Setting up timing on a 2.0EFI

[SimonR]

Hi Simon, unfortunately that is one of the ways Rover recomended, 11lbft for 8mm deflection at mid point of belt, and yes it is a bit Mickey Mouse. In the workshop we used a timing belt tension gauge, Rovers version of a Borroughs Gauge.

I'll be honest on the single cam model once you had done a few you could set the belt by feel and it was always ok when checked with the gauge.

You can nearly always hear if a belt is too tight as it makes a "warb warb" noise on tickover.

Cheers for that info Gary - and thanks to Simon Heap also for sending me the gauge. I sorted this out this afternoon - the whole tensioning procedure seemed a bit prone to error to me, but I did the best I could by taping a matchstick to the belt and then marking out an 8mm gap on a bit of tape. The tensioner itself isn't exactly easy to set in a precise way either, but I believe that it's about 8mm deflection at 13 Lbft.

Today, for the first time in about 2 years, my Maestro moved under its own power - quite a land-mark event! I just need to bleed the brakes and swap a couple of tyres round and then it's off to the MoT station to see if it gets a ticket!

Cheers also to Phil (Countrydude) for sorting me out with a much nicer 'quickshift' gear change linkage - seems to work a treat and feels a lot more positive.

[mgdavid]

.......I'll be honest on the single cam model once you had done a few you could set the belt by feel and it was always ok when checked with the gauge........

agreed; I posted to this effect last night but post has completely disappeared !

[G Force]

Hi Phil,

Well the Haynes method for setting up the tensioner is to mark two lines on the cover back-plate (one which is the belt's normal line and a second 8mm forward of this), and then measure the amount of pressure required to deflect the belt the 8mm forward, using a spring guage (the type of thing that people use to measure the weight of a fish).

Hi Simon, unfortunately that is one of the ways Rover recomended, 11lbft for 8mm deflection at mid point of belt, and yes it is a bit Mickey Mouse. In the workshop we used a timing belt tension gauge, Rovers version of a Borroughs Gauge.

I'll be honest on the single cam model once you had done a few you could set the belt by feel and it was always ok when checked with the gauge.

You can nearly always hear if a belt is too tight as it makes a "warb warb" noise on tickover.

[SimonR]

I wouldn't be happy leaving it like that, I don't know the setup but i'm guessing you had a torque setting to tension the belt and a setting to do up the bolt? But only one torque wrench?

Hi Phil,

Well the Haynes method for setting up the tensioner is to mark two lines on the cover back-plate (one which is the belt's normal line and a second 8mm forward of this), and then measure the amount of pressure required to deflect the belt the 8mm forward, using a spring guage (the type of thing that people use to measure the weight of a fish).

This seems a rather perculiar way of doing it to me and I actually couldn't see how it would give a reliable measurement, hence why I did it by feel - but you're right, it should be done properly as a belt failure would be catastrophic for my rebuilt cylinderhead.

I was surprised that the tensioner didn't work like the one on the S-Series (i.e. use a deflection-torque-wrench to set it to the right tension and then do the retaining bolt up) but basically I've got an allen-bolt to clamp it on the engine and a hexagonal hole in the tensioner to adjust it.

Hopefully someone will come up with a better solution on this thread.

As an aside, it's got to come off again anyway because I bought the wrong type of timing belt (square teeth rather than rounded ones) so the correct one's on order.

[countrydude]

I wouldn't be happy leaving it like that, I don't know the setup but i'm guessing you had a torque setting to tension the belt and a setting to do up the bolt? But only one torque wrench?

I'd use the torque wrench on the belt and do up the bolt with any wrench so it holds the tension. Then you can set the torque on the holding bolt?

I'm guessing the o series uses a similar tensioner to the prima, I think I remember it to be the case.

It isn't worth the risk, too loose and the belt jumps a tooth, to tight and it snaps.

[SimonR]

Evening all!

I just wanted to say a big thank you to everyone who helped on this thread: I spent the day today (with a little help from my father and Phil at times) rebuilding the contents of the engine bay.

I ended up giving the block a couple of coats of red paint and of course to do so I had to remove all the parts that bolt to it so they got re-finished as well.

Once rebuilt, it took a little while before it coughed into life but once running it went pretty well. I was very happy to hear that the head is a LOT quieter after its rebuild - the whole thing purrs along very nicely. Hopefully using a different inlet manifold with different pressure regulator, air flow meter, injectors, etc., I've also cured the over-fuelling issue.

This thread was particularly helpful because although I'd got hold of a Montego Haynes which covered the engine, it didn't have anything to say about the later cam-sprocket with the two dimples.

The only bit that I had to guess at was the tensioner - I didn't have a spring balance to set measure the belt deflection (as per the Haynes supplement) so I guessed the tension, based on how it felt before I took it apart. Do you reckon that's close enough?! - or is there an easier way?

Anyway, thanks again, not many jobs left until it'll be off for MoT....

[SimonR]

If you can get the correct gasket, it has got to be the best way forward... Might be worth a double check if you have not done so already Simon, that the oil feed lines up with the old round hole type gasket on the block & the head, just for my education if nothing else

Haