View Single Post
  #14  
Old 02-26-2010, 12:51 PM
Blown353 Blown353 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Central Valley, CA
Posts: 925
Thanks: 0
Thanked 88 Times in 34 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by legend View Post
That article is somewhat incorrect... they say Merlin a couple times, but they also say "tank engine"-- the Meteor was the derivative of the Merlin used in tanks and it's a Meteor under the hood.

The Meteor used a lot of steel parts instead of aluminum/magnesium (tanks didn't really need the weight savings) and they also lacked the supercharger of the Merlin so they would run reliably on low-octane "over the road" fuel but at the expense of being way down on horsepower (less than 1/2) compared to the Merlin.

The engine in that Rover lacks the distinct 2-stage supercharger case and accessory drive section of the Merlin-- so I'm inclined to believe it's a Meteor. Reading on other websites confirm the engine as a Meteor.

Still one hell of a job stuffing it into the car... or rather making the car fit around it.

I'd still drive it.
__________________
1969 Chevelle
Old setup: Procharged/intercooled/EFI 353 SBC, TKO, ATS/SPC/Global West suspension, C6 brakes & hydroboost.
In progress: LS2, 3.0 Whipple, T56 Magnum, torque arm & watts link, Wilwood Aero6/4 brakes, Mk60 ABS, Vaporworx, floater 9" rear, etc.

Last edited by Blown353; 02-26-2010 at 06:23 PM.
Reply With Quote