FYI, looks like it'll fit nicely in the Series Rover engine bay. And I've found adapters that will let me put my existing transfer case on a number of the US transmissions. Interestinger and interestinger.
FYI, looks like it'll fit nicely in the Series Rover engine bay. And I've found adapters that will let me put my existing transfer case on a number of the US transmissions. Interestinger and interestinger.
Keith Tanner said:FYI, looks like it'll fit nicely in the Series Rover engine bay. And I've found adapters that will let me put my existing transfer case on a number of the US transmissions. Interestinger and interestinger.
And now it's so much easier to post build pictures. 
4BT is 3.9L. The pre-98 were 105 hp/ 265 lb/ft, Post 98 ones (16-valve) are 170 hp & 420 ft/lb.
ultraclyde said:That's not the R2.8L specs they list on the website:
R2.8 Turbo Diesel Specs
- Displacement: 2.8 L (171 cu in)
- Torque: 267 lb-ft @1500-3000 RPM*
- Horsepower: 161 hp @ 3600*
- Engine Weight: 503 lbs
- Dimensions: 28.3 in (H) x 25 in (W) x 25.1 in (D)
I just pulled the first numbers Google spit out. My bad!
Keith Tanner said:FYI, looks like it'll fit nicely in the Series Rover engine bay. And I've found adapters that will let me put my existing transfer case on a number of the US transmissions. Interestinger and interestinger.
I still have rover love, need to see this happen.
Disco axles with disc brakes, power steering, Cummins 2.8, wearing Basil's body - it's a Defender 88.
Oh man, I did not need this idea. I have too many other projects. But maybe it's time to clear the decks.
Unless your pulling a big trailer, I'd guess 210 hp and 385 ft*lbs is all you'll ever need for any Jeep, Land Cruiser / Rover that this is aimed at.
I really, really, really like the idea of this engine. Unfortunately I don't have anything that could make use of it!
I really, really, really like the idea of this engine. I've watched several videos of the Tube Sock Jeep and its just mesmerizing watching that thing crawl up super steep inclines at idle with no throttle applied. Unfortunately I don't have anything that could make use of it!
Xtreme Offroad (powerblock TV) is building a bastardized Defender with the R2.8 and an AX15 using the Advance Adapters kit. I wish it was a more sensible option for my 318ti....
A 401 CJ said:Unless your pulling a big trailer, I'd guess 210 hp and 385 ft*lbs is all you'll ever need for any Jeep, Land Cruiser / Rover that this is aimed at.
True, but the 2.8 only makes 161 HP and 267 ftlbs. Granted that's plenty for your average CJ,YJ,TJ etc, but the 318 in my ZJ bests that by enough that I wouldn't pursue a swap for those prices. Honestly when STM317 posted that info I did an excited double take and thought maybe I had the wrong numbers. If it made that much I'd be opening a new savings account.
But the next one they release....
Keith Tanner said:Disco axles with disc brakes, power steering, Cummins 2.8, wearing Basil's body - it's a Defender 88.
Oh man, I did not need this idea. I have too many other projects. But maybe it's time to clear the decks.
good thing you're mostly across the country. I have access to a good number of rover parts still and i'd be doing some major enabling.
I know a guy who put a 6.2 GM Diesel (Humvee spec) in his '71 C/K panel truck. He's all geeked about the 2.8 Cummins and wants to put it in his wife's T100 Toyota. I tried to explain to him that the swap would probably be illegal in California, plus the motor'd be worth 3X the rest of the truck!
edit: The Humvee 6.2 makes more power than the Cummins, but the lower-spec 6.2s are very similar in output. Ain't turbocharging grand?
ultraclyde said:That's not the R2.8L specs they list on the website:
R2.8 Turbo Diesel Specs
- Displacement: 2.8 L (171 cu in)
- Torque: 267 lb-ft @1500-3000 RPM*
- Horsepower: 161 hp @ 3600*
- Engine Weight: 503 lbs
- Dimensions: 28.3 in (H) x 25 in (W) x 25.1 in (D)
For being similar in displacement and application, the baby Duramax makes another 100 ft-lbs. I'm kinda impressed.
LWN Turbo Diesel Specs
grover said:Keith Tanner said:Disco axles with disc brakes, power steering, Cummins 2.8, wearing Basil's body - it's a Defender 88.
Oh man, I did not need this idea. I have too many other projects. But maybe it's time to clear the decks.
good thing you're mostly across the country. I have access to a good number of rover parts still and i'd be doing some major enabling.
There's one other Rover guy in town. I need all the enablers I can get on this one!
keith, who makes those adaptors to fit an american trans to the rover the transfer case? I have been toying with a very bad idea involving this engine, a 2 door disco 1 and a toyota sunrader RV
Advance: http://www.advanceadapters.com/categories/adapter-kits/191/0/0/0/36/0/0/0/
I was talking to a friend who does CAN integration work about the 2.8, and he said "the problem is, it doesn't do anything an LS doesn't do other than run on diesel". And, uhh, actually, valid point. It may be a bit more compact than the V8 from what I can tell. It has to have an intercooler, but you have some flexibility there.
Also, apparently they only sold something like 10 or 18 last year. You just can't get them.
I wonder how the mileage compares to an LS in the same rig?
Can't be worse, that's for sure. It has to be better.
I didn't intend that to be "nothing beats the LS!", but it was a valid point on his behalf.
Oh, agreed. I'm not familiar with LS packaging and size to compare either. It's an interesting thought exercise to work up cost - benefit on both.
The difference in cost would pay for a LOT of gas.
If the Cummins is anywhere close to the GM 2.8L Duramax expect 30 mpg highway (55), 34 mpg interstate (65-75), 24-25 mpg city/ hwy. City drags it down a lot. 2016 Canyon CCSB., no tune or deletes. Tuned engines are getting way more.
For an RV there are more reasons than just economy to run diesel. If you run a wallas Diesel Stove/heater, you no longer have to worry about carrying containers of highly explosive propane. Not only does this free up storage space, reduce the chances of an explosion, but allows for passage through tunnels and over some bridges that prohibit the transport of propane through or over there.
Having been around the water most of my life, I have seen a few boats explode due to leaking propane. I do not trust gases like that one bit
ultraclyde said:Oh, agreed. I'm not familiar with LS packaging and size to compare either. It's an interesting thought exercise to work up cost - benefit on both.
The difference in cost would pay for a LOT of gas.
I would compare like to like. The cost of the Cummins is on par with an LS crate. The power/torque level of the 2.8 actually works better for my (currently imaginary) application as it's within the realm of stock(ish) drivetrain parts. The LS, not so much.
that is a good point, Keith. My imaginary application would still use stockish rover parts. An LS would rip them apart, but the torque of the Cummins is on part with a Rover v8, but with hopefully better mileage. To beef up the drivetrain of a Series, Defender, or a Disco to handle the power of an LS adds more money to the equation
For being similar in displacement and application, the baby Duramax makes another 100 ft-lbs. I'm kinda impressed.
I'd bet that's only because GM can do million mile durability testing on the one drivetrain they sell the engine in front of. I think the R2.8 is intentionally rated to be swap-friendly, i.e. not blow up the drivetrains of the various things it's going to be swapped into. The people paying 8k for this 160hp motor probably wouldn't pay more if it was 210 etc.
I am thinking real hard about this engine for my Clark Cortez RV 'someday' build. Seems perfect for that. I want to put one in my B250 but i just cant justify the money on this vehicle.
You'll need to log in to post.
