If not a p38 or discovery2 ?

[kbs]

Hi all,

I've been trying to replace a p38 4.6 with something similar.
Discovery2 (with thor 4ltr) looked like a good alternative (and ulez friendly).

As prediicted (by the forums), I cant find a non-rust bucket d2 (I did see one, but sold before I could offer).

My useage has changed, over the next year, I will need to use a local ulez about 60 times (£540).

I want a 4x4 auto with a good sized engine. Is it time to move on to a newer rangerover? L322?.

So the l322 needs valve saver fluid, but is it a good fit for lpg conversion? What other big comfy 4x4 (ulez friendly) should I look at?

All information gratefully received. Many thanks. Keith

[Gilbertd]

Pre-2006 L322 with the 4.4 litre BMW engine doesn't need a valve saver, only the later Jaguar/Ford engined ones. With those word has it to avoid the 2006-2009 ones as from 2010 MY they are a lot more reliable.

For the ULEZ aspect, a mate with a 4.6 LPG'd P38 had the same problem when they introduced it as he has to drive into the original central zone at least one a week. He went for something that we both decided that Mr **** wouldn't approve of, a 4.4 V8 Discovery 3 on LPG. ULEZ compliant although they aren't that common. The other option is the Disco 3 in drag, the L320 Range Rover Sport if you can find one of those that doesn't have an oil burner under the bonnet. There is another option that takes advantage of a mistake by TfL. For some inexplicable reason, a 4.0 litre P38 from 2000 or later, is shown on the TfL checker as ULEZ compliant. It shouldn't be and the 4.6 isn't, but there's a loophole there. You'd just have to hope someone doesn't realise the error and correct it.

[Pinger]

Pre-2006 L322 with the 4.4 litre BMW engine doesn't need a valve saver, only the later Jaguar/Ford engined ones.

Is this a general Ford thing? Is the 2 valve/cyl Ford Modular V8 (as fitted to Crown Victoria) similarly soft of seat?

[kbs]

Hi Gilbertd.
Many thanks for the l322 valve seat info. That is probably the best option for me if I don't find a d2.
Back to the other forum to read the buyers guides.
Could the 4ltr 2000 p38 'exemption' be due to discovery2 having SAI and being euro3? (Maybe I read that wrong).

Just to be sure I have understood, are all the 4.4 engines BMW? therefore any 4.4 l332 doesn't need valve saver?

Thanks again.

K

[Gilbertd]

No, 2002-2005 model L322s use the BMW engine, 2006 onwards use the Jaguar/Ford engine also in 4.4 litre NA or 4.2 Supercharged, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Range_Rover_(L322).

No idea why the post 2000 4.0 litre P38 is exempt as it is Euro2, as is the 4.6. I've always assumed it is an error in their database. I saying that, I'm currently recommissioning a 2005 Rover 75 diesel that has been standing for 6 years. It needs an MoT as the owner wants to transfer a private plate off it before selling it rather than simply selling it as it is with personal plate but no MoT. I put the private plate number into the TfL checker and it correctly identified the car and the fuel type but said it was compliant. Yet putting the registration number of an identical spec and year car that is on Autotrader, it says it isn't. So if it is sold as is with the personal plate on it, it is compliant but if the plate is taken off and it gets the original 55 plate back it isn't. All completely bonkers.....

Ford engines as a rule have valve seats made from something marginally harder than butter but there may well be exceptions. There could well be a difference between European Ford and US Ford. There's a list published by Prins but it isn't likely to be exhaustive as it is only engines that people have converted and found problems, see https://www.scribd.com/document/9033586 ... arze-Liste

[kbs]

Thanks, I will keep looking >2005 on the l322.

Ebay has a p38 4.6 advertised as ulez (try the registration number, it is not ulez). I suspect the seller will say "oh. I thought all lpg vehicles are ulez exempt".

Think I'm being too sceptical? Take a look at the advert. He claims to have bought the car to help out in the Ukraine but has now found a more suitable vehicle. This isn't the first time I've noticed this pitch. Perhaps it replaces "one carefully lady owner who only drove it to church every Sunday"

[Pinger]

Ford engines as a rule have valve seats made from something marginally harder than butter but there may well be exceptions. There could well be a difference between European Ford and US Ford. There's a list published by Prins but it isn't likely to be exhaustive as it is only engines that people have converted and found problems, see https://www.scribd.com/document/9033586 ... arze-Liste

Thanks Gilbertd. No mention of the 4.6l Modular V8, but as you say, not necessarily an exhaustive list. Later (post 1999) GM Vortecs appear to be vulnerable - a shift from cast iron to alloy heads (and seat inserts) possibly the cause? This is the kind of info I was curious about when I started the 'cast iron valve seats' thread - which morphed into a boating thread! Don't want to hustle you guys, but how are the boat engine rebuilds progressing?

[Gilbertd]

Alloy heads with inserts depend entirely on the grade of steel used for the inserts. Some are easily hard enough to cope with no lube at all while others are only just hard enough for unleaded with its additives. When Ford did the dual fuel Focus, that had a different cylinder head that looked identical and the only difference was the grade of steel used for the inserts. They could have used the same grade on all engines but that would have increased the cost by at least 2p per engine.....

Boat engine rebuild is going slowly. I started honing the bores, got 3 done fine and then started on the cylinder that had the burnt piston. Honed most of the marks out but there was still a score left in it so started honing a bit more. Then I checked the bore diameter, which should be between 4.003 and 4.007 inches, and found I was already at 4.012 inch so figured it really did need a rebore. So it has gone away to be bored and fitted with new pistons to match. Phoned them yesterday to see what progress was to be told that, due to summer holidays, they are a bit short of staff but should have it ready by the end of next week. So all ancillaries have been prepped, the heads are sitting on the bench with new valves ground in, seals fitted and cleaned up ready to bolt on. Just got nothing to bolt them to at the moment........

[LPGC]

From around the mid 2000's some of the Vauxhall (GM) heads have soft valves that need a valve lube system too.

Boats (now we're talking lol!).. I've been meaning to ask Gilbert how his engine build was going.

I honed all my V8's bores and managed to get rid of all the scratches. Cylinder 2 was particularly badly scored but that's come out great after honing. After removing all the pistons I found a few other bores with light scoring too. Honed the hell out of those with scratches! Then took meticulous (or as good as I could with less than proper engineering quality measuring tools such as cheap 'comparative method' bore gauge and cheap digital caliper) measurements... Cyl 2 is a few thou bigger than other cylinders now, there is some tapering (narrower toward bottom of bores), slightly out of round (wider front to rear than side to side) but apparently it should be like that until/unless the heads or torque plates are bolted on. Hardly 'blueprinted' but my measurements are all within tolerance so I'm hoping it should be good when put back together.

I imported 8 x new hypereutectic pistons and ring sets (moly coated top ring) and have rebuilt the bottom end. Great service and value from Rock Auto... I ordered them on a Friday afternoon and they arrived on the Wednesday, all the way from the US and costing less the £200 for the pistons and rings (UK import tax and VAT included), there were cheaper pistons and cheaper rings available but I went for coated pistons and rings (the cheapest pistons had rings included, I could have got 8 pistons and a rings set for near half the price). It was a pita removing the press fit conrods from the old pistons and fitting them onto the new pistons but I got it done...

Working on one rod/piston at a time I heated the little ends whilst in the old pistons using a propane torch, used the press to push out the pins, whilst the removed rod was still hot reheated the little end, had the new piston ready on the floor with new pin partly inserted at one end... then quickly put the rod into the new piston and pushed the new pin in. You have around 2 seconds to push the new pin through the rod and centre it before the little end grips the pin, once it's gripped it would be very difficult to move it without damaging the new piston even if reheated (at least without the proper press adapter to support the piston whilst pressing the pin). The old pistons ruined during removing the pins. It would have been a bit easier to rebuild using floating gudgeon pins but also more expensive.

This was cyl2 and it's piston before honing

20230717_145810.jpg (2.75 MiB) Viewed 6257 times

20230717_145752.jpg (2.38 MiB) Viewed 6257 times

After honing

20230809_140039.jpg (2.54 MiB) Viewed 6257 times

But it took a lot of honing / work just to get the bores right and a lot of work again to put the rods on the new pistons.

The cam is back in (first job before putting the crank in), still have to attach the cam thrust plate, cam chain, sump, timing cover, water pump, lifters, heads, fuel pump, etc and I have all new brass core plugs to fit. Will be filling it with oil and manually driving the oil pump whilst checking oil pressure before installing the dizzy. But the main bits are back in... the cam, crank, mains, pistons, big ends etc all torqued up and the engine rotates quite easily using a bar on the crank studs (before putting the pistons in the crank could be turned with slight pressure from a little finger but I didn't have to do any work on main or big end bearings).

