• Hi Guest!
    If you appreciate British Car Forum and our 25 years of supporting British car enthusiasts with technical and anicdotal information, collected from our thousands of great members, please support us with a low-cost subscription. You can become a supporting member for less than the dues of most car clubs.
    There are some perks with a member upgrade!
    **Upgrade Now**
    (PS: Subscribers don't see this gawd-aweful banner
Tips
Tips

Just acquired a Jensen Healey

Share this page

Neat cars!

When that leaky little hand-grenade of an engine blows up, though, I'd definitely plan to upgrade to a nice lightweight aluminum (Rover/Buick) V8. Simple, robust, much lower maintenance, and more grunt too...

Check out this one: Jay Fowler's 1973 Jensen Healey Engine Swap
JayFowler-B.jpg
 
CurtisJ said:
Neat cars!

When that leaky little hand-grenade of an engine blows up, though, I'd definitely plan to upgrade to a nice lightweight aluminum (Rover/Buick) V8. Simple, robust, much lower maintenance, and more grunt too...
Click to expand...

Curtis, they aren't by any means hand grenades. In fact they aren't even that highly stressed. Obviously a 4 valve DOHC engine needs a tad more maintenance than a hydraulic lifter V8 will, but that lovely engine is 90% of the charm of these cars and of the value as well. You want stressed, look at the later turbo version putting out just on 300 BHP in the Lotus models.

I can see swapping out a run of the mill pushrod British 4 cylinder plodder, (MG, Sunbeam, TR etc.) but this one is among the very best and most interesting of British engines, and IMHO there is a very good argument to leave them in there. All of the service issues are now well known and they don't provide any particular challenge to keep running reliably. I know many members of the Jensen clubs that I see at meets a thousand or more mmiles from home who think nothing of taking long trips in them (I'm usually there ia one or another of my big Jensens).

BTW, yes, they can leak. But that is nothing unusual for any British engine.
 
Timing belt every 18K miles? That's a lot of timing belts to go through in the life of one car.

Isn't it the same engine as this Lotus originally came with?
Richard Norman's 298cid/4.9L Buick V8 Powered 1974 Lotus Elite

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:]I bought my '74 Lotus Elite in 1982 with a slipped timing belt which had lunched all 16 valves in the 2.0 liter aluminum twin-cam 4 cylinder engine. On this engine, if the timing belt slips just one tooth it bends all of the valves, every time. The repair bill is about $2,000, or about $600 if you repair it yourself.[/QUOTE]
 
Well, I'm of the opinion if ya want a Buick, go buy a Buick. If ya want a Lotus be prepared to OWN a Lotus. But to make a Lotus INTO a Buick seems a bit off. And it doesn't help the value of the car at all. Just my opinion.
 
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:]But to make a Lotus INTO a Buick seems a bit off.[/QUOTE]

The Lotus engine obviously didn't make a Jenson into a Lotus, so why would swapping a Buick engine into a Lotus "make a Lotus INTO a Buick"? Engine swaps have always been a part of the British sports car hobby, and American V8's have been particularly associated with Jenson's history.

The little aluminum V8 is a special engine with a longer, more successful sporting history than most people realize. For example, it was raced in the 1962 Indy 500 by Mickey Thompson's team (with rookie-of-the-year Dan Gurney driving), and later with Repco development it helped Brabham win a Formula 1 championship. (For the 1966 season, GM engine castings were used. For 1967, Repco used their own blocks, which were derived from the GM design.) More to the point, the Buick 215 is (~15 pounds) <span style="font-weight: bold">lighter</span> than the Lotus iron four-banger, yet has <span style="font-weight: bold">75%</span> more displacement... IMHO, if a Buick engine makes a Lotus lighter without otherwise sacrificing performance, than it makes a Lotus MORE of a Lotus!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:]And it doesn't help the value of the car at all.[/QUOTE]

Are you an investor, or an enthusiast? No matter how you slice it, investing in Jenson's ain't gonna make you rich. You're better off focusing on personal satisfaction than "value".
 
As I stated, Curtis: Just my opinion.

It's not my car, not my decision.

CurtisJ said:
The Lotus engine obviously didn't make a Jenson into a Lotus, so why would swapping a Buick engine into a Lotus "make a Lotus INTO a Buick"?
Click to expand...

The 907 made the JensEn more English, tho. And pluggin' a Buick lump into a Lotus ~does~ make it a Buick. Or at least makes it worth what a Buick would fetch.

CurtisJ said:
Engine swaps have always been a part of the British sports car hobby, and American V8's have been particularly associated with Jenson's history.
Click to expand...

I've done my share of Interceptor repair. I'm not impressed. Not a Buick in sight. Mostly Chryslers there.

CurtisJ said:
Are you an investor, or an enthusiast? No matter how you slice it, investing in Jenson's ain't gonna make you rich. You're better off focusing on personal satisfaction than "value".
Click to expand...

An enthusiast, actually. That's the reason I'd be for keeping the original engine design in the first place. And most of the LBC's we fuss with wouldn't be worth half of what's spent on 'em, "investment" is a misnomer. "Jensons" included. And "personal satisfaction" is my point. Again: Not my car, just my opinion.

CurtisJ said:
IMHO, if a Buick engine makes a Lotus lighter without otherwise sacrificing performance, than it makes a Lotus MORE of a Lotus!
Click to expand...

ummm... Okay. All that's needed then is to convince the next owner. Not my issue. Go drop a 427 Chebby in a Ferrari and send back a report.

:shrug:
 
Hey Guys,

I'm going to speak on Dale's behalf on this one. He and I exchange emails frequenty (My apologies Dale).

But he's pretty happy with his car. As to motors, their respective issues, and the like. Let's ensure we're providing intelligent recommentdations when requested. It's too easy to scare off an owner when there's arguments regarding the car that aren't necessarily in the owner's best interests.

In regards to the motor itself, when someone learns what's involved in the maintenance, then they can make the appropriate educated decision for themselves. Let the owner make the decision.

Cheers!
Jody
 
No argument at all.


Again, I have both the Jensen and Lotus manuals to hand. I'll pass on any info requested if it's in one of 'em.
 
Hi Guys!
Sorry I've missed a spirited discussion about my latest acquisition. Jody's got it right though, I'm really enjoying my J-H. The engine is the whole reason for owning one of these as the styling is hardly inspired. The engine is not unique by todays standards, but state of the art for 1974. It makes the most gorgeous sound when revved to the red line. (it really will pull 6,500 plus) I was advised against driving it from San Diego, but after a brief delay for a new fuel pump, it brought me home with out any problem. It will need ongoing things as all LBCs do, but we will enjoy it as we renovate and maintain it. No trailer queen this. On the Fourth we head for Grand Junction and Loma, CO then to Craig, Hayden and Steamboat Springs and return maybe through Breckenridge and Chama. Should be topless the whole way and enjoying as fine a scenic drive as there is. Don't expect any problems, but will be prepared for whatever with a few tools and of course Triple A and a cell phone. Eat your hearts out.
 
Dale said:
Hi Guys!
Sorry I've missed a spirited discussion about my latest acquisition. Jody's got it right though, I'm really enjoying my J-H. The engine is the whole reason for owning one of these as the styling is hardly inspired. The engine is not unique by todays standards, but state of the art for 1974. It makes the most gorgeous sound when revved to the red line.
Click to expand...

Well stated. Rip that lovely engine out and stick some American V8 in and you just killed any value (and charm) the car had. A JH on song is a really nice car to drive. The somewhat greater demands of a (for the times) high tech engine are gladly met by owners who enjoy them.

I can attest to the joys of owning idiosyncratic engines - my MGA Twin Cams are a good example.

Not everything benefits from having a V8 shoehorned into it - and cars like the JH which have small diameter wheels often need substantial re-engineering to the point that you end up with nothing much Jensen left, just a shell around a bunch of American driveline and fabbed underpinnings. Frankly, if I were going to go to all that trouble, I'd want something that looked more interesting than a JH when I was finished.

