Found out something very interesting today re: K Series head gaskets......

More later!

How later is later?

advice not to use a gasket anymore? no more hgf then lol

You can make one out of a cornflakes packet?

You can make one out of a cornflakes packet?


maybe blue peter will be making one later

maybe blue peter will be making one later

I thought it was blue peter who make the K series in the first place lmao

No, blue peter made the plastic head locating dowls out of washing up liquid bottles!

blue peter also made the coolant bottle out or a margarine tub..so so very small :lol:

no no no, it's proper news.......in about an hour.

why the wait, hurry man! my 3rd (witnessed) HGF is currently sat outside waiting for the head to come back from the skimmers

Land Rover have redesigned the K series 1.8 head gasket and upgraded the lower rail that the head bolts screw into.

The head gasket has lost it's elastomeric beads and now has a laminated type of construction and the lower rail is beefed up - it must have an effect upon the clamping load. Head torque figures remain unchanged.

Picture three shows the very thin metal coated shim that is fitted on top of the headgasket

hmm didnt think they used the k anymore, just diesels...

anyway, just using the HG you reckon thats now well worth using, also how easy is it to change this lower rail...

of course my revised design k will never get hgf :eyes:

Sump off job to change the rail.....

I thought all Land Rover K's were supplied by PowerTrain, if so why did these changes not make it into MGR cars? Have LR been stripping the engines down and modifying them after delivery? Where are LR sourcing there K engines from now if they're still being used?

Too many questions!

I don't know what's happening supply-wise at the moment, but LR have to look after the owners of Freelanders with the K Series - hence the redesign. Quite who has done the redesign work is beyond me - it must be LR themselves?

Well it was said recently (either on here or keith's site) by an ex-employee that PT knew exactly what was needed to stop the head gasket problems, but the P4 weren't interested in spending the money. I wonder if this knowledge has made it over to LR?

This is good news anyway, for TF owners in particular.

Forgot to say, well done Major, a good find!

Major.

Are LR actually building cars with these mods, or is this a bulletin for dealers to implement when a car appears with HGF??

None of these engines left PowerTrain with these mods did they??

If LR are building cars with these mods, they must be rebuilding their engine stock with these mods before letting them onto the line.

Major,

Is that not like the post 800 (mk2) KV6 head gasket?

Interesting, that's kind of similar to the Ford Zetec E engine gasket.
Aren't LR using Ford lumps now?

Major,

Is that not like the post 800 (mk2) KV6 head gasket?

Very similar :)

I have the 200 1.4 K16.....should it affect me?

Im kinda confused at which engines your talking about...

You say the K-series....so I guess it should concern me if I was to get HGF?

Cheers

Oli

I have the 200 1.4 K16.....should it affect me?

Im kinda confused at which engines your talking about...

You say the K-series....so I guess it should concern me if I was to get HGF?

Cheers

Oli

Thanks for that Major.

This gasket, if designed by Land Rover which looks very likely, will be for the 1800CC K series - as that is all LR use.

The 1600 K series uses the 1800 liners though, so this mod should defo work on a 1600 K.

1400 K has different (thicker) liners. Chances are this should work, but there would be a risk.

is the rover spec lower rail the same across the 1.4 1.6 and 1.8s?

if not then i'd consider giving this a go :)

where did you find this info?

can this gasket be used without the lower rail change ? , if so would it wake any differance

is the rover spec lower rail the same across the 1.4 1.6 and 1.8s?

if not then i'd consider giving this a go :)

where did you find this info?

I am 99% sure the lower rail is the same on all models, incl VVC.

Major says the torque and tightening process is the same, so why change in lower rail???

Perhaps it reduces movement/increases stiffness - less HG stress ? ? ? Just speculating. . .

I reckon the lower rail is stiffer, giving less 'flex'

There is an image missing from the pics above - there is a very thin steel shim that sits on top of the gasket - it is like an additional coated gasket.

All very interesting.

How did I come across it? Ordered the parts from Land Rover. There is a Technical Bulletin out about it - would like to see that sometime. Anybody work for Land Rover? :dddc:

can this gasket be used without the lower rail change ? , if so would it wake any differance

I'd fit the lower rail - yes it could be done but the rails specification has been changed for a reason.....

Thanks for that Major.

This gasket, if designed by Land Rover which looks very likely, will be for the 1800CC K series - as that is all LR use.

The 1600 K series uses the 1800 liners though, so this mod should defo work on a 1600 K.

1400 K has different (thicker) liners. Chances are this should work, but there would be a risk.

Reckon this would fit all K Series 4 cyl engines - the gasket it replaces fitted across the range 1.4/1.6/1.8

I was told about this 'improved' headgasket over a year ago by the then MG Rover Technical rep for this country, didn't think it would have ever seen the light of day...

Part numbers? Interested to see the prices...

Keith

So that black bit is just all one piece with a raised bit around the edges where the original beading was?

How did I come across it? Ordered the parts from Land Rover. There is a Technical Bulletin out about it - would like to see that sometime. Anybody work for Land Rover? :dddc:
I just rang my local LandRover dealer and was speaking to the Part's Manager (who I'd be pally with) and he hadn't heard about it yet, asked him to try and find out though...

Keith

i nearly ordered mine from land rover, but got it from a dutton forshaw MGR instead. if it pops again i think i'll try this route out

i nearly ordered mine from land rover, but got it from a dutton forshaw MGR instead. if it pops again i think i'll try this route out

If I was gonna do a K series head gasket now, I would try this route out if I planned to keep the car for any amount of time.

You could take your Dutton HG kit back if it has not been opened.

Only pig with this will be the extra work involved in changing the ladder while the head is off - especially if, like me, you have to lie on your back on the floor :lol:

I really like the fact they are not using a gasket with those poxy beads.

Any idea of costs for the gasket and rail?

just to answer a few questions,

the freelander will be still using the K untils stock run out. For now, the diesel is selling the best so petrol freelanders are being built in slower qauntites.

I will try and find out what engine they will be using, but for now, the above is up to date.

I will also have a word with the guys who do engine testing tommrrow (dont hold your breath though) about the new mod and find out exactly what it does.

Ben.

A good find Major!

I wonder if it'll be taken right across all cars with the 1.8k when it comes to HG repairs. :)

Might put a kit up on ebay! Would certainly help you guys out, if nothing else.

Any idea of costs for the gasket and rail?

Yes, about £28+VAT each - not that expensive.

I wish somebody would answer my question....:cus: :irked: :mad:

I wish somebody would answer my question....:cus: :irked: :mad:

I could answer it if you like, but i'd be making the answer up! :lol:

Major, any chance of soem part numbers to order with? my "k" is on 90k miles and has overheated BADLY about 4 times in the last 6 months alone due to various little problems with the electics and cooling system. HG is guna go soon :banghead: i can feel it in me bones :)

So that black bit is just all one piece with a raised bit around the edges where the original beading was?

Yes, it would appear so.

Wish I had my proper camera today, these pics were taken with my phone camera.

Major, any chance of soem part numbers to order with? my "k" is on 90k miles and has overheated BADLY about 4 times in the last 6 months alone due to various little problems with the electics and cooling system. HG is guna go soon :banghead: i can feel it in me bones :)

Then I would assume the cylinder head to be scrap, as it goes soft once overheated.

Here is the improved condition oil/head bolt rail in place - note the oil suction pipe.

Then I would assume the cylinder head to be scrap, as it goes soft once overheated.
So with this new improved gasket the clouds of steam won't appear, warning of a problem, until after the cylinder head is guaranteed to be scrap?

OK, you never said it was an improvement...

Eh? I don't quite follow you! :spanner:

Eh? I don't quite follow you! :spanner:
Isn't it normal for people to find out about cooling system problems from the clouds of steam that emerge when the gasket fails? If this new gasket lasts longer before failing then it will mean the head will be properly overheated instead of just slightly overheated so a new head will be required instead of just a gasket - I'm not sure thats an improvement?

evolotion obviously found out about his cooling problems another way, but then his cooling system is not quite standard!

I can't see it (the improved gasket) making any difference to how the gasket would fail/how you would notice it......quite frankly.

