Eh...1996 Rover miniMetro

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mic
  • Start date Start date
seriously....an a series!!! the very same a series they launched in 1951!!!! Don't get me wrong I like old engines...I'm the pround owner of a b series powered car....but the a series in a car from the 90s.....good lord thats some top class parts bin design! Even better than using the door handles from an 1970s mgb in a 1990s van.
 
DingleBerry said:
seriously....an a series!!! the very same a series they launched in 1951!!!! Don't get me wrong I like old engines...I'm the pround owner of a b series powered car....but the a series in a car from the 90s.....good lord thats some top class parts bin design! Even better than using the door handles from an 1970s mgb in a 1990s van.
Click to expand...
Im sure its a K-Series now as i think they only came in the 1.1
 
It's most certainly a K-Series. The 1.6 and 1.8 are all 16v engines, the 1.1 is an 8v and the 1.4 could be an 8v or a 16v engine. All engines will fit into a Metro/100.

The K series replaced the A series in the Metro in 1990 IIRC, though was still used in the mini until it's demise in 2000 (or was it 2001?).
 
Dogbreath said:
It's most certainly a K-Series. The 1.6 and 1.8 are all 16v engines, the 1.1 is an 8v and the 1.4 could be an 8v or a 16v engine. All engines will fit into a Metro/100.

The K series replaced the A series in the Metro in 1990 IIRC, though was still used in the mini until it's demise in 2000 (or was it 2001?).
Click to expand...
Mini Production ceased in 2000. A series had gone through a few changes since its release though.

What'd be the cheapest 1.8 K-series engined car you could buy? Crashed MGF?
 
commited said:
What'd be the cheapest 1.8 K-series engined car you could buy? Crashed MGF?
Click to expand...
Good question, 1.6 or 1.6 im after. So what cars should i be hunting
 
1.6 out of various rover 200's and 400's 1996 or so on!
1.8's out of the same+mgf+Rover 75
1.8vvc's out of 200 vi's, brms, coupes, R25Gti's, ZR's, MGF, MGTF etc.

imo while the 1.6 is good unless your building to a race or sprint spec where 1.6 is the limit why not go for the 1.8?
 
Pigeon said:
1.6 out of various rover 200's and 400's 1996 or so on!
1.8's out of the same+mgf+Rover 75
1.8vvc's out of 200 vi's, brms, coupes, R25Gti's, ZR's, MGF, MGTF etc.

imo while the 1.6 is good unless your building to a race or sprint spec where 1.6 is the limit why not go for the 1.8?
Click to expand...
Ill go for the 1.8 if i can get it :)
 
What engine would be in a ROVER 620 1996?


EDIT
Rover 600 Manual 1.8L petrol 1998, Leinster Wexford €800.00
, 4 dr, saloon, manual, black, ABS, a/c, a/b, c/l, e/s/r, e/w, immob, p/s, s/r, Honda Engine & running gear. 085-*******

?
 
If it's a multi-point injection 1.1 (rather than single-point) then you're halfway there with regards to the loom. From what i've read you'll then just need to plug in the ecu to the loom and the loom to the engine and it should be ok. If it's single point then you'll need to change the loom.
 
Pigeon - arent the 1.6 engines the honda jobbys or are they only on the pre-bubble cars.

The Rover 600s engines were all Honda except for the 2.0T and the diesel. Might fit though :D

I think this is right:
The 1989-1995 200s/400s 1.4/1.8 were K series
The 1995-2005 Rover 200/400s 1.4-1.8 were all K series ('cept diesel)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rover_K-Series_engine
 
Dogbreath said:
The original Austin Metro was marketed as a miniMetro
Click to expand...
IIRC they were only badged as an Austin miniMetro for the first year or so of production.
penski said:
Being that the early ones have the hateful little A-series in them,
Click to expand...
early? i thought they used A- series lumps for many years before fitting anything more modern.
Dogbreath said:
As for crazy...the Group B 6R4 rally car was (loosely) based on a Metro and that had 330bhp in factory spec and the works teams were getting significantly more than that out of the mid-mounted V6 engine.
Click to expand...
a real shame they never really sorted the reliability problems out.
unbelievable cars to see being used in anger.
 
[TW]Fox said:
These guys need to be really careful they don't get a reputation as banger-land. I can see the appeal of retro-rides - becuase much retro is cool.

A 1996 Rover 100 is NOT 'retro'. It is simply an old banger. This is why its free.
Click to expand...
Out of my thread with your level headed thoughts you!
 
I had a Rover Metro GTi in british racing green - great little car. Went all around the country in it, mostly at just under 100mph, when I used to go to footy away matches and never cost me a penny to run. Handled pretty well too, although that was in 1995 so modern stuff would leave it for dust.
 
[TW]Fox said:
These guys need to be really careful they don't get a reputation as banger-land. I can see the appeal of retro-rides - becuase much retro is cool.

A 1996 Rover 100 is NOT 'retro'. It is simply an old banger. This is why its free.
Click to expand...
A reputation as banger land? Are you serious? Only by blind fools.

Retro rides is full of people who know what they're talking about - I guarantee at least one person has done this conversion before, hence why I linked to it.
 
commited said:
A reputation as banger land? Are you serious? Only by blind fools.

Retro rides is full of people who know what they're talking about - I guarantee at least one person has done this conversion before, hence why I linked to it.
Click to expand...

You totally misread my post.

I said, and you quoted, they 'need to be careful they don't get a reputation as banger land'.

Becuase the retro-ride link appears to get posted every time somebody buys anything over 8 years old irrespective of whether its properly retro or simply an old shed.
 
And in the interest of a balanced arguement, penski would post something like this...

'Retro is an attitude, not an age. Fiat Seicentos have the possibility
to be nice little Retro motors...

www.retro-rides.com is the most open-minded car forum around...No
cliques, no nastiness, nothing. Not everyone likes everything posted
but all criticism is constructive...

Most members own more than one car including a lot of brand new stuff
and one or two pre-war classics.

'Retro' doesn't mean 'pre-'88' or 'pre-72' or anything like that...It
is a whole attitude towards cars, their use, and their place... '
 
Yea thats about it. It's totally open, its a great automotive place of piston-headry and welcome to anyone :)

Pretty much irrespective of car too, although, we don't want the place flooded out with modern things :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom