Jump to content

Solex carb on the Jaguar J60 CVRT engine


roger1954

Recommended Posts

What is the solex carb model number on the Jaguar J60 engine? Where are the diaphrams and parts available in the US or UK?

Has anyone ever changed over to E type SU carbs? or other brand?

Has anyone ever change oil filter to screw on type?

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is the solex carb model number on the Jaguar J60 engine? Where are the diaphrams and parts available in the US or UK?

Has anyone ever changed over to E type SU carbs? or other brand?

Has anyone ever change oil filter to screw on type?

Thanks

 

Roger,

I can see no advantage fitting twin SU carbs to a J60, not as if there is good access to keep them in tune, and not only that, I doubt there is room to fit them and get an intake pipe to air cleaner. They have been in use for over 40 years with the Solex. Same with oil filter, 'why mend what ain't broke' as the old saying goes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only carburettor change that springs to mind is some lads here in the US used a Holley and claimed improved reliability and serviceability. How much of that was the design and how much is about a USA carb being easier to deal with while in the USA I can't say.

I have toyed with the idea of a TBI system on a J60 as being plausible, easy in fact, and might be more reliable than a mechanical carb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only carburettor change that springs to mind is some lads here in the US used a Holley and claimed improved reliability and serviceability. How much of that was the design and how much is about a USA carb being easier to deal with while in the USA I can't say.

I have toyed with the idea of a TBI system on a J60 as being plausible, easy in fact, and might be more reliable than a mechanical carb.

 

There have been several 're-powers' of cvrts in the UK, most using alternative diesel units, but the most impressive was with a later (late 80's/early 90's) Jag straight 6 fuel injected. This was a straightforward swap, and gave a significant improvement in acceleration and top speed.

other benefits were weight loss, 12v system, and more space generated, as the airbox, generator, regulator and wiring could all be removed....oh and it had a spin on oil filter at a couple of quid a go!

Terry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There have been several 're-powers' of cvrts in the UK, most using alternative diesel units, but the most impressive was with a later (late 80's/early 90's) Jag straight 6 fuel injected. This was a straightforward swap, and gave a significant improvement in acceleration and top speed.

 

Terry

 

Now that must have been a lively drive! I doubt it had the required longevity in army drivers hands though. The phrase "built like a tank" doesn't seem to apply to army drivers from some of the damage I've seen...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If ever an engine benefited form dewey eyed nostalgia it is the XK. Best part about it is the cross flow head which Jaguar added to a bought it Standard design. It hates to run at high revs, suffers in most instalations from overheating problems. On the 4.2 pulls liners. Bottom end is fragile, Oil pressure excentric, Needs an oil cooler to bring the oil temp out of the Stratosphere. spits out lower timming chain tensioner at the least excuse, distributor and carburetors need very frequent attention. It needs the tripple SU. to breath properly or the middle two cylinders do most of the work. But it sounds wonderfull with straight through exhausts. Where should I stand for execution?

Edited by john1950
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If ever an engine benefited form dewey eyed nostalgia it is the XK.

...Where should I stand for execution?

Just here next to me. I'm going to run one until it disintegrates and use the intervening time to plan my repower. The DOHC design was amazing in 1949 and has a good power to weight ratio for even the period of the CVR(T) introduction but just does not have the strength to be a reliable bit of gear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just here next to me. I'm going to run one until it disintegrates and use the intervening time to plan my repower. The DOHC design was amazing in 1949 and has a good power to weight ratio for even the period of the CVR(T) introduction but just does not have the strength to be a reliable bit of gear.

 

The J60 was in military service in the CVR(T) for around 30 years, and yes some did blow apart at times, but that was in service. Surely as a private owner you are not going to drive to destruction? Like all vehicles, they have their limits, you exceed them and pay the price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If ever an engine benefited form dewey eyed nostalgia it is the XK. Best part about it is the cross flow head which Jaguar added to a bought it Standard design. It hates to run at high revs, suffers in most instalations from overheating problems. On the 4.2 pulls liners. Bottom end is fragile, Oil pressure excentric, Needs an oil cooler to bring the oil temp out of the Stratosphere. spits out lower timming chain tensioner at the least excuse, distributor and carburetors need very frequent attention. It needs the tripple SU. to breath properly or the middle two cylinders do most of the work. But it sounds wonderfull with straight through exhausts. Where should I stand for execution?

 

My Dad had a late 70s Jag which he bought 2nd hand in 1987. When he died it was suffering from coolant usage, not a lot,

but it kept needing topping up. A subsequent owner contacted me and quizzed me about any problems we had had with it. He then offered to show me what was wrong (he was an incurable Jag addict). That was how I learnt about the idiocy of Jag not putting a rim on their liners and them having a propensity to drop liners. This one (No6) had dropped just to the point where without the head on you could clearly see the liner was down, but could not actually see into the water jacket. It also had some sort of crash switch that decided one day for no reason that it no longer wanted to play the "I should work because I have not been in a crash" game with the new owner and locked out the engine.

 

Us Aussies tend to put a lot of emphasis on reliability due to our long distances and climate conditions where a breakdown can be a life threatening experience. Owning a car with random and unpredictable defects that can immobilise you is not a sensible

decision.

The liner drop tendencies and self crashing switch overruled my desire to ever own another Jag. Lovely car, lovely to drive, but stupid engineering hiding away in there.

 

Surely there is another engine that will bolt up in a CVRT? Did Jag use the standarised bolt patterns for bell housing and gearbox or was it some bespoke pattern unique to them?

 

Regards

Doug

Edited by dgrev
Fix grammar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To my mind the XK engine is a classic case of british engineering, Good inovation then no money to develop the line. Stretch it as far as you can but you cannot have any time or money. It started out 2.4 liters .developed into 3.4 then 3.8 and was stretched finally to 4.2. As they stretched it its reliability went down as its power output went up. I think the purpose of putting a single card on was to reduce the power output and hopefully improve reliability. You must keep the peak temperatures down. Clean air fillters and coolant, as far as possible unrestricted air flow and short usage of full power. As long as you work on the premiss that it is not bullet proof, civy life will be fine. They are reasonably easy to work on at least when they are out, no expensive tools required or computers. British car manufacturers shopped at Woollworths for there switches. Another example of this is the AEC V8. Sorry I have gone on a bit.

Edited by john1950
edit
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My Dad had a late 70s Jag which he bought 2nd hand in 1987. When he died it was suffering from coolant usage, not a lot,

but it kept needing topping up. A subsequent owner contacted me and quizzed me about any problems we had had with it. He then offered to show me what was wrong (he was an incurable Jag addict). That was how I learnt about the idiocy of Jag not putting a rim on their liners and them having a propensity to drop liners. This one (No6) had dropped just to the point where without the head on you could clearly see the liner was down, but could not actually see into the water jacket. It also had some sort of crash switch that decided one day for no reason that it no longer wanted to play the "I should work because I have not been in a crash" game with the new owner and locked out the engine.

 

Us Aussies tend to put a lot of emphasis on reliability due to our long distances and climate conditions where a breakdown can be a life threatening experience. Owning a car with random and unpredictable defects that can immobilise you is not a sensible

decision.

The liner drop tendencies and self crashing switch overruled my desire to ever own another Jag. Lovely car, lovely to drive, but stupid engineering hiding away in there.

 

Surely there is another engine that will bolt up in a CVRT? Did Jag use the standarised bolt patterns for bell housing and gearbox or was it some bespoke pattern unique to them?

 

Regards

Doug

 

Swaps done over here include Jag efi 4.2,3.8, a few big V8's, BMW 2.5 TDS, Cummins civvy 5.9 BTA (+ non-turbo) Deutz air cooled 6 cyl, Steyr MI16 and the old Perkins lump.

I could never get my head around why MoD would choose an engine, then redesign it to lower the power output (ie CVRT, Warrior,Challenger etc). I think J60 was detuned from 265 down to 195 (ish)horse, oh but then its got to drive that huge mixed flow fan...and a thumping great alternator....and then lets put it in a very tight fitting armoured box at way above acceptable running temperatures. After all that it was no wonder poor squaddie had to drive it foot flat to the floor! Case in point-MoD upgraded CVRT to the cummins 6BTA, then detuned it to match power of the J60! Mine was a bit gutless, so I tweaked the fuelling at war & peace (see you tube clip-PKE646L). not ideal, but I was only copying VW's idea....

A replacement engine needs to have a min rev max of 4750 to make 50mph (higher is faster) 240 or more horse and must have minimal torsional vibration-the thump on the drivetrain. This counts out many diesel engines, petrols are smoother.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Terry

 

Looking at the amount of smoke and colour coming out says to me that you are over fueling. More diesel than the air capacity of that engine. I suspect that you can wind it back some, get the same power and not be greeny public enemy No1!

 

Keep in mind, that drivetrains are usually a balance between the ability of the various components to handle the torque and power.

What concerns me is that by upping the engine, you will now over stress the centrifugal clutch, gearbox or final drives.

There usually is not a lot of lee way in AFV designs. They all must obey the armour-firepower-performance triangle.

 

On M113A1 etc Detroit Diesel 6v53 they run smokeless even when at full throttle unless the engine is knackered. Even then, with the heavier variants (eg M577 Command Post and FSV) the auto gearbox is the weak link in the powertrain as far as running on the limits of the power/torque load that it was designed to take. In so much as what started out as a 9 ton vehicle evolved to be around 13 ton before they upgraded everything with different power plant, auto box, drive shafts and final drives in the latter variants.

 

With CVRT I would be particularly wary of the gearbox and final drives - given that they are epicyclic.

 

My suggestion would be that on hard surfaces such as bitumen or concrete roads you don't give it full welly. Likewise leave some

unused when doing neutral turns etc. Be gentle.

 

Regards

Doug

 

Swaps done over here include Jag efi 4.2,3.8, a few big V8's, BMW 2.5 TDS, Cummins civvy 5.9 BTA (+ non-turbo) Deutz air cooled 6 cyl, Steyr MI16 and the old Perkins lump.

I could never get my head around why MoD would choose an engine, then redesign it to lower the power output (ie CVRT, Warrior,Challenger etc). I think J60 was detuned from 265 down to 195 (ish)horse, oh but then its got to drive that huge mixed flow fan...and a thumping great alternator....and then lets put it in a very tight fitting armoured box at way above acceptable running temperatures. After all that it was no wonder poor squaddie had to drive it foot flat to the floor! Case in point-MoD upgraded CVRT to the cummins 6BTA, then detuned it to match power of the J60! Mine was a bit gutless, so I tweaked the fuelling at war & peace (see you tube clip-PKE646L). not ideal, but I was only copying VW's idea....

A replacement engine needs to have a min rev max of 4750 to make 50mph (higher is faster) 240 or more horse and must have minimal torsional vibration-the thump on the drivetrain. This counts out many diesel engines, petrols are smoother.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To my knowledge the UK diesel CVRT gearboxes have a different input gear ratio, strengthened(!) gear box internals and uprated final drives. Not all carried out at the same time though...

 

True.

 

But that still does not give him Carte Blanche to over stress. The components in the diesel variant would have been upgraded to absorb the spec torque delivered by that configuration plus a small fudge factor to allow, not spec plus say another 25% continuous. CVRT design is not that robust. Especially the epicyclic final drives!!!

 

Quite a few times I have received phone calls from people who have killed their Ferret gearboxes by driving them as conventional manual gear changes. They then want me to supply them with another gearbox for them to kill - not going to happen. The consistent response I get is that they aren't interested in how the vehicle must be driven, but they want to drive it their way ie. drive it as a normal gearbox. If it was viable to drive it as a normal manual why would the military have gone to all the fuss of training on a pre-selector system?

 

Until people get it through their heads that AFVs are a fine balance of trade offs that mean that the design is right on the limits: they just won't get it. Think of an AFV along the lines of a truck that is loaded to 150% of its designed weight then flogged hard. Which is why AFVs get rebuilt at around 10,000 km or miles, not 1,000,000 miles like your regular semi-trailer would if anyone bothered.

 

CVRT was designed with that power output for a reason. If the designers thought they could get a free extra 25% power they would have done so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even though the replys are interesting, we have deviated from the original question somewhat.

sorry....carb is a solex 48NN1P, rebuild kits and diaphragms from Bannister's

The later gloss black ones rebuilt by Marcus Engineering work best...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...