Isn't it normal for people to find out about cooling system problems from the clouds of steam that emerge when the gasket fails? If this new gasket lasts longer before failing then it will mean the head will be properly overheated instead of just slightly overheated so a new head will be required instead of just a gasket - I'm not sure thats an improvement?

evolotion obviously found out about his cooling problems another way, but then his cooling system is not quite standard!
Most TF (for instance) HGF’s that I have come across including my own aren’t steamy cloud type in fact there was no obvious overheating, you can be running around with a dead HG for weeks with no apparent ill effects. The head in my case was warped but was still serviceable with a skim.

The usual failure is a small failure of one of the elastomeric beads around the cylinder head bolt hole drillings - allowing a small bleed of coolant across into the oil......then it just gets worse.......gradually.

I am actually quite excited about this.

It looks similar to the KV6 head gasket/the T series Klinger gasket.

My theory with this is that the thermal cycling (caused by the original thermostats) mean that the head and block seem to be cycling against each other, as the engine runs, which, over time weakens and detaches the elastometric bead from the gasket face. This allows the fluids to mix - HGF.

This gasket does not have any elastometric bead to fail!!

I can only guess that this was Land Rovers own fix, rather than putting in the PR thermostat, which was apparantly expensive as MGR did.

You can see that in the MK3 MGR gasket, they had tried to strengthen the elastometric beads jointing onto the gasket to prevent it detaching.

Looks good!

major, would the ladder rail and the block not be machined as a matched pair ?

Seen a similar design sold by Raceline(ford tuners) but they charge £180 retail!!! made in Japan. Many modern cars use this design of headgasket, called 'Multi layer steel gasket' been around for few years, fitted to late Alfa Romeos, Beemer mini, various Toyota's, Nissans, etc etc Know for a fact that Lotus even looked into using these on the K's in their Elises but like rover 'fools to the end' didn't bother. My thanks, will contact my local landrover dealer whom do work for tomorrow. I even looked into this myslf but manufacturer wanted minimum order of 100 units at estimated cost of £40+ vat each!!! too much for me!

major, would the ladder rail and the block not be machined as a matched pair ?

Nope no need - there is no matching to be done.

My gawd, this thread has brought one or two new members to the forum!

I am actually quite excited about this

So am I - can't wait to 'use' the parts on one of my next projects! Cirians broken vi would be ideal! I have a TF160 cylinder head here that is just ripe for his engine :dddc:

Seen a similar design sold by Raceline(ford tuners) but they charge £180 retail!!! made in Japan. Many modern cars use this design of headgasket, called 'Multi layer steel gasket' been around for few years, fitted to late Alfa Romeos, Beemer mini, various Toyota's, Nissans, etc etc Know for a fact that Lotus even looked into using these on the K's in their Elises but like rover 'fools to the end' didn't bother. My thanks, will contact my local landrover dealer whom do work for tomorrow. I even looked into this myslf but manufacturer wanted minimum order of 100 units at estimated cost of £40+ vat each!!! too much for me!

Multi layer steel on my T series turbo. 125K of boosting activities, head never off and when I sold it was as good as it was when it was new.

So I am sold on them. They used these on the KV6 when BMW and Rover sorted it out before the 75.

HGF is as rare on the KV6 as it is with any other car, I would say.

Another question is why MGR didn't do this years ago, if LR (Ford) managed it with presumably little budget?

Or were MGR scared that such a change might somehow be seen as an admission of a problem with the original engine design?

Seen so many K gasket failures, but few actually gone on the rubber seal area(don't do the mechanics, ain't seen it all) but the main construction of gasket is a single layer Stainless pressing, I believe that the ability of any elasomer compound too long term truly bond to this, quite amazing!! Saying that, had 3 high mileage heads to skim, two having done 80+ thousand, last 96,000 miles!! the failure was the rubber elasomer compound. Most failures are via the fire ring seal area on the Elises.

So am I - can't wait to 'use' the parts on one of my next projects! Cirians broken vi would be ideal! I have a TF160 cylinder head here that is just ripe for his engine :dddc:

That would be some project. I wish I had the need for a second car, I'd buy it off you when you finished it (if you were parting with it) - I have a soft spot for vi's having owned one in the past, and this would be a corker with it's strengthened engine :)

Another question is why MGR didn't do this years ago, if LR (Ford) managed it with presumably little budget?

Or were MGR scared that such a change might somehow be seen as an admission of a problem with the original engine design?

Nail and head, I think! :)

For many years as employee at Janspeed we had alot of contact with the rover factory, as in doing the landspeed record (217mph) MGF 1400, did the rework of the VVC head for the 160 spec, plus just before closure I did work on the X power kits plus supersixteens, and through that entire time they could never get it together or deal with the problems that were losing them money. Their way of dealing with issues seemed to be ignore it and save money by lowering quality further, which then makes things worse. The truth hurts.

Seen so many K gasket failures, but few actually gone on the rubber seal area(don't do the mechanics, ain't seen it all) but the main construction of gasket is a single layer Stainless pressing, I believe that the ability of any elasomer compound too long term truly bond to this, quite amazing!! Saying that, had 3 high mileage heads to skim, two having done 80+ thousand, last 96,000 miles!! the failure was the rubber elasomer compound. Most failures are via the fire ring seal area on the Elises.

Hmmmm that's strange - coz all the failures I've seen have been the elastomeric beads, be it on the front edge, above the alternator (external leakage) or internally around the head bolt holes.

be it on the front edge, above the alternator (external leakage)

like this major?? http://www.filelodge.com/files/hdd2/19126/PICT0078.JPG

its my dads he doesnt have it any more but would you say that was a failed head gasket? if it is we had no idea!

I cannot see anything in that pic that indicates a HG failure - apart from a nasty oil leak from a camshaft oil seal!

I cannot see anything in that pic that indicates a HG failure - apart from a nasty oil leak from a camshaft oil seal!

doh, seems a bit obvious now when I look at it! oh well that cars long gone (unfortunatly)

this is great news about the new head gasket by the way, luckily i dont need one at the moment its only done 33k miles. (now i say that it'l probably blow!)

Well if i can get hold of a new head! Think i am going to have the First R75 with this new HG!

I just want my car back! lol

Well if i can get hold of a new head! Think i am going to have the First R75 with this new HG!

I just want my car back! lol

has the head gasket blown on that?

What I have found is, although the fire ring looks wide as with most gaskets, if you actually pull one apart, that the main seal is actually supplied by a piece of very small dia round wire, and if you look at any head one removes that the actual contact area is a 1/2mm or so, PATHETIC by any standard!! Most cars have 2/3 or more mm of seal, with the porosity, slag inclusion issues in the alloy of the casting this puny seal contact a disaster. I find most gasket blowouts on the exh side directly below the port floor, as the exh is the hottest area this would not be any surprise!! any amount of 'movement' in the engine seems to cause some 'frittering' in this area and boom, mild grooving/loss of gasket seal = failure. Major Ingrim, this site looks like fun!?

has the head gasket blown on that?

Yes turned out a fault with the head from when it was made???

Zorst Gasses into Coolant and
Coolant into Oil.

Over heated for about 5 seconds

What I have found is, although the fire ring looks wide...
Presumably most of your experience of HGFs is with post 2000 year engines?
And the Majors is largely with pre-2000 year engines?

MGR did make some changes including metal dowels, uprated gasket, uprated coolant, uprated thermostat, improved tolerances...

Presumably most of your experience of HGFs is with post 2000 year engines?
And the Majors is largely with pre-2000 year engines?

MGR did make some changes including metal dowels, uprated gasket, uprated coolant, uprated thermostat, improved tolerances...

All engines really - from the introduction in 1989 to date.

Still no part numbers :eyes:

Keith

So the strengthened lower rail must be to improve rigidity, is that what we think?

Very interesting stuff; I'd love to hear how this was developed/Can't wait to see if it is an improvement!!

its very stranger see this kind of failiture in the l series engine,why ?if they were designed by rover ?

Then I would assume the cylinder head to be scrap, as it goes soft once overheated.

Fair enough :) TBO im suppised its stil running atall. when you get the time, could you please post up the part numbers so i can order these parts without too much hastle, the head and sump will be comeing off soon anyways for other reasons, so worth doing then!
Cheers.

could this be the end of hgf? it sounds great..but i guess will have to wait for these to be used and prove if they can solve the problem..the Land Rover bulletin claims that this is the end for hgf?

Maj please keep us infromed on this topic especially on development of also the 1.4 unit as I would imagine their is still a demand for smaller engines so this could this apply to the entire engine range?

Still no part numbers :eyes:

Keith

Gimme an hour or so! :dddc:

If this really is the end of HGF theres gonna be a lot less posts on this forum all we need now is someone to fix the old VIS motor problem for the Kv6 and were all sorted , we`ll still be flying around in MG`s and Rovers when were all old men (those of us who arnt already ) lol

If this really is the end of HGF theres gonna be a lot less posts on this forum all we need now is someone to fix the old VIS motor problem for the Kv6 and were all sorted , we`ll still be flying around in MG`s and Rovers when were all old men (those of us who arnt already ) lol

I was thinking the same thing. The KV6 is also used in the Freelander, I wonder if they'll take a look at the inlet manifold next - lets hope they do! A few people have been busy manufacturing catch tanks and adding them into the crankcase breather system to stop oil vapours passing through the inlet system and possibly gunking up the mechanism, causing motor failure.

It's hard to say whether this is the right approach though, when the motor failed on my car it was the motor itself, there was no evidence of it stripping teeth because the mechanism had got stiff. Oil does get into the motors though too which is probably not healthy for them.

Take this with a pinch of salt until I can confirm
New headgasket LVB500190 approx €44 + VAT (~£29+VAT)
New oil ladder LCN000140L approx €52 + VAT (~£34+VAT)

One of the reasons I can't confirm these just yet is that my local LandRover dealer has them on backorder since they came out :ouch:

Keith

on the pics the part numbers are partially visible... maybe there are other pics with the full code ;)

Maybe another advantage of the new oil ladder (in addition to greater torsional rigidity) is that it adresses an issue which I remember Mike Satur raised a while ago : the issue of the long through bolts bottoming out in their holes in the ladder before the correct clamping loads (torque settings) could be achieved.

If they went to the trouble of making a whole new ladder, surely they took the opportunity to make these holes just a little bit deeper.

By the way, are the long bolts to be used still the same old ones?

Per

Take this with a pinch of salt until I can confirm
New headgasket LVB500190 approx €44 + VAT (~£29+VAT)
New oil ladder LCN000140L approx €52 + VAT (~£34+VAT)

One of the reasons I can't confirm these just yet is that my local LandRover dealer has them on backorder since they came out :ouch:

Keith

Correct! I got them VOR overnight.

Engine now running sweetly! :)

By the way, are the long bolts to be used still the same old ones?



Same bolts, same torque settings.

the long bolts go through the ladder, so a new ladder won't address the bottoming out issue ;)
If my eyes don't deceive me, the part numbers I see on the pics look different from those posted above ?

Rail - LCN000140L £29+VAT

Gasket Kit - LVB500190 £23+VAT

Taken from the invoice, so I know it's correct!

the long bolts go through the ladder, so a new ladder won't address the bottoming out issue ;)
If my eyes don't deceive me, the part numbers I see on the pics look different from those posted above ?

I'm certain it is a torsional rigidity issue concerning the rail.

Cracking post Major well done
Is the Shim part of the gasket kit and does it fit to the block or head ?

No need to shout.
didn't mean to criticise (great, informative thread).
maybe LVB500190 is for the gasket kit, while the gasket and shim have different individual numbers?
Agree the ladder changes are for torsional rigidity.

Hi! Just stumbled over this great thread, which has already found its way to the German Roadstervision MGF/TF forum :)

Do I get that correctly that the shim is the black gasket-like part on the last of the 3 pictures. Would be interesting to know where that piece fits to (between oil ladder and block? Or is part of the head gasket?) and which part number it has.

I assume these parts can only be purchased via a LR dealer? Or would an MGR dealer be able to order them, too?

Hi! Just stumbled over this great thread, which has already found its way to the German Roadstervision MGF/TF forum :)

Do I get that correctly that the shim is the black gasket-like part on the last of the 3 pictures. Would be interesting to know where that piece fits to (between oil ladder and block? Or is part of the head gasket?) and which part number it has.

I assume these parts can only be purchased via a LR dealer? Or would an MGR dealer be able to order them, too?

Welcome, it looks to me like the first and third pictures are of the new headgasket, head face up and head face down respectively.

The middle picture is of the new bearing ladder alongside the old one.

These are Land Rover parts, so MGR dealers will probably not be able to get them - for the moment.

Have just spoken to my mate in an MGR dealer and he was not aware of it, but is going to call his contact in Land Rover this afternoon as they still do 2 or 3 K series head gaskets a week, even though they changed to Honda 2 or 3 years ago!!!

Thanks Matt, guess you're right... just had a closer look at the pictures. I was just wondering, as there was some mention of shims.

Regarding the bolt length issue Mike Satur reported, I guess it will still be valid and isn't solved by the new oil ladder. As far as I can remember, the bolts go through the full thread of the ladder and protrude a bit beneith. The issue Mike reported, was that the bolts on the left side of the engine (esp. between cylinder 3 & 4, front ones) met the bottom of the sump pan, which is shallower on that side in order to make room for the exhaust pipe passing beneith. This resulted in incorrect torque when tightening these bolts and therefore weaker clamping of the engine segments on the left side.

I assume these parts can only be purchased via a LR dealer? Or would an MGR dealer be able to order them, too?

For the moment only from LandRover dealers as I checked and those part number are not valid in the MG Rover system.

Keith

Thanks Matt, guess you're right... just had a closer look at the pictures. I was just wondering, as there was some mention of shims.

The shim, I understand, from what Major has said, comes with the ladder and goes above the ladder. - WRONG - SEE MAJORS POST BELOW!!

As for the bolts being too long, it would probably be a good idea to torque up the head bolts before the sump is put back!! The sump has to be taken off for this HG implementation, so then the issue could be inspected before the sump was refitted - and the sump pan modded??

Hi! Just stumbled over this great thread, which has already found its way to the German Roadstervision MGF/TF forum :)

Do I get that correctly that the shim is the black gasket-like part on the last of the 3 pictures. Would be interesting to know where that piece fits to (between oil ladder and block? Or is part of the head gasket?) and which part number it has.

I assume these parts can only be purchased via a LR dealer? Or would an MGR dealer be able to order them, too?

I will show the correct orientation of the gasket and shim later. FYI - The shim lies on TOP of the fitted head gasket, with the coated side UP

No need to shout.
didn't mean to criticise (great, informative thread).
maybe LVB500190 is for the gasket kit, while the gasket and shim have different individual numbers?
Agree the ladder changes are for torsional rigidity.

Gasket set inc shim is LVB500190, great value at that price too.

Cracking post Major well done
Is the Shim part of the gasket kit and does it fit to the block or head ?

Thanks! Only too pleased to help and pass this info on to others.

Teh shim fits on TOP of the head gasket with the coated surface UP

Thanks! Only too pleased to help and pass this info on to others.
that's great mate.. thank you for all the information you provide to us and all your help..
this thread has found its way to Greek MG-RoverClub as well and we are looking forward for more news :)

Excellent news.
If if if if only this had been done 5 years ago.
Rover/Powertrain really did not play this well.
LandRover admitted there was a fault from the start.

As I say it looks similar to a Ford gasket.
Only time will tell if it fixes the problem, I would imagine it does as there is no elastomeric bead to fail.

Next question is, will they be able to supply enough to cope with the demand?

Next question is, will they be able to supply enough to cope with the demand?

My fears too. I doubt it.

Next question is, will they be able to supply enough to cope with the demand?
good question.. i wouldn't like to think of producing a restricted amount in order to cope with the demand on freelanders and ignoring the demand of thousands k-series owners..

good question.. i wouldn't like to think of producing a restricted amount in order to cope with the demand on freelanders and ignoring the demand of thousands k-series owners..


HHHMMMmmmm....:idea: ........

A trip round all the breakers to buy up all the `K`s with blown heads cheap, update with the above mod and then hit E-bay!!!!....

££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££ ££ssssssss:D

Just a question on the side: What does this coating on the head gasket presumably consist of? I was just wondering how this new gasket differs from the full race head gasket that Brown & Gammons has been offering... which is AFAIK a "full metal" gasket.

So the shim does what ??
Barrier for pourous head ?
to infill were theres a damaged fire ring on the head ?
greater torerance against slightly warped head ?
other ?

Just a question on the side: What does this coating on the head gasket presumably consist of?
Probably an elastomeric coating?

I would imagine it's a softish metal that is to replace the beading.
When you tighten the bolts and clamp the head the shim may act as the sacrificial componant that allows the other parts to bite into it.

I could be wrong and probably am, lol
:bandit:

Me gets the feeling this could be the longest thread in the Forums history!!.......... cant think why though!!!..

Probably an elastomeric coating?

Sort of, it's a bit sticky, a bit like nearly dry gloss paint.

Just a question on the side: What does this coating on the head gasket presumably consist of? I was just wondering how this new gasket differs from the full race head gasket that Brown & Gammons has been offering... which is AFAIK a "full metal" gasket.

I wonder who makes that gasket?

Me gets the feeling this could be the longest thread in the Forums history!!.......... cant think why though!!!..

:lol: it's certainly grown quite quickly over the past 24hrs or so! :spanner:

Regarding the bolt length issue Mike Satur reported, I guess it will still be valid and isn't solved by the new oil ladder. As far as I can remember, the bolts go through the full thread of the ladder and protrude a bit beneith. The issue Mike reported, was that the bolts on the left side of the engine (esp. between cylinder 3 & 4, front ones) met the bottom of the sump pan, which is shallower on that side in order to make room for the exhaust pipe passing beneith. This resulted in incorrect torque when tightening these bolts and therefore weaker clamping of the engine segments on the left side.

Thanks for clarifying this issue, Andre! :)

And good idea from Matt Hicks:

As for the bolts being too long, it would probably be a good idea to torque up the head bolts before the sump is put back!! The sump has to be taken off for this HG implementation, so then the issue could be inspected before the sump was refitted - and the sump pan modded??

Per

Actually, I don't think there's much you can mod on the sump pan. Mike recommended checking which bolts actually touch the bottom. This can be done simply be screwing them in by hand until they're tight with the pan still on and measuring the bolt length (ideally on new bolts, as the old ones will have stretched). If the respective bolts between cylinders 3 and 4 are above 97mm measured from the face of the cylinder block to the underside of the bolt head, then shortening the bolts by about 3-5 mm and carefully re-threading was his recommendation.

Regarding the Brown & Gammons gasket... I have no idea who makes it. All I know is that it cost me a fortune (some 180 quid) :( ... to cheer myself up a little in the face of the price for the new reworked head gasket, it does look quite sturdy: It consists of the metal carrier plate with fire rings and two thin sheets of some black, supposedly metal-like material, which is loosely fixed to either side with a couple of rivets. B&G claim it fixes the HGF problem once and for all... and I pray they're right for that price.

But the Land Rover gasket is £150 cheaper!

That's the part of this thread that hurts ;)

Hi all,

I've just joined up as I've just bought a 1.6 2001 45 Saloon. Have scanned this thread with interest and just wondered if someone could clarify for me (as it's way too long to read now!!!)

1.
This kit costs 56 quid?

2.
Does it fit the 1.6 K-Series?

3.
Is it worth doing this now or wait for signs of HGF and just do it as part of that?

4.
Reason for asking 3 is that I'm not flush at the moment and have very little mechanical ability so would have to trust this to a garage - Anyone any idea of what they'd be likely to charge for labour?

Cheers!
Matt

1. 63 quid + VAT if you include the new oil ladder

2. I'm not sure if both engines have the same cylinder bore, but I guess someone else knows this

3. + 4. Always follow the old rule "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" ;) I wouldn't spend the money unless a HGF is on its way... my personal opinion.

Hi all,

2.
Does it fit the 1.6 K-Series?


The 1.6 uses the same liners as the 1.8, so yes it will work OK.

It will PROBABLY work on the 1.4 and 1.1 too, but they both use different (thicker) liners, so someone would have to try it.

1. 63 quid + VAT if you include the new oil ladder



I make it £61.10inc!

Is it worth doing this now or wait for signs of HGF and just do it as part of that?

Agreed - if it ain't broke then don't fix it!

The 1.6 uses the same liners as the 1.8, so yes it will work OK.

It will PROBABLY work on the 1.4 and 1.1 too, but they both use different (thicker) liners, so someone would have to try it.

Yup, agreed Matt - MGR supply the SAME gasket for all K Series motors - LVB000230 (IIRC) so this gasket set will fit the majority of K Series engines. Only the 1.8k is mentioned on the small bit of paper that comes with the gasket, telling you where to fit the shim bit and which way up.

Agreed - if it ain't broke then don't fix it!

That's kind of what I was thinking - It's only got 55k on the clock and I'm not a thrasher so I'll just keep up the maintenance and servicing on it.

Cheers!
M

Any idea whether this would be OK to fit to the turbo's???

Did they not have a different head gasket in an attempt to lower the C/R, or did they end up using the same one as all the others in the end??

Could be good for them, as they will be the most stressed application - IMO.

I think the HG is the same on the turbo K engine - but we'd require clarification from and MGR Parts Dept.

I'm sure the liners and pistons differed on the turbocharged engine.

I think the HG is the same on the turbo K engine - but we'd require clarification from and MGR Parts Dept.

I'm sure the liners and pistons differed on the turbocharged engine.

I think the liners were the same, may have been different at first, but standardised later on.

I think the main difference was the 1.8T uses VVC Mexican Market pistons, which lower the compression ratio.

I think this gasket should be OK on a turbo, if the other one was used I see no reason why not.

AFAIK, there was only one Klinger gasket, which was used on normally aspirated and turbocharged T16's. . .

ok, just scanned through some of the posts so if someone has already said this, aplogies:

Right, according to a 'source' at work

land rover managed to design these new parts, rover/powertrain asked what they had done, but refused to give it to them

also, the gasket used, its supposed to be very similar design (materials and how it is layered) to a bmw 6 pot (minus the two cylinder holes!)

please dont take this as gospel, i dont want to be sued lol!!

I think this gasket should be OK on a turbo, if the other one was used I see no reason why not.


We'll know very soon cos I plan to use these parts on my new spec 1.8T engine :shh:

Keith

land rover managed to design these new parts, rover/powertrain asked what they had done, but refused to give it to them


Sounds plausible :)

We'll know very soon cos I plan to use these parts on my new spec 1.8T engine :shh:

Keith

Good stuff Keith, let me know how you get on :spanner:

land rover managed to design these new parts, rover/powertrain asked what they had done, but refused to give it to them

I don't follow the logic behind that, why would you not help your engine supplier to fix a problem? Unless MGR were ripping them off on engines, but there's no evidence of that I've come across.

You would hope these new parts fit the 1.8T because a few people have had problems with gaskets failing on these engines - 20k miles I believe in one case. To be honest MGR deserve a slap for doing a turbocharged version of an engine that already has potential gasket issues without strengthening this area.

ok, just scanned through some of the posts so if someone has already said this, aplogies:

Right, according to a 'source' at work

land rover managed to design these new parts, rover/powertrain asked what they had done, but refused to give it to them

also, the gasket used, its supposed to be very similar design (materials and how it is layered) to a bmw 6 pot (minus the two cylinder holes!)

please dont take this as gospel, i dont want to be sued lol!!

Your forgetting one thing. Rover built the engines for Land Rover. Rover were the first tier supplier so they would have to be supplied with gaskets to build into the engines. Land Rover wouldnt buy the gaskets and give them to Longbridge. The gaskets would have had to be delivered to Longbridge by the gasket supplier. It wouldnt exactly have been hard for Rover to look at the gaskets. Or request the info from the supplier of the new one. The gaskets never made it into factory built engines. This is only a service fix.

I wonder who makes that gasket?

Hi,

and thank you for this good news.
Presume it's due to a cooperation with Elring, but no idea who it finally produces.
There had been rumours at MGR already in summer that a new design metal gasket _was_ under developement. So don't be to harsh with them (+++)

btw, whome do I need to ask for permission on using your pictures on my silly webside ?

Major Ingram ?
or Webmaster Steve ?

Would be great to have them on my HGF site and the online EPC and a link to this thread would get included aswell, of course.

Cheers
Dieter

Thanks major :) just gota find my local Landrover dealer now :cool:

Hi,

and thank you for this good news.
Presume it's due to a cooperation with Elring, but no idea who it finally produces.
There had been rumours at MGR already in summer that a new design metal gasket _was_ under developement. So don't be to harsh with them (+++)

btw, whome do I need to ask for permission on using your pictures on my silly webside ?

Major Ingram ?
or Webmaster Steve ?

Would be great to have them on my HGF site and the online EPC and a link to this thread would get included aswell, of course.

Cheers
Dieter

Dieter - feel free to copy any images/info to your excellent site :)

Thanks major :) just gota find my local Landrover dealer now :cool:

That's is they can actually get hold of the repair parts! I bet they'll be in short supply...

Yeah, but I wouldn't really rush and and buy one if your engine is working fine. We don't actually know if it makes any difference at all.. We're assuming it does.

Fine, if you get a HGF then fit this kit, but otherwise, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Major, I also wanted to join the others once more in thanking you for this really valuable information :)

There's just one thing in the new HG kit that still puzzles me: Those shims, you mentioned... what is their purpose and where are they actually located? They don't happen to be those steel cylinder head locating dowels that e.g., MGR has been supplying over the last couple of years along with the uprated head gasket, do they?

The shim is the thin metal black tacky gasket that sits on top of the main gasket.
It appears to replace the elastomeric beading.

Indeed - it sit on TOP of the new gasket with the coated face upwards.

The steel dowels remain unchanged.

Sorry, just to make sure I have understood it correctly: When everything is re-assembled, is the right order of the components the following (bottom to top): block - gasket - shim - head?
Per :confused:

Sorry, just to make sure I have understood it correctly: When everything is re-assembled, is the right order of the components the following (bottom to top): block - gasket - shim - head?
Per :confused:

That's the way I see it.

This is a great thread, i've read with interest as the wifes 52 plate TF has had a HGF 2 days ago,only got 28k on the clock, its back with the garage we bought it from 4 months ago, i'm of to see them soon with these part numbers to see if they will replace with this set.

Also, the garage said that the warranty bought from them only covers upto £1000, they said that this job would cost more, is this correct?

thanx in advance

your being ripped off mate.

Sorry, just to make sure I have understood it correctly: When everything is re-assembled, is the right order of the components the following (bottom to top): block - gasket - shim - head?
Per :confused:

Yes, you are quite correct..

This is a great thread, i've read with interest as the wifes 52 plate TF has had a HGF 2 days ago,only got 28k on the clock, its back with the garage we bought it from 4 months ago, i'm of to see them soon with these part numbers to see if they will replace with this set.

Also, the garage said that the warranty bought from them only covers upto £1000, they said that this job would cost more, is this correct?

thanx in advance

What are the symptoms of the gasket failure? Sounds rather expensive to me.

What are the symptoms of the gasket failure? Sounds rather expensive to me.

Was coolant loss, oil in coolant, contamination/mayo from one end of the dip stick to the other.

It took them 2 days of me bothering them to take a look at the car (they are a Toyota/Lexus main dealer, RMB Teesside) so didnt seem to bothered

Said the head would need skimming etc, is this always necessary?

Gasket set inc shim is LVB500190, great value at that price too.Major, if you started a new project with a '95 214 SEi with HGF, would you fit this new gasket solution?

It would depend upon the cars value etc etc and how long one intend keeping hold of it.....

Was coolant loss, oil in coolant, contamination/mayo from one end of the dip stick to the other.

It took them 2 days of me bothering them to take a look at the car (they are a Toyota/Lexus main dealer, RMB Teesside) so didnt seem to bothered

Said the head would need skimming etc, is this always necessary?

Worst case scenario that, really. Oil in cooling system and water in the sump.

Wish you were nearer to me etc etc!

Skimming? No, it's not always necessary - and when it's done it's often done badly.

Said the head would need skimming etc, is this always necessary?

Depends if it was boiling for long how badly it overheated.

Just be very warey of getting the car fixed at a non MGR dealer or specalist, the F/TF's cooling system is v. tricky to bleed and done incorrectly it can lead to another HGF...

Talking of that - I just got hold of a decent vac fill kit - £65+VAT - it looks well made! Should make replacing the radiator in that accident damaged TF much easier!

hello,
i just made a search about other vehicles problems an i have found that other brands have also head gasket problems.look at this site http://experts.about.com/q/BMW-Repair-805/Coolant-problem.htm

Cylinder Head Gasket failure is suprisngly common on many makes of vehicle....

It's there as a fuse, if you want to look at it another way.....think about it.....

It would depend upon the cars value etc etc and how long one intend keeping hold of it.....OK, it was a loaded question, what I was trying to get at is how much confidence you would have to fit this solution in a 'Wedge' 214, especially if it was a car in for, say, repair.

OK, it was a loaded question, what I was trying to get at is how much confidence you would have to fit this solution in a 'Wedge' 214, especially if it was a car in for, say, repair.

Well, if I had the cash available to do the repair using the latest parts etc - then I would use the parts as per this thread.

Cylinder Head Gasket failure is suprisngly common on many makes of vehicle....

Exactly. There was an article in Car Mechanic the other week on doing gaskets, they said it's the weak point of all modern engines. So it's not just the K-Series.

Just joined on the forum and not long had my ZR160. Just have to say what a great thread Major Ingram!! Interesting reading and a bit of reassurance (Hopefully)for a new K series owner.

Well, if I had the cash available to do the repair using the latest parts etc - then I would use the parts as per this thread.Cheers, what I was thinking of was to buy a gasket to sling in the back of the shed to cover my ass if the sod let go on me - as this always happens on a Sunday or later in the week, making getting hold of one harder. This would be a kind of insurance policy! I didn't know whether to get that usual Rover gasket or the 'Freeloader' (sic) one.

Cheers

'Freeloader' (sic)

Ha ha, thought it was just me that called them that!

Exactly. There was an article in Car Mechanic the other week on doing gaskets, they said it's the weak point of all modern engines. So it's not just the K-Series.

Fiat Puntos go @ 40k

Ha ha, thought it was just me that called them that!...or 'Freestander', which is what our lazy landlords used to do!

MAJOR Perhaps it would be a good idea to make a sticky post that is locked, containing all of the info so that its easier to access. The info on the forums tends to get lost in masses of posts and it becomes difficult to work out whats what, just my opinion anyway ! I mean we can raise and issue for discussion but once we have discussed perhaps a seperate cut down sticky that is locked summarising the info would be more helpful to owners and easier to access. Especially on information thats very important or what as in this post might be seen as groundbreaking info !


I make no excuses from my lack of grammatical showmanship !

MAJOR Perhaps it would be a good idea to make a sticky post that is locked, containing all of the info so that its easier to access. The info on the forums tends to get lost in masses of posts and it becomes difficult to work out whats what, just my opinion anyway ! I mean we can raise and issue for discussion but once we have discussed perhaps a seperate cut down sticky that is locked summarising the info would be more helpful to owners and easier to access. Especially on information thats very important or what as in this post might be seen as groundbreaking info !


I make no excuses from my lack of grammatical showmanship !

Yes, I will do something either early or later on tommorrow (Friday) it's just that I've got a few beers anboard right now

Dieter - feel free to copy any images/info to your excellent site :)

Thank You. Done that with link to this thread, so it can't get lost.
http://www.mgfcar.de/hgf/

The excellence is cause of all your great input by email, to forums and gathering on meetings.

You are Great.
Regards
Dieter

Thanks Dieter, great writeup on your excellent site as usual!

Your forgetting one thing. Rover built the engines for Land Rover. Rover were the first tier supplier so they would have to be supplied with gaskets to build into the engines. Land Rover wouldnt buy the gaskets and give them to Longbridge. The gaskets would have had to be delivered to Longbridge by the gasket supplier. It wouldnt exactly have been hard for Rover to look at the gaskets. Or request the info from the supplier of the new one. The gaskets never made it into factory built engines. This is only a service fix.

its only what i heard from a friend who works in the engine dept.

please dont shoot the messenger.

its only what i heard from a friend who works in the engine dept.

please dont shoot the messenger.

