Page 1 of 1
Were SU or Strombergs fitted to the 2.6/3.0 Six?
Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2018 11:12 am
by fuckwit
LRs generally have issues with the various flavours of Weber, Zenith and Strombergs fitted to 2.25 & 2.5 engines. Whole threads on carbs witter on about this carb or the other. Agreed age doesn't help, yet other marques don't have quite so many problems. I fitted an ACR SU conversion to my 2.5 and have never looked back.
Browsing various places I keep hearing mention of the 2.6 fitted with SU carbs? I thought, even in 'Auntie Rovers' the 2.6 six cylinder left the factory gates with Strombergs. Is the SU a conversion, or did some variants have these?
Re: Were SU or Strombergs fitted to the 2.6/3.0 Six?
Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2018 12:39 pm
by Th0ma_s
My 109 2.6 have a Stromberg 175cd.
So did mye spare engines until i took them of to rebuild the best one of them.
Re: Were SU or Strombergs fitted to the 2.6/3.0 Six?
Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2018 3:29 pm
by fuckwit
Yes, that's what i thought. Solihull, for whatever reason, always fitted everything else. Never an SU?
Re: Were SU or Strombergs fitted to the 2.6/3.0 Six?
Posted: Sat Jun 23, 2018 8:14 am
by DasLandRoverMan
I've seen a few sixes with the SU on them, both 2.6 and 3 litre flavours, although all in Forward Controls, which also got a Stromberg from the factory.
I think part of the reasoning was to do with SU's suffering fuel starvation running at more 'extreme' angles, which the Strombergs didn't get.
Car V8's had SU's from the word go, whilst the Land Rover ones had Strombergs up until the late 80's.
Re: Were SU or Strombergs fitted to the 2.6/3.0 Six?
Posted: Sat Jun 23, 2018 9:04 pm
by Boehler
Hi,
My FC IIB 2.6 petrol got a SU mounted , plate on it says AUD81.
Considering the low mileage and general unmolested state of the vehicle i think this is its original configuration.
Apart from that, the Parts catalogue says so
best regards
Alex
Re: Were SU or Strombergs fitted to the 2.6/3.0 Six?
Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2018 9:06 am
by fuckwit
I had heard the SU wasn't so good at extreme angles, WW2 Spitfires were fitted with a form of SU, which was a disadvantage against the fuel-injected opposition.
Despite the "No good on inclines" trope, almost the complete British Leyland car line-up at the time had SUs. I did wonder why some didn't stray to Rover. Seems they did.
In a leafer, at angles where this matters, can't see it myself, you will have already fallen out of the thing.
My 12YO boy likes to sit out back, tail-gunner position. Next time I pull negative G with a BMW on my tail, I'll let you know.
Re: Were SU or Strombergs fitted to the 2.6/3.0 Six?
Posted: Mon Jun 25, 2018 5:09 pm
by 22900013A
As well as FCs, early bonneted sixes had the SU.
Re: Were SU or Strombergs fitted to the 2.6/3.0 Six?
Posted: Wed Nov 07, 2018 10:26 am
by helicalrider
Early 2,6 Station had SU HD6.
Later they had Stromberg/Zenith 175.(The 2.6 was introduced in May of '67 with a single SU HD-6... then in June the SU was replaced with a Zenith 175 CD-2S)
FC also had SU HD6.
109 2,6 NADA and Rover P4 110 had Weslake with SU HD8.
Rover P5 3.0 MKI had SU HD8.
Rover P5 3.0 MKII and III with Weslake also had SU HD8.
Regards Marc