Just got back from holiday in Cornwall. Just before the holiday I messed up by over-torquing cam thrust plate bolts, stretching them. Daft me I was using a new 3/8 torque wrench and I hadn't set it properly, the cam thrust plate bolts only need 10ftLbs (120 inch Lbs) but I'd got the torque wrench set to around double that. Ordered 2 x new ARP thrust plate bolts which could be delivered anytime form 4 days ago (didn't happen) to 3 days from now. So I'm waiting for delivery of 2 x little bolts... 1/4 inch UNC thread, around 3/4 inch long, nothing special about them except they are 8 grade (again nothing special about that) but with special low profile heads. If it wasn't for the low profile heads I could buy such bolts for around 5p each from a local bolts supplier. Wish I'd never used the new torque wrench now, easy enough to guestimate 120 inch pounds and it's not like exact torque on those bolts is critical like it is with a main or big end cap bolt. Tempted to buy standard bolts from the bolts supplier and grind the heads a bit thinner.. But it would be unfortunate if I did that and the bolts ever let go or fouled the cam chain.

Forgot to mention I chased all the bolt threads in the block with taps (except for main and big end bolt threads). Some of the head bolts on these Ford 302W engines go straight through into the water jacket (seems a daft design to me) so sealant is used on head bolts to prevent coolant coming up head bolts and into oil under the rocker covers.. It doesn't inspire confidence for getting correct torque on the head bolts. Anyway I'd want to chase the threads even if they didn't go into the water jacket, most of the female threads around the engine were rusty, maybe because of the marine application. One of the timing cover/water pump bolts snapped during removal of those components but I managed to get it out by heating that area of the block and by welding a bar to the front of the snapped bolt. Bought a new set of stainless bolts for the timing cover and wp. Now wishing I'd bought a new set of head bolts, the old bolts look fine, they're not stretch (torque to yield) and they're they're not very highly torqued, it seems to be normal practice for engine builders to re-use old 302W head bolts... but still I'll kick myself for re-using old head bolts if any fail.

I haven't done anything with the heads yet, they seem fine but will obviously need cleaning up before re-installation, I should (and most likely will) check all the valves / stems / play / seats and use some alcohol mixed with water to check for valve leaks.

I think I have a full set of marine spec gaskets to rebuild the engine but sods law there'll be some little gasket I need but haven't got.

[Gilbertd]

Some of the head bolts on these Ford 302W engines go straight through into the water jacket (seems a daft design to me) so sealant is used on head bolts to prevent coolant coming up head bolts and into oil under the rocker covers.. It doesn't inspire confidence for getting correct torque on the head bolts.

All the head bolts on the small block Chevy go through into the water jacket which, I totally agree, does seem to be a particularly stupid piece of design. Same thing where you coat the threads and underside of the bolt heads with gasket sealer before putting them in so you don't get rocker covers filled with coolant. The head bolts are in 3 different lengths and on the pre-Vortec engine were just done up to 65ft/lbs but on the later Vortec, it is 22ft/lb then angle torqued but a different angle for each length. I've even bought an angle torque gauge for the job, I just need a block to bolt them to.....

We've deviated again......

[LPGC]

We've deviated again......

We have but @Pinger asked for it

Not sure whether to use gasket sealant or something like liquid PTFE thread sealant on head bolts that go through into coolant channels. Been doing a fair bit of research during this engine build, on a lot of the American engine forums they reckon PTFE sealant is a better bet for such bolts...

[Gilbertd]

Manual for mine recommends the ludicrously expensive Mercruiser Quicksilver stuff but the Yanks on the forum reckon this stuff https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/285376123333 is a good alternative. Really messy stuff but smells like the old red Hermetite so I suspect that would do the job just the same (if you can still get it....).

[LPGC]

Yeah I too have read advice about using the Permatex aviation grade stuff.. But that advice has carried down unchanged from the 1960's while these days we have PTFE thread sealants and instant gasket type stuff. If I hadn't researched I'd probably have gone for instant gasket type stuff but there seems to be a good case for PTFE over instant gasket and I expect the Permatex advice to be good but a bit dated and probably at best only as good as PTFE or instant gasket. In the 1960's they were still using rope crank oil seals...

[Pinger]

We have but @Pinger asked for it

Indeed I did - and gratified to see the progress you're both making.

Not sure whether to use gasket sealant or something like liquid PTFE thread sealant on head bolts that go through into coolant channels. Been doing a fair bit of research during this engine build, on a lot of the American engine forums they reckon PTFE sealant is a better bet for such bolts...

The Yanks love their Permatex! I don't doubt Permatex make very good products but not so easily obtained here. I'll ask on the USA forum I frequent for suggestions re sealing head bolts - and ask for Permatex alternatives.
One thing driving sealant (RTV type) selection these days is compatibility with catalytic convertors. Not a concern for your boat engines but possibly there are sealants that are being dismissed because of that (when used in car/truck applications) that would be perfectly usable for you.

[Pinger]

Manual for mine recommends the ludicrously expensive Mercruiser Quicksilver stuff but the Yanks on the forum reckon this stuff https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/285376123333 is a good alternative. Really messy stuff but smells like the old red Hermetite so I suspect that would do the job just the same (if you can still get it....).