Sounds right to me aswell....cheers for the information.

I see the great Dr Dave has come out of his shell

I see the great Dr Dave has come out of his shell

:lol: it was one hell of a holiday! :)

its only what i heard from a friend who works in the engine dept.

please dont shoot the messenger.

Just rationalising what you said thats all. Put it this way. We are still building freelanders with k1.8s in them. The stockpile was massive. LR was stockpiling engines for about 2 years in anticipation of the disaster that befell MGR.

I see the great Dr Dave has come out of his shell

Yeeaks !!!!
Dooh, this is You !!
:URGOD: :lol: :URGOD:

I recall we had the last emails back in 2001 !
Errrm, I think I need to get a regular visitor to this Forum again :)

Yeeaks !!!!
Dooh, this is You !!
:URGOD: :lol: :URGOD:

I recall we had the last emails back in 2001 !
Errrm, I think I need to get a regular visitor to this Forum again :)

Thanks Dieter! I'm not worthy!

Would be good to see you around :)

Hi Guys
At the risk of asking a dumb Question:_poke::iwstupid: , am I correct in assuming this fix is no good for the T200 Tomcat Turbo?:minxy:

by the way - last time I looked the major was going teetotal! You havent been to see Steve recently then?:=p:

Hi Guys
At the risk of asking a dumb Question:_poke::iwstupid: , am I correct in assuming this fix is no good for the T200 Tomcat Turbo?:minxy:

by the way - last time I looked the major was going teetotal! You havent been to see Steve recently then?:=p:

The tomcat turbo should not need a "fix".

It got a new head gasket back in 1996, called the Klinger Multi Layer Steel jobbie.

If the head surface and block surface are OK and time is spent on the preperation, you will not see a leak again.

My Ti had one of these and was still going strong at 125K (performance used :lol:)

The tomcat turbo should not need a "fix".

It got a new head gasket back in 1996, called the Klinger Multi Layer Steel jobbie.

If the head surface and block surface are OK and time is spent on the preperation, you will not see a leak again.

My Ti had one of these and was still going strong at 125K (performance used :lol:)

Yeah! - but mine has already done 157K:rotflmao: , so I thought a bit of TLC mite not go adrift - maybe an oil change in a year or two? The Klinger is THE replacement for the T200 I guess?

Yeah! - but mine has already done 157K:rotflmao: , so I thought a bit of TLC mite not go adrift - maybe an oil change in a year or two? The Klinger is THE replacement for the T200 I guess?

What is the T200??

The Klinger was the final T/M/O series head gasket.

It is very sensitive to head and block face conditions and they need to be totally perfect - very clean with no residue.

Good bit of kit though when done properly.

Very interesting thread. To avoid HGF should I upgrade the gasket and the oil rail only, or would be necessary to place a remote thermostat too?

Very interesting thread. To avoid HGF should I upgrade the gasket and the oil rail only, or would be necessary to place a remote thermostat too?
Hi Mike,

If I were you, I'd only upgrade the Coolant Sensor immidiately. B&G or DIY .. I have an one kit with buzzer, if you need .. :bgrin2:
And keep the gasket and oil rail as spare, plus PRT kit, aswell in my spares box.

*Don't fix what ain't broken*

:2c:
Mine is on 105k km now and you know, without any problems.
Did in the new bottle with sensor and a simple buzzer, ordered the new gasket and rail and that's it.

Best to Argentina
Dieter

How did you get on with parts availability Dieter? Did the Land Rover parts department know what you wanted?

Very interesting thread. To avoid HGF should I upgrade the gasket and the oil rail only, or would be necessary to place a remote thermostat too?

I think the idea of this mod, is to keep the standard cooling system and thermostat - Land Rover did not want to pay the extra money for the PR thermostat and different cooling assemblies.

However, I personally may fit a different thermostat too, especially if I was tracking the car, etc.

Best of both worlds then.

I think the idea of this mod, is to keep the standard cooling system and thermostat - Land Rover did not want to pay the extra money for the PR thermostat and different cooling assemblies.

However, I personally may fit a different thermostat too, especially if I was tracking the car, etc.

Best of both worlds then.

Freelander has had the remote thermostat for ages!

Freelander has had the remote thermostat for ages!

My apologies then.

When you say the remote stat, do you mean the PRT one which MGR implemented onto the 75 and TF in 2004 or another type?

I had been told that Land Rover did not want to change the stats as it would add a lot of cost to the drivetrain build cost for each car, so thought they had not done it.

dunno if its the exact same stat. But it definately has a remote stat on it so its the same theory. Also got coolant level sensor from 04/05 as well.

Also got coolant level sensor from 04/05 as well.

That is what Rover should have done back in 1996.

Just shows how silly it was.

This small cost at build, would have paid for itself five times over in reduced warranty claims for engines, etc.

Also, the damege limitation to the brand reliability wise is immesurable.

Cheers,

dunno if its the exact same stat. But it definately has a remote stat on it so its the same theory. Also got coolant level sensor from 04/05 as well.

The Land Rover stat is a £60+VAT job, a load of hoses aswell!

That is what Rover should have done back in 1996.

Just shows how silly it was.

This small cost at build, would have paid for itself five times over in reduced warranty claims for engines, etc.

Also, the damege limitation to the brand reliability wise is immesurable.

Cheers,


I thought Land Rovers had a 'problem' with K and head gakset as well? If thats the case, then the remote stat did nothing to improve things anyway. Also, if it did work, surely they wouldn't have had a need to developed the items we are talking about in this thread? ;)

Remote stat is/was a service fix, not upon production at that point in time.

How did you get on with parts availability Dieter? Did the Land Rover parts department know what you wanted?

I've forwarded needs to a friend (MGR Mechanic) and he already picked up one from LR for himself. Will see whether he likes to get more. You can imagine what's going on here in DE since the news got posted.

Anyway, may be it's better to asking myself direct. (The friend gets a discount, though.)

an interesting history about the k series engines :
http://www.sandsmuseum.com/cars/elise/thecar/engine/kingk.html

I've forwarded needs to a friend (MGR Mechanic) and he already picked up one from LR for himself. Will see whether he likes to get more. You can imagine what's going on here in DE since the news got posted.

Anyway, may be it's better to asking myself direct. (The friend gets a discount, though.)

Good, so the availability doesn't look too bad then? Pleased to help!

I just had an interesting discussion with the head mechanic of a dealer here in Germany, who said that he perceives one of the major reasons in the frequent head gasket failures on the MG F/TF to be the fact that the K series engine was developed for front engine cars and that on the F/TF the coolant pump is too small for the large coolant circuit. Looking at the small pump, I readily believe this could be at least one of the many reasons for the HGF... does anyone know, if there are possibilities to uprate the pump?

Good Question Andre

i have heard people who drilled the thermo ring, for a continous cooling, one of the side efects was that the engine takes more time to heat up, and in my opinion the thermo start to read badly the true temps on the engine, causing more heat and a themal shock.

I have read that the reason for HGF is that the thermal doesn't read very well the true temps on the engine, it takes some time to open the ring so that the coolant get to the engine, due the time to open the ring, the engine heats up more that it should, and when the ring opens it causes a thermal shock on the engine, weakening the Head Gasket. The solution supposedly is to put a remote thermostat, where he would have a better temperature reading of the engine, and it would open the ring when it should, avoiding those violent thermal shock.

im not sure of that pump, like i sayd for what i read the problem is that the thermo can't read very well the engine temps, so the problem it shouldn't on the pump. and i have heard the problem with the pump is that its not strong enough to pump coolant from the radiator to the engine. Not sure

I just had an interesting discussion with the head mechanic of a dealer here in Germany, who said that he perceives one of the major reasons in the frequent head gasket failures on the MG F/TF to be the fact that the K series engine was developed for front engine cars and that on the F/TF the coolant pump is too small for the large coolant circuit. Looking at the small pump, I readily believe this could be at least one of the many reasons for the HGF... does anyone know, if there are possibilities to uprate the pump?

Another One of the many thousands of reasons given for HGF!!.......

