[ROVERNET - UK] 2000 SC auto
venterrh at telus.net
Tue May 16 02:56:51 BST 2006
Thank you so much for your lucid and comprehensive
description. Time and money are indeed the problem. Who knows when
the final coracle arrives?
The car is actually my wife's, and she does much better with
an auto than a manual box. Strangely enough, although she is not a
"car person", she is not keen to part with the car. At present, I
have the engine and gearbox out of the car for some major engine
work, and although the gearbox was working smoothly I don't think I
should just plonk it back in. Hence the enquiry.
A few years ago I replaced the flex plate with the solid
version supplied by the club. It is not something I wish to repeat,
especially if the engine is in situ.
I have read that a torque converter not just multiplies the
torque but exerts a not insignificant thrust on the flex plate, and
via that to the crankshaft. A torque converter that is out of sorts
is not that good at multiplying torque but can exert an excessively
large thrust. On some makes of engine this results in rapid wear of
the crankshaft thrust bearings. So, a torque converter should be in
good condition and as a bonus lock up in 4th gear, thereby
eliminating (presumably) that nasty end thrust, at least for highway work.
I will mess around with the engine first and then ponder the
Thank you again, Kent.
All the best,
At 08:15 AM 06-05-15, you wrote:
>You can fit anything to anything provided you have
>enough time and money. All the Rover auto conversions
>I'm familiar with are V8 conversions, so the 2000SC
>would be something new. The conversion to 4spd manual
>is much easier, but if you want a better automatic for
>your SC, you must decide if you need an OD automatic
>or not. OD automatics are always longer than
>comparable 3spd. autos and I'm not sure how much room
>you have under the floorpan/tunnel on the SC. Gear
>spacing and torque match are other considerations.
>The AW70/71 is closer to the BW65 than to the BW35 in
>terms of installation details. You can use a BW65
>bellhousing on an AW70/71 with some modification. The
>same cannot be said for the BW35 bellhousing. I don't
>believe the BW65 was ever fitted to the SC. Service
>and parts expertise for the AW70/71 may not be readily
>available in all areas.
>When considering an auto gearbox swap, there are three
>area to consider, 1.bellhousing to block adaptation
>(or if you have a suitable bellhousing already mated
>to the engine into which the new torque converter will
>fit, an adaptation between the bellhousing and the
>transmission body), 2. Pilot adapter to support the
>front of the torque converter, and 3.
>flexplate/driveplate attachment to the torque
>conveter. Everything else is a matter of
>fitting...linkages, driveshaft length and attachment,
>floorpan/tunnel clearance, linkage and controls.
>The simplest approach to take with the AW70/71 would
>be to try the Volvo bellhousing on the back of the P6
>block/adapter plate and see how close they come to
>mating. It may be possible to index the Volvo
>bellhousing to the Rover adapter plate/block and
>simply redrill the Rover plate. The AW trans may
>actually use the same pilot arrange ment as the BW35,
>which would be helpful, but I can't remember offhand
>and I don't have an AW trans handy at the moment.
>This would only leave you with matching the torque
>converter to the Rover flexplate. Unfortunately, the
>flexplate for the SC/BW35 seems to be the weak point
>in the whole drivetrain. Someone else will have to
>chime in on why they fail so frequently, as it has
>slipped my mind.
>All in all this is a totally new area and the 4spd
>stick conversion is indeed simple by comparrison. If
>anyone has a spare SC auto bellhousing and flexplate,
>I'd love to have one with which to experiment.
More information about the rovernet