I think that a vehicle properly restored to original condition or
maintained from new in its original state is a considerably more difficult
goal to accomplish than cutting one up and modifying it. If I had a nickel
for every time I've been "advised" to exchange my early 2.25 for something
else, I could probably buy another new chassis, though maintaining the
original engine keeps the vehicle's history intact. Besides, I enjoy the
challenge of tracking down rare parts that the engine swappers don't give
two cents about: I even have a set of four long-out of production Lodge
spark plugs for car show display purposes. (I could explain what Lodge
spark plugs are and look like; however, those who care already know and
those who are concerned about Iron Dukes will never understand.) With
swapping engines, originality is out the window and nothing else really
matters so why bother yourself with tracking down a correct turn signal
lens. I have an idea that frequently some rare and valuable parts are
discarded in the zeal and fury to create the perfect, ultimate, coolest,
whatever Land-Rover-bodied bastard. I didn't buy a Land-Rover expecting it
to be a perfect vehicle and I accepted it for what it was. People accept
most other vehicles for what they are: why can't they do it with
Land-Rovers?
I think it would do some of these engine swapping kids good to be forced to
read a history of the Rover Company Ltd. Mind you, I mean something
concerning Rover as a whole and not just Land-Rover. I would like them to
realize the company had a history prior to producing Land-Rovers, beginning
with bicycle manufacture during the late 1800s and proceeding to building
some of the first jet engines during World War II. Then after they've
covered the pre-war history, they could research the mergers of all the
automobile companies that formed British Leyland and finally proceed to
BMW's buyout of Rover Group and then the selling and division of the
remains to the subsequent purchase of the Land-Rover division by Ford.
Perhaps if they'd do this they'd have a little more respect for their
Land-Rovers and what they represent. Someone mentioned that Land-Rovers
seemed to be intended to be disassembled (and consequently modified) due to
their simple, Mecanno-set style construction. Apparently, the prevailing
wisdom is that the Wilkes brothers envisioned any and every conceivable
engine being shoehorned into Land-Rovers someday. I guess the fact that
Rover, like most other automobile producers in post-war Britain, was
strapped for funds and that they couldn't afford to produce complicated
body panels had nothing to do with the design of the vehicle. It was all
done to accommodate Iron Dukes! Thanks to all the engine swappers for
setting the record straight! I'm sure that Maurice Wilkes is smiling down
on these ultimate Land-Rover-bodied bastards since they have corrected all
of his mistakes.
I'm sure that in 1948 Maurice remarked, "You know, this vehicle is a heap
of crap and, quite honestly, I'm ashamed of it. My conscience is also
bothering me: these things are going to have a high selling price and they
are so flawed and irregular--simply trash. Though that's okay. We
designed them so that the people who buy them will be able to make their
own modifications and change them 'round. Nevertheless, it still seems a
pity to ask such a high price for the things and then expect people to be
forced to go out and have to purchase another engine to replace these
worthless lumps we're installing. Alas, I'm certain that 20 year old kids
in the year 2001 will understand that we so poorly engineered these things
that they have to be rebuilt by their owners to be any good." Of course,
Maurice Wilkes didn't say that and if the factory-stock Land-Rover had been
as bad as some people make them out to be, Rover wouldn't have ever sold a
single unit. For that matter, Rover, much less Land-Rover, would probably
have never survived.
All this engine swapping nonsense shows a complete lack of understanding of
Rover's history and how the Land-Rover came about. I guess that's what
happens when people buy them because they "look cool". The cool looks wear
thin after a short while and they can't and don't satisfy these peoples'
need for a modern car and, thus, they start in on engine conversions. It's
too bad that perspective buyers can't rent a Series Land-Rover for a couple
of weeks to find out if they really do want one. (Before any of you get
any ideas, I thought of this renting scheme first!) I have an idea that
most would shy away from them and be asking for a refund, probably before
the lease contract had more than a few days used up. (Personally, if I had
such a Land-Rover leasing business, I'd only rent them out during December
and January and make certain that the only heater allowed to be installed
in my fleet would be the infamous Smiths shin-burners. I'd also only rent
Is, IIs and IIAs with no overdrives and the earlier transmissions with
unsynchronized first and second gears. That ought to cure the "man those
things look cool" crowd in no time.)
About seven years ago, being an admirer of all things Rover, I nearly
bought a '66 Rover 2000SC from a college student: it had been bought
merely based on the fact that it "was funky". The idiot hadn't a clue
about how to care for the car and used DOT 3 to top off the fluid
reservoir. Naturally, the rubber in the brake system quickly
self-destructed and to alleviate the problem, a bottle of "Heavy Duty DOT
3" was purchased (I found the bottle in the boot.) Of course, the car
wouldn't stop and since the kid was too dumb and proud to ask a question or
try to analyze what had gone wrong, the car was for sale as someone else's
problem to solve. The deal fell through and I later found out that a
salvage yard was called to haul the car away. I was told the kid got paid
$25 for the "funky car." The moral is that if the kid had bother to learn
something about the car, it might still be on the road rather than having
been crushed. What a shame, it was a really nice, original P6.
