension.

If you don't have to have absolute maximum power IMHO the V6 is the way to go for a great handling and driving car.

---

'73 Midget (V6)
'59 MGA (I6) under construction
'73 Lotus Europa
'52 MG TD kit car body project.
'98 Jag XK8

"There is a fine line between a hobby and mental illness"

Bill, if you're referring to the LT1, my advice would be to pass and consider instead an LS engine. The LT1 has what has got to be the worst design for an ignition system ever. A type of distributor GM calls the "OptiSpark" (and every LT1 owner with this demon calls it the OptiPuke) is the Achilles Heel of this wonderful engine. Not only is it mounted under the water pump, said water pump is not only prone to leaks but also to burp the cooling system, the burping valve is also directly above the Opti. As it's an "optical" system it's also prone to failure due to contamination from oil and dirt. And GM charges something like $600 for a replacement. It's so unfortunate as the LT1 is an awesome engine and can be built for much power and strength. The LS engines are even lighter and their coil-on-plug ignition is much better. There are conversions available for the LT1 OptiPuke, however very expensive.

"Ask me how I know" Christine AKA z28racergirl.com 

---

Christine Knight
Marketing Assistant

Helpful Links:
Code of Conduct
FAQs

Disclaimer:Working on automobiles is inherently dangerous. Moss Motors, Ltd. is not liable for injury or damage due to incorrect installation or use of their products. All products are sold with the understanding that the safe and proper installation and use of the products is the customer’s responsibility. Follow factory workshop manual procedures and instructions, but use current shop safety standards and common sense. Some tasks will require professional advice or services which Moss Motors cannot provide.

Christine, you are correct, I should have said the LS series of engines instead of the LT! Funny about the ignition being right under part of the cooling system where any leak could cause problems, does that sound like a stock MGB and the notorious heater vavle? LOL

---

'73 Midget (V6)
'59 MGA (I6) under construction
'73 Lotus Europa
'52 MG TD kit car body project.
'98 Jag XK8

"There is a fine line between a hobby and mental illness"

All,

It just struck me that we're talking about a 1964 MGB roadster here. Generally, I'm all for the idea of modifying sportscars for creative exercize and increased performance. We do this work in our shop all the time. But...

I have to say, that if this particular MGB is in good form rustwise, and has most of the original pieces, I'm not so sure I'd want to make it anything but a 1964 MGB. Bs that early have a character all their own and are becoming rare. So, if it's fairly original, please consider keeping it so.

---

Motorbill
From Lola to Land Rover, If it's British and has wheels, it's likely I've bloodied me knuckles thereupon

Yes the car is from 1964, but was modified some time ago, including fenders, seats, steering, suspension, transmission.  So it was heavily changed to accomodate the aforementioned modififcations.  I actually wanted to go in the direction of restoring to original spec, but have been considering the V6 or V8 upgrade for a few months now.  It doesn't mean I'll go that route.  I may endup simply cleaning it up and do the engine rebuild, rewire, etc.

Ok. I'm backing out of everything I said. Honestly, I'm in the same camp as Bill. Leave the '64 alone. It's tough to find salvagable early cars and really easy to find rubber bumper ones that are a heck of a lot easier to convert.

Yes, you can do a V6 or V8 conversion to an early car. But, it's a lot more work since you really have to make the engine compartment look like a late (74.5-80) one. I did a conversion on a '69 MGB GT once and am planning on doing a '73 GT but have lined up all the sheet metal bits ahead of time, some new others from junked RB cars.

One other thing to watch for on the '64 is that the door latches have to be adjusted just right, or you could lose a passenger hot footing it around a turn. BTDT.

It all comes down to a personal decision. I was originally going to put a V8 into a 1968 roadster chassis, but ended up selling it as a project and buying a rubber bumper car that was in much better shape. I made money on the deal and got an easier chassis to convert.

 

---

Kelvin Dodd
Global Sourcing Engineer
Moss Motors, Ltd.
Helpful Links:
Code of Conduct
FAQs

Disclaimer: Working on automobiles is inherently dangerous. Moss Motors, Ltd. is not liable for injury or damage due to incorrect installation or use of their products. All products are sold with the understanding that the safe and proper installation and use of the products is the customer’s responsibility. Follow factory workshop manual procedures and instructions, but use current shop safety standards and common sense. Some tasks will require professional advice or services which Moss Motors cannot provide.

OK, so the news is that I have decided to keep it as an original 64.  I won't be doing an engine swap afterall.  So the car needs some restoration and the deadline is a year from now.  I'll share my progress with the members of this forum under this very topic and I will post pictures as the work progresses.

Yipee!

Keep us posted.

---

Motorbill
From Lola to Land Rover, If it's British and has wheels, it's likely I've bloodied me knuckles thereupon