Rovertech 2.0

The head gasket went on my 400 today
Its just touched 110,000 miles, my 3dr blew its gasket at 112,000
I'm probabaly gonna get the water pump changed at the same time, also the cam belt (even though it was done less than 3000 miles ago), is there anything else i should change while im at it?
GARY

What engine is it mate? Should I expect this on mine soon? Its a 416 on 97k

What is wrong with reusing the cambelt? Rover wouldn't recommend changing it.

Thats lasted well. My coupe went at 89k and my cab went at 82k

Bob SLi wrote:What engine is it mate? Should I expect this on mine soon? Its a 416 on 97k

Come on.. the clues are there... it was the HG that went.

Therefore I would bet it's a k series.... and in a Mk1 400 that means it's a 1.4

Dont worry about the HG on your 1.6 - that's the Honda D16 - in 3k miles your engine will only just be run in

Although 'apparenlty' there's nothing wrong with k series as long as they're well maintained

My cars are VERY well maintained
Yes it is the k series, and as far as i know, its the original gasket.
The reason i commented about the gasket on my 200 going was simply a mileage issue, they both went at simillar mileage.
As for the cam belt, i know it can safely be reused, but as they cost very little, surely it would be better to fit a new 'en while im at it:)
GARY

Sheaf wrote:
Although 'apparenlty' there's nothing wrong with k series as long as they're well maintained

A dig at myself? 'Apparently', the theory has just been proved right. I have seen honda D16 lumps go at much lower mileage. I'm not saying a K is more reliable, i just honestly think the K gets way too much stick. Its a good engine with flaws IMO. With a bit more development it could have been so much better.

I wouldn't say 111000 miles is a bad result on 1 head gasket myself.

I would change the cambelt, they cost very little, and gives you peace of mind.

depends if you remove the belt completely.

i dont, so i wouldnt replace it..

Sheaf wrote:

Bob SLi wrote:What engine is it mate? Should I expect this on mine soon? Its a 416 on 97k

Come on.. the clues are there... it was the HG that went.

Therefore I would bet it's a k series.... and in a Mk1 400 that means it's a 1.4

Dont worry about the HG on your 1.6 - that's the Honda D16 - in 3k miles your engine will only just be run in

Although 'apparenlty' there's nothing wrong with k series as long as they're well maintained

Maybe it's time you went and studied for a degree in common sense.

MGTurbo wrote:

Sheaf wrote:

Bob SLi wrote:What engine is it mate? Should I expect this on mine soon? Its a 416 on 97k

Come on.. the clues are there... it was the HG that went.

Therefore I would bet it's a k series.... and in a Mk1 400 that means it's a 1.4

Dont worry about the HG on your 1.6 - that's the Honda D16 - in 3k miles your engine will only just be run in

Although 'apparenlty' there's nothing wrong with k series as long as they're well maintained

Maybe it's time you went and studied for a degree in common sense.

I agree. Load of danglies deluxe written there.

my d16 sohc went at about 75k as toby knows, muchly due to the amount of high revs the engine saw under my ownership and a loss of coolant. All engines have flaws regardless of manufacturer and items like Headgaskets are just items that WILL need replacing at some point. I havent even attempted doing a headgasket YET, but i know it isnt the end of the world if it does start leaking, I mean what does it cost to pull a head? £40 for a gasket plus £20 or so for a skim if needed, plus anything else for the job.

You guys sooo need to be able to recognise tounge in cheek comments

Fine, whatever. All headgaskets fail, they're all equally likely to go, and the k is not prone to it. It's all lies and propaganda.

It's just a strange coincidence that I happen to know 4 people off the forum who had k's with failed HGs, and not one single person who has had one fail on another car, bar my dad who managed to blow the one on his Sunbeam Rapier IIRC.

How many people with K's on the forum ?

Sheaf wrote: Dont worry about the HG on your 1.6 - that's the Honda D16 - in 3k miles your engine will only just be run in

So just in time to chang ethe oil control rings then

Sheaf wrote:You guys sooo need to be able to recognise tounge in cheek comments

Fine, whatever. All headgaskets fail, they're all equally likely to go, and the k is not prone to it. It's all lies and propaganda.

It's just a strange coincidence that I happen to know 4 people off the forum who had k's with failed HGs, and not one single person who has had one fail on another car, bar my dad who managed to blow the one on his Sunbeam Rapier IIRC.

No they don't. They rarely actually ..'fail'. More often than not, they are damaged first then are unable to do the job they were designed to do. Check a few posts above and you'll see "loss of coolant" played a part in one so called failure. A look round other Rover sites will also show other honest owners who've had damaged head gaskets on their cars, not just Rovers either, following their own 'failures'' like never checking coolant levels and other items as all manufacturers recommend. Loss of coolant, for ANY car, is almost certainly the cause of most cylinder head gaskets 'failing'....due to overheating damage without proper coolant levels.

The original poster confidently states his cars are well maintained.... He can be confident as he's obviously had his cars from new.

Full service history merely means there'a few stamps in a book. There's more to good servicing than that. Those stamps are NO guarantee of a job well done even if you paid the professionals well to do it.