Hot rods hold no appeal for me. I was en route to Asheville, NC about a
year ago and decided to stay over in Pigeon Forge, TN and drive through the
Smokies to get to Asheville. Unbeknownst to me, there was a hot rod meet
going on and the things were everywhere--like flies on fresh... Anyhow,
being a car nut, I felt that I had to take a few minutes to at least look
at the ones in the hotel parking lot before I left. There they were:
Fords with Chevy engines, Chryslers with Ford engines and Chevys with Ford
powerplants, etc. The interiors were completely modified and basically the
cars were unidentifiable save for the body shells they were built up from.
Some were for sale and I couldn't believe the asking prices. Needless to
say, there were few buyers and I walked away wondering how a price could be
set on these contraptions. What's a 1940s Chevy bodyshell with a
late-model Ford engine and a Pontiac rear end worth? Who knows. One thing
I was surprised to learn was that there are companies out there that
essentially sell their customers all the parts needed to "build up" certain
cars that are popular hot rod targets. Build a hot rod by the numbers, or
something like that. At least this ensures that some level of proper
engineering goes into the end result. In the midst of all these hot rods
was a lost looking and completely stock Triumph TR6. I spent more time
examining it than all the hundreds of Yank Tank hot rods combined.
The thing that bothers me about these homemade hybrids is that they are not
being designed by automotive engineers. For that matter, they're not even
being approached in a very scientific manner at all. Engineering or
re-engineering a car is not for amateurs; for that matter, even the experts
can develop things that are deathtraps (the grossly overpowered Sunbeam
Tiger and A.C. Cobra are prime examples of a legitimate [i.e.
factory-built] hybrids that could be downright dangerous in the hands of an
inexperienced driver.) I have to seriously question the abilities of some
of the people currently contemplating re-engineering their Land-Rovers. Do
these people have the capabilities to perform testing with computer models
of how all their modifications will work out? I doubt it. They certainly
can't build a series prototypes to help envision what the finished
product's dynamics will be like. Most car companies build test mule after
mule in an attempt to get everything right. With these amateur engine
swaps, it's simply a matter of do it and hope for the best. And what
happens when they fail to create the ultimate Land-Rover-bodied bastard?
It will be difficult to find a buyer for the thing who wants to drive it
(especially if the truth is revealed about what a mess the vehicle is) and,
sadly, prices for scrap iron and aluminum have plummeted in recent years.
Someone mentioned that these "hybrids" are an essential part of
Land-Rover's history--that the make's history has been recorded and written
with these creations as an integral part thereof. I would argue that they
are not even a footnote. Does the Motor Heritage Trust go out seeking
hacked up Land-Rovers with Iron Dukes in them? Hardly. What is in their
collection? Vehicles like HUE 166--which was bought back from a farmer who
had owned and used it for years and hadn't "re-engined" it. Does anyone
ever discussed these vehicles after the fact? I've never heard anyone
concerning themselves about John Q. Public's Volkswagen-diesel powered
Land-Rover bodied bastard after John Q. does his conversion--no one cares
after a few months or years. If these things are so important in the
greater scheme of Land-Rover history, why aren't they detailed and
discussed in depth in books dealing with Land-Rover history? Could it be
because they aren't part of the history that the manufacturer was
responsible for? Obviously, the manufacturer (as well as many others) does
not recognize the Land-Rover-bodied bastards as being Land-Rovers and why
should they? They aren't anything more than a Land-Rover bodyshell in the
end.
Speaking of hot rods, there's an interesting one locally--it's based on a
Citroen 15CV. Yes, it's fascinating that someone put a Chevy engine and
rear end in it, though what a shame to chop up what is a quite scarce car
on this side of the Atlantic. In this transition, it's lost all of its
original French charm that made it uniquely Citroen; now it's just a
collection of parts. Hell, it's even lost its famous "traction avant" in
this futile attempt to create a better Big 15. Is there a single auto
museum that would want this thing in their collection? I doubt the Henry
Ford Museum or Harrah's have been in contact. Basically, that's the
problem with cutting up and mutilating a Land-Rover: what these Land-Rover
engine swappers are doing is creating collections of unrelated parts that
have no value except to their owners and no provenance. These conversions
have no future because they have no regard for the past.
Brian Willoughby
1960 Land-Rover Series II 88" S.W.--"The Lady Eleanor"
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Apr 05 2001 - 15:17:14 EDT