As for the Buick 215 (in all the various forms) there is nothing magical about it, bar a tenuous connection to British cars because MG and Morgan used it, and the fact that in Britain they are fairly readily available. There is an excellent argument for modern GM 60 degree V6 being a better alternative for swaps - similar weight and power, but modern technology and significantly less space concerns than with the V8. Use a 3.5 minivan motor with injection and you are way ahead of the old Rover lump.
 
I've just finished rebuilding a 907 and I've upgraded it using various bits and pieces (2.2 crank, High Compression pistons & head, stainless valves, 104 cams, Excel cam carriers, HTD cam gears, Dellorto 45s, etc.) from the later Lotus engines. I expect to get around 200 HP from it. I could have dropped in a Rover V8, and a friend did exactly that with his, but after careful consideration I think keeping the 907 engine for the car is much the better decision- less custom engineering and easier. Any resale (not that I'm intending to do that) would raise questions about the quality of the work and effect on the car's behaviour, etc.

I reckon I have one of the landmarks of British automotive engineering- the first DOHC 4 valve/cylinder engine.

And the car is rare and unusual, even if those qualities don't make it valuable....
 
JamesWilson said:
And the car is rare and unusual, even if those qualities don't make it valuable....
Click to expand...

"Yet" James.
 
healeyneil said:
Whens that engine going in, James !!!!
Click to expand...

The Jensen Healey!

Well done, James - a very nice engine spec that many JH owners have converted to.
 
Hi All!
It's past my bedtime and I've got to get back to the saltmine in the AM, but I will take a minute to tell all and sundrie that we had a great trip in 17798 and arrived home about 1830 hours this PM. Covered 1,247 miles in 4 days averaged 26.23 mpg. All but about 100 of those miles in Colorado and between 5,000 and 10,000 feet. Coal Bank, Molas, Red Mtn, Rabbit Ears, Muddy, Fremont and Wolfcreek passes were all surmounted. Gotta go for now, details at 11. Dale
 
Hello again All!, Can't say the trip was entirely without incident. We blew a tire just North of Montrose. I should have learned from the same experience with the TR7. Old tires are not good, regardless of mileage. Made it to Grand Junction on the spare and bought a set of Han Kooks because that was all that was readily available. They were a revelation as the old Michelins were out of balance and lumpy. I didn't realise how bad until I drove off on the new ones. The rest of the trip was great and I can reaffirm that these cars were indeed conceived, designed, engineered and built to be driven. Y'all take care. Dale
 
The only advice I can offer is in the way of timing belts. Worked at a dealer in the early 70's(Econo Auto Center in Riverside, California).
Not that many problems on the JH's. A couple of engines, but this was in the first year(build problems from the factory).
I would research the belt and see if Dayco or Gates carries a replacement. I would suspect their longevity to be better than the JohnBull belt we used to get at the parts counter.
 
RonMacPherson said:
The only advice I can offer is in the way of timing belts. Worked at a dealer in the early 70's(Econo Auto Center in Riverside, California).
Not that many problems on the JH's. A couple of engines, but this was in the first year(build problems from the factory).
I would research the belt and see if Dayco or Gates carries a replacement. I would suspect their longevity to be better than the JohnBull belt we used to get at the parts counter.
Click to expand...


:lol:

*see th' first response post in this thread. :jester:
 
Concerning the value and price of JH roadsters:

This has to be the best value of British roadsters! The prices are shockingly low and the performance is far better than the other LBCs I've owned, (save the two XKEs, but they didn't run, so they don't count in this discussion...).

For a confirmed greasemonkey the engine is fascinating, just twiddly enough to keep one thoroughly engaged. The trick, I think, is to have a spare JH 907 engine to work on while the other is in service.

It's nice to have a LBC that will keep up with modern traffic and is just unusual enough for folks to ask,"Is that some kinda Jagwire?" This of course takes absolutely nothing away from all the other treasured British, Italian and American iron that has graced the driveway and garage over the last thirty years. It's ALL good (even with funky motor transplants) if it makes us happy.
 
Back
Top