Still, what do I know, more than once 'professionals' have told me "They all do that".... so it must be true ... they're professionals...
.

In my experience, the cylinder head gaskets on O and T series Rovers and MGs are near bullet proof provided the cars are well maintained... even the turbocharged cars.

I have recently purchased two Rover 620ti, both car's owners being professionally advised that the cylinder head gasket had failed. Both owners openly admitted having next to no ' under the bonnet nouse' thus can only rely on the advice of the professsionals had given them.

Investigating both cars I discovered the reasons for the 'failures'. On one car the little pipe from the top of the radiator which is connected to the Turbocharger's water cooling had been fractured (someone leant on it? - easily done because of its location) and a near invisible hairline crack would open up under hot coolant pressure leading to loss of coolant. The other car had a similar coolant leak on the small hose which is connected to the turbocharger. Following long fast runs, the slow but progressive loss of coolant would be hard to observe. These led to overheated engines and cylinder head gasket 'failures'... One car needed a head skim following the overheating.

Both cars now run as the designer intended...

So, what came first, the failure or the damage..

Chicken and egg init? ...

As George_chick here has frequently reminded folks... give your car the "Getting to know you" Julie Andrews attention ... just maybe then your head gaskets would never be failures .... but allowed to do the job they were designed for.
.

southside wrote: Thats lasted well. My coupe went at 89k and my cab went at 82k

my uncles s reg r 200 - 1.8 lastes 39k

MGJohn wrote: On one car the little pipe from the top of the radiator which is connected to the Turbocharger's water cooling had been fractured (someone leant on it? - easily done because of its location) and a near invisible hairline crack would open up under hot coolant pressure leading to loss of coolant.

That I can relate to John! The Tourer was sold as HGF, apparently for the THIRD time, once I got it home and had a chance to get it running again the top rad hose had a small split in it, so every now and then jet of water would spurt out. http://homepage.ntlworld.com/fluke9/Video(02)(1).3gp for a small vid of it
Once we started stripping bits down to remove lump the small pipe on the inlet was blocked solid by what looked to be radweld or something similar! So, what caused HGF? Obviously poor or lack of maintainace, not bad design!

Yeah fair enough the majority of rover enignes that suffer from hgf are the k's but isn't it actually down to the design and material used for the locating dowls?

In all honesty, i havent had my 400 since new, back in '92 i was only 10!
Only had the car for three years, and in that time its been very well serviced, BUT, i cant say if this was true with the previous owners , and as you say, service history doesnt mean its been looked after.
GARY

xr4x4 wrote:depends if you remove the belt completely.

i dont, so i wouldnt replace it..

Yep, the pas belt is a pain to remove and the crank pulley is nigh on impossible without an airgun.

Changing the belt will add on an extra 20% time to the repair for very little gain. By thetime the cambelt is ready for changing the car will be ready for the knackers yard anyway probably.

radddogg wrote:

xr4x4 wrote:depends if you remove the belt completely.

i dont, so i wouldnt replace it..

Yep, the pas belt is a pain to remove and the crank pulley is nigh on impossible without an airgun.

Changing the belt will add on an extra 20% time to the repair for very little gain. By thetime the cambelt is ready for changing the car will be ready for the knackers yard anyway probably.

Cheeky sod
I wish mine had PAS....

sam w wrote:Yeah fair enough the majority of rover enignes that suffer from hgf are the k's but isn't it actually down to the design and material used for the locating dowls?

The main reason for HGF is failed coolant system allowing the engine to overheat, the K series doesnt like lack of water so it blows. Other engines are more resiliant, the K series just happens to have a low tolerance to lack of maintainence.

MGTurbo wrote:

sam w wrote:Yeah fair enough the majority of rover enignes that suffer from hgf are the k's but isn't it actually down to the design and material used for the locating dowls?

The main reason for HGF is failed coolant system allowing the engine to overheat, the K series doesnt like lack of water so it blows. Other engines are more resiliant, the K series just happens to have a low tolerance to lack of maintainence.

Yeah, as soon as you lose water in a K the temp gauge flies up . I think it dosent help with the fact its a low capacity system. I dont think there's really a problem with HGF anymore with the steel dowels, which they were originally designed to use.

low capacity system

Id agree entirely. 4.5 litres compared to 8 in a T, 10 in my M turbo...

Thats not a lot of coolant for a reasonable level of output / engine size.

The capacity of the system is so low, that if im pootling along in this very cold weathe,r then bung it in 2nd redline it, then into 3rd and do the same, the temp guage has practically dropped to 10%. this is cos all the water in the rad gets cooled down in advance, cos the rad probably holds more water than the engine does...

the thermostat is new as is coolant... I can only see it as a 'quirk' of the layout. Comapared to the 820, the guage never moved except for a 10 miles blat which took it off the clock (and thats when the guage went up!)

It just shows that the amount of coolant VS engine output VS reaction time of componenets and their position plays an important part in the cooling of the K.... I cant wait for mine to blow up

Rob, the haynes does advise specifically the checking of said small pipe for blockages (to blow/suck in it to release the 1 way ball bearing valve)