As stated in previous posts time and again (deja-vu), the information on their manufacture came from a source within FM.
Capiche?
At the time those liners were procured, GKN liners were still being supplied and used as spares. A better question might be why on earth would Rover and others still be supplying known crappy liners through dealer networks.
I have seen GKN liners used in engines built as late as 2004 by other engine builders…
Knowing the acknowledged poor quality of the GKN liners I sought an alternative from a trusted source.
I have yet to receive a detailed reply from AE on the material specs. My own and independent measuring has shown that your claims about dimensional inaccuracy to be unfounded, at least on the liners I have tested, if you have others which you dispute, let’s see them.
When I recently approached Rover and PTP for liners I was offered AE liners with no caveats whatsoever, no discussion about ‘emergency use’ and with an assurance that these were OE liners. If they consider these to be OK for use then they must have their reasons.
It was only after a friend bought some and discovered that they were AE that I took Rover and PTP to task.
As you well know catepillar, bought Unipart when BMW sold the company, so the parts spares division were no longer a division of Rover.Furthermore even Catepillar did not supply GKN liners after 1998
Caterpillar NEVER bought Unipart, Unipart still exists as a separate company. Unipart had been removed as the official parts supplier before BMW sold Rover (sort of). Unipart was not a part of Rover as it was sold off in 1987 as a management buyout.
And Caterpillar didn’t take over until 1999/2000 therefore they were not supplying parts in 1998.
And yet they still managed to supply 100,000s of engines with substandard liners… and did some seminal work on producing an engine which is prety much guaranteed to both pop it’s headgasket and soften its head…
Most of us are keen, but a lot of us are sick to death with hearing propaganda and bullshine.
The liner issue was a quality control problem pure and simple no doubt exacerbated by the bean counters.
I daresay there has been the odd problem with Toyota cams but that pales into insignificant minutae compared to the scale of the HG problems experienced on the K series. A scandal of biblical proportions.
Had it sorted? where was the PRT on Mark’s car?, what were the liner heights like?.. sorted my *rse. How many post 2001 Freelanders have popped their headgaskets?
Yada, yada, yada, the same old stuff you’ve been spewing out for years.
Rover were complicit in producing an engine that was doomed to failure, even with all their expertise and years of evidence they were unable to first concede and then solve the head gasket problem.
If Mark’s head was soft (which it wasnt when it was fitted), it is due , according to you, to a fundemental flaw present in just about every Rover engine to leave the production line. The fact his liners were at best level and at worst below the level of the block was a major contributing factor.
Read your own verbage on Seloc…
I have yet to see any of the parts from Mark’s engine despite many requests. Mark has been adequately compensated for the problems that he suffered despite me seeing no hard evidence of any failed components.
With due respect to Mark, his problems are one engine amidst around 400 that I have been involved with and whereas personally it is significant to Mark, it is statistically insignificant.
I have completed around 28 of those particular conversions and Mark’s is the only one that has suffered any problems. Only two of these have a remote thermostat fitted.
You are trotting out the same old stuff over and over again… give it a rest … yawn…
I suspect you will want to engrave your tombstone with the details, ‘lest we forget’.