I would list a few more........ but am in work tommorow!!:rolleyes:

The bigger pump idea in our rear engined appplications does`nt realy hold water (no pun intended), as the Freelander is at least as bad, if not worse than the F/TF for HGF!!(if thats possible!).

I just had an interesting discussion with the head mechanic of a dealer here in Germany, who said that he perceives one of the major reasons in the frequent head gasket failures on the MG F/TF to be the fact that the K series engine was developed for front engine cars and that on the F/TF the coolant pump is too small for the large coolant circuit. Looking at the small pump, I readily believe this could be at least one of the many reasons for the HGF... does anyone know, if there are possibilities to uprate the pump?


I thought it was a fairly high capacity pump anyway.

As for uprating it, not sure about that, but you could fit an electrice inline one for extra help..

I thought it was a fairly high capacity pump anyway.

As for uprating it, not sure about that, but you could fit an electrice inline one for extra help..

Finding a pump with the right boresize would be tricky....

Anyone seen the L/R service bulitin yet ? and are you susposed to skim the cly head to compansate for the thicker gasket/shim ??

woulb be nce fit a coolant systemlike this to this engine
http://www.valeo.com/automotive-supplier/Jahia/pid/863

Anyone seen the L/R service bulitin yet ? and are you susposed to skim the cly head to compansate for the thicker gasket/shim ??

Doubt it - why put the shim in there if that was the case!

Finding a pump with the right boresize would be tricky....


True! And no amount of pumping is going to help if there's no water in the system..

woulb be nce fit a coolant systemlike this to this engine
http://www.valeo.com/automotive-supplier/Jahia/pid/863

Looks like an easy retrofit if available from scraped cars with Valeo THEMIS.
I think it's German language only for you all ?

Anway. In short.
- Temperatur regulator / Fan controll/ Valve Control -ECU
- Electric Waterpump
- Electric valve (4-way, I think)
- Speed controlled Radiator Fan
Heat balance done with pump water, either to the heater matrix, or/and to the radiator.

Just quite similar to modern house heating installations including high temp and low temp heating (under floor low temp heater)

Alternative:
See for Craig Davis Waterpump for instance. Rob Bell has some ideas on site.

I think I might carry out this modification on Cirian75's 200vi when I get it back to the 'shop. Would be a good one to try it out on!

I think I might carry out this modification on Cirian75's 200vi when I get it back to the 'shop. Would be a good one to try it out on!


hmmmmmmmm a vvc engine that should b intresting

Yeah, I'm looking foward to playing with a VVC lump again! :spanner:

Just got back from L/Rover Inverness and was told L/R should not off released the Gasket and Rail because theres also a modiflyed Thermostat and Stretch bolts as part of the kit
but other parts are on back order so cannot comment on differances

can anybody please write exactly what we need to replace in case of HGF with the part numbers and where we can buy those part? ( i mean the upgraded parts)

Just got back from L/Rover Inverness and was told L/R should not off released the Gasket and Rail because theres also a modiflyed

Nobody told me that! When I enquired I was told told bolts and torque settings remain unchanged!

I think I might carry out this modification on Cirian75's 200vi when I get it back to the 'shop. Would be a good one to try it out on!

Nice to see my baby will be staying on the road, rather than being ripped apart :)

Nice to see my baby will be staying on the road, rather than being ripped apart :)

Ripping it to bits and breaking the car would be nothing short of criminal!

Dont know if its true Major its only what I was told today , however it would make sence of uprated rail if new bolts have a stronger clamping force

Dont know if its true Major its only what I was told today , however it would make sence of uprated rail if new bolts have a stronger clamping force

:errx2:

"
The effect of the replacing the OE bolts with stronger ones, whether or not their torquing is changed, is to stress the webs between the crank and the bolt path. Rover’s own stress analysis shows that this will lead to fatigue failure of the block. ... Further, since the replacement bolts tend not at yield where they are effectively stretching they will distort the block. Unless the crank path is aligned honed, this will cause the crank to bind in its bearings, with obvious consequences for bearing wear and also frictional losses to output. ... since the factory block has the crank path machined and honed with an OE bolt at the specified torque, in yield the path will be out of round with the new bolt. This will cause distortion of the crank path, binding of the crank and bearing crush. This happened with my supercharged engine built by Warrior – where 10mm 660B long bolts were torqued to 55nm. Despite being run in on the dyno for 4 hours, the mains totally ceased to the crank after the engine was left to stand for 4 months, eventually requiring a complete rebuild. There will be considerable power losses in such engines too."

http://www.sandsmuseum.com/cars/elise/thecar/engine/kingk.html

Just got back from L/Rover Inverness and was told L/R should not off released the Gasket and Rail because theres also a modiflyed Thermostat and Stretch bolts as part of the kit
but other parts are on back order so cannot comment on differances


the old stretch bolts did the job so why change them. however the old thermostst was a pain in the back side ans if theres a new 1 i want 1.

Great thread chaps - and thanks Dave for bringing this to all our attention! May I use these pix too on my site? :)

Regarding the likely origin of these parts - I have a strong suspicion that these are Powertrain designed kits.

Why?

At MGF10, Rob Oldaker described exactly this head gasket as the next phase of development for the engine, to try and solve the HGF problem. Clearly, this development came to an end in April, but a company had been comissioned to make these parts.

Presumably, it would have been easy for Landrover, with their strong ties with their former colleagues at Powertrain, to buy these gaskets in for use with Freelander.

Secondly, the lower oil rail. I find it incredibly unlikely that Ford would waste R&D effort and money on an engine that they are about to replace, and that they have no further interest in. Interestingly, Simon Erland mentioned a while ago that Powertrain engineers had been working on a stiffer lower oil rail for the EUIV upgrade.

I think that what we are all looking at here are escapees from the Powertrain engine development department: these are parts that would have been seen on the EUIV compliant K-series right now, had the company not crashed out back last April.

I would imagine that both parts would be worth-while upgrades for an engine that is currently in pieces - but I don't think that it would be worth while messing around with an otherwise healthy engine...

Will try and find out if my suspicions are true with my engineering contacts...

Pics - yes, of course you may use them Rob ~ thanks for asking.

Now it's all starting to come together - all those fragmented pieces of the jigsaw!

Pics - yes, of course you may use them Rob ~ thanks for asking.
Thanks Dave :D

As you say Dave - quite a mystery surrounding these parts - but we'll get to the bottom of it! :)

Excellent site that you have Rob

Just had the HG replaced with the LR one on my 25 GTI, picking it up tomorrow.
Wish me luck !

They were able to get the parts OK then?

Out of interest - what sort of repair costs did you incur?

£483 including head skimming.

Excellent site that you have Rob
Thanks, much appreciated! :D

£483 including head skimming.

Inc £60-worth of Land Rover parts - that's a good price. That's what I like to see :)

I am desparately trying to find where I'd previously read about the oil rail in the EUIV engine - no luck just yet, but came across this on exiges.com by Simon Erland:

They do use a shim , as does the new euro4 std MLS gasket, it's role is to allow the tubular fire ring inside the fire ring fold overs to roll over the shims surface without digging into the ally head - should the head have gone soft from getting too hot and losing it's quench - in other words it's a fire wall.

This supports the idea that the LR gasket is indeed an EUIV part - and helps explain the need for the shim.

Will keep looking for the oil rail reference!

I am desparately trying to find where I'd previously read about the oil rail in the EUIV engine - no luck just yet, but came across this on exiges.com by Simon Erland:

This supports the idea that the LR gasket is indeed an EUIV part - and helps explain the need for the shim.

Will keep looking for the oil rail reference!
Excellent info Rob, sounds its been properly developed and tested.

Just wondering if the parts where ever meant to be retro-fitted to pre EUIV engines though, If there really are some new bolts then it could be that they were only intended to be fitted to a block machined for EUIV. - Maybe a question for your "engineering contacts"...

There are NO NEW BOLTS according to Land Rover.

Yes, the shim does appear to carry out that function......

I didn't realise there is (or are going to be) Euro IV K series engines?

I thought Land Rover were just using the stocks of K engines they built up before the collapse of MGR?

I didn't realise there is (or are going to be) Euro IV K series engines?

I thought Land Rover were just using the stocks of K engines they built up before the collapse of MGR?