I've asked on the USA forum I mentioned and await their replies. While searching there I found this:

Head_Bolts GM.png (25.47 KiB) Viewed 6187 times

It does mention a Loctite sealant - and reminded me I have the complete GM workshop manual set for 1998 GMT 400 trucks which covers all the engines (by then, Vortecs). If you want the volume with the engine stuff Gilbertd, PM me an e-mail address and I'll forward it to you.
I also found that later Vortecs have TTY (torque to yield) cyl head bolts that are single use only. Identifiable by having 1/2'' heads (earlier reusable bolts have 5/8'' heads) and new ones come with pre-applied sealant.

As and when info arrives on the other forum, I'll bring it here.

[kbs]

As we have moved on to boat engines.....

I still have an 1980s Bukh 10hp in the garage. Spare starter, good exhaust manifold. Direct sea water cooling, single cylinder with a huge flywheel and a traditional dumper truck sound.

I replaced this with a beta (marinised kubuto) about 5 years ago.

Bits for the Bukh are a bit hard to get, so I'd probably be best to sell it for spares. Also have too many other projects half (quarter?) finished.

Other than appollo duck - where would you guys look to offload such an engine?

Keith

[Gilbertd]

This is what Mr Mercruiser says about fitting the heads on the V6, the Vortec is what they refer to as the Gen+ engine.

Screenshot 2023-09-02 191102.jpg (144.41 KiB) Viewed 6175 times

No mention of the bolts being one use at all.

Can't help with where to advertise a boat engine other than eBay. I assume that is the sort of thing used in narrowboats?

[LPGC]

I've read of plenty owners / builders using nothing at all on head bolts that go into coolant channels and not having any problems.

I wouldn't want to chance that myself, I'm used to working with pressurised systems / threaded joints etc and would expect coolant to leak all the way up threads and out from below bolt heads.

OK so we're talking different engines, mine's a Ford 302 and Gilberts is a GM V6, although probably around the same power. My bolts are all the same length, Gilberts are different lengths. Apparently the early versions of the Ford V8, the 289, had blind holes for head bolts and if I had one of those I wouldn't need to be worrying about coolant coming up head bolts... but it's a 302 and I do need to worry.

Not sure what to think now. If I hadn't read anything I'd think about using either RTV or PTFE sealants. I have read the same advice about using the Permatex stuff but it seems to be advice dating back to the 60's and I'd expect better options to be available by now, maybe both RTV and PTFE would both be better options... or maybe not.

Another thing about boat engines, or at least mine and Giilbert's boat engines, is that there will never be any pressure in the coolant system because they both run unpressurised raw water cooling. So probably not much of an issue anyway. But still I and I expect Gilbert would like to make sure the engine is/would be capable of holding pressure in the cooling system without bleeding coolant into oil. And I expect any of the Quicksilver stuff, Permatex, RTV or PTFE would accomplish that. We might rule out the Quicksilver and Permatex based on cost and maybe on assumption that RTV or PTFE are more modern and more capable. I did consider the Permatex, briefly, before I did further reading... But I think I can narrow down what I'm going to use to either RTV type stuff or PTFE. Probably PTFE on the the lower threads and RTV for the last bit of upper threads before (and under) the bolt head - that's another one I read that seems to make sense! Another thing to remember is that the PTFE stuff isn't exactly cheap either, in fact it's probably more expensive per ml than the Permatex or Quicksilver stuff... But I've used it plenty times on LPG pipe connections on which it's proven utterly reliable.

Before my time with this boat or engine the engine was rebuilt for sure. And it definitely seems the rebuilder used RTV on the head bolts. But (and this is a point brought up on some of the American forums) I reckon some of the RTV will have made it's way into coolant passages. To a lesser degree I'd also think that RTV would affect torque settings more than PTFE and be a bit more messy, e.g. leave more 'stuff' on threads that would make removing/refitting heads down the line more of a problem in terms of leaving more stuff in coolant channels in the event heads had to come off without the engine being totally stripped and rebuilt.

So I think for me it'll be PTFE on most of the thread with a bit of RTV under the bolt heads and on a short section toward the top of the threads. But I don't expect we could go far wrong whatever (sensible) route we choose.

[kbs]

....can't help with where to advertise a boat engine other than eBay. I assume that is the sort of thing used in narrowboats?

Not sure 10hp is enough for canal boats (other than the smallest day boat maybe).

These things were fitted to small (21-26') sailing boats in the1970-1980s. The 26' sadler was sea going. A couple of these have crossed the Atlantic. Would manage ~5.5 kts

[Gilbertd]

Would manage ~5.5 kts

Hmm, not going to tow a water skier then.....