They are. That does not however mean that there were no plans in place for MGR to run EU4 engines.

what do you think if nanging could build this k serie engine with all this HG improviments,a better cylinder head design and this new valeo coolant system ( to complete the news antipolutions norms) ?
might be a good engine for the futures new MG 's cars with minimun expense than get other absolute new engine ( ¿news VW petrols engines????????)cheers

Just to close the bit about the torque settings for the (unchanged) stretch bolts ... the correct procedure is still to tighten the stretch bolts in the sequence specified by the workshop manual first to a torque of 20 Nm, followed by two further sequences, each times tightening the bolt by 180°, right?

Regards,
André

Just to close the bit about the torque settings for the (unchanged) stretch bolts ... the correct procedure is still to tighten the stretch bolts in the sequence specified by the workshop manual first to a torque of 20 Nm, followed by two further sequences, each times tightening the bolt by 180°, right?

Regards,
André

Correct Andre :)

Then the Chinese would probably get all the credit for 'fixing' the K-Series. :rolleyes:

Oh no, we'd make sure that wasn't the case.......

Just thought i'd post some info that Dave Andrews posted on another forum on the subject of these new parts, making some points I think people on this forum may like to/should hear. Hope you dont mind Dave, at least it will save you having to type it out again.

I happened to have the main test/development engineer for the K from Powertrain here a few times over the last couple of weeks and had some long chats about the multi-layer gasket. There have been several MLS type gaskets available before from various sources. The main advantage with the lastest gasket is the shim which eliminates fire ring dig in and masks any issues with the head casting.

Powertrain employees were constrained from calling the shim a 'shim' since they had always condemned the use of these by third parties, however their own research showed them to be very effective. The shim had to be called 'the sixth layer' and was planned to be bonded to the gasket to disguise it's nature.

He mentioned that it took a heat cycle or two for the gasket/shim to seal since the sealant on the shim was a dry tyoe and that they had a shim toaster on the line when the testing was going on the ensure that the engines survived a pressure test before running.

For what it's worth a well know BTCC engine builder uses a regular commercially available gasket together with a shim against the head and this seems to do the trick. The only real issue is the slight lowering of the CR that comes about because of the increased thickness of the gasket.

His opinion is that a good quality gasket with correct liner heights should make a reliable job provided the casting is sound. If the casting isnt sound then a shim could well help.

In his opinion the inserted ladder is unecessary.

He had an awful lot to say about porosity as well which pretty much confirms what I (and others) have been saying for some time.

Heads with porosity across the fire ring may be helped by the shim, but it is by no mean certain unless the liner heights are also correct. Heads which have softened will still give a problem since the shim will dig in.

The Cr is not lowered on production engines, the head is skimmed by the approriate amount to allow for the thicker gasket, this gace problems in that the LR engine had to be singled out and identified for special treatment since they would have a different gasket and more skimmed from the head casting.

The MLS gasket is intended as a retro fit to lessen HGF, I.E. a field solution as well as a factory fitment. The strengthened ladder seems to be a solution looking for a problem, the standard ladder is used in BTCC engines where it has proved up to the job (and it is drilled for an oil spray bar). The tougher ladder might be to allow increased clamping loads but test have shown that increased clamping loads simply cause the supporting pillars in the head to crush and the loads return to those that the pillar can support.

What you see on the BTCC ladder is a spray bar that oils under the piston crowns toi aid piston cooling, it is not strengthening of the ladder per se. The ladder is in all important respects standard.

There may be other issues the ladder is designed to solve but my contact is unaware of them and was *very* intimately connected with all aspects of the K series. He runs a 230BHP K series and elects to use the stock ladder and gasket despite free access to the MLS gasket and tougher ladder.

AFAIK the MLS gasket was designed well over 2 years ago (maybe even 3+) at Powertrain. I was sworn to secrecy at the time by my contacts and have been waiting for it to become available. Again AFAIK it was adopted on the line just for engines destined for LandRover.

For the record I have heard that is it just as sensitive (if not more so) to liner height problems...

I've now spoken to my "contacts" (sorry, can't reveal who they are, for obvious reasons!), but it does indeed seem that the gasket and oil rail are indeed K-series EU4 parts (the story that Dave provides is almost certainly accurate).

One thing to note however, both the MLS gasket AND the oil rail must be fitted at the same time.

I haven't pressed any further on an explanation for this at this time, but I am sure that the reasons will become available in due course... :)

Some interesting stuff there SHARKYMGF. Has anybody got details of this BTCC oil rail/spray addition?

Out of interest - where does Dave Andrews post?

ok so r we agreed the new gasket is better and shoild b used instead of the mgr 1?

ok so r we agreed the new gasket is better and should b used instead of the mgr 1?...and safe on all K16 versions (like my 214 SEi '95); yes I'm getting a bit uncertain as well!

Cheers

Hi,

Thank you for all valuable information. I will install new type of gasket and revised oil ladder very soon in Freelander 1.8k engine. Just one question remains :

According to RAVE for Freelander, the cylinder head bolts can be re-used, after a positive check of the length. LR dealer say you should renew these bolts ALWAYS. (for commercial or technical purposes ?!?!?) I recently spoke to a non-official LR dealer : "we re-use these bolts after check, renewal is seldom necessary." What is your opinion ? Thx for help !!!

Provided they're within tolerance, they are safe to re-use.

I think you will find that people seldom find them out of tolerance, though your question will probably open some debate from both camps.

"Renew bolts" comes from dealerships who are keen to bump up parts sales....

No nned to replace unless they fail the tolerance values.

Out of interest - where does Dave Andrews post?
Various places Dave, but most frequently on Blatchat and SELOC.

Various places Dave, but most frequently on Blatchat and SELOC.
He is also a member of this site, but only seems to drop in occasionally. The info I posted came from SELOC, but you will need to register to see the thread (hence why I couldn't link directly to it).

Cheers Steve & Rob - will have a nose around! :hyper:

No problem. The thread that Steve refers to is here (http://forums.seloc.org/viewthread.php?tid=71125) - as Steve says, you need to be a member to view. Unfortunately, the thread has degenerated to the usual infighting, which is a great shame. However, the thread still contains some real gems of information - not least DVA's calculated drop in compression ratio by 0.25:1 due to the increased thickness of the gasket...

Just been onto the dealer.....

Gasket Kit - LVB500190 £23+VAT

This gasket is available - no back order issues . I know what I will be fitting from now on ;)

Just been onto the dealer.....

Gasket Kit - LVB500190 £23+VAT

This gasket is available - no back order issues . I know what I will be fitting from now on ;)
Don't forget to fit the new oil rail at the same time though!!!

Don't forget to fit the new oil rail at the same time though!!!

I thought the same but didn't have time to post!

Land Rover still assure me there are no newer bolts or any different torque/angle procedures to be followed when fitting this gasket.

Had a read through the thread over on seloc.org - what an unfriendly place!

Yes, SELOC can be quite a challenging environment at times Dave! :lol:

It seems then, that everywhere (except here) that k-series discussion takes place there's a conflict of "expert" opinions. I'm a member at exiges.com, it's the same there. I won't mention any names, but there's 2 people both frequently contradicting each other, despite being similarly "expert" on the subject. It frequently descends to bickering, probably not helped by stirring from other users. Who and what are we supposed to believe?

I've spoken to both protagonists independently (they're the same as on SELOC except that Simon Scuttham is, I think, banned from Exiges.com).

Both clearly know their onions when it comes to K-series.

Both have opinions that I respect, and there is a lot that I've learnt from both (and curiously, there is a lot of common ground between them in terms of general engine building advice). Indeed, it could be argued that through the confrontations on those sites, they've managed to educate the masses even more effectively than if everyone had had a 'love-in'!

Who is the guilty party in all this? I don't really want to answer that question, but if you can follow the history of these discussions long enough, it is possible to arrive at an informed opinion.

I should declare that I've had cylinder head work done by one of the protagonists, so am probably slightly biased in their favour on the basis of results and customer care...

Dr Dave, got some documented evidence that the gasket was designed by Powertrain and not Land Rover. Unfortunately its sensitive info so its not for public viewing. Tried pming you but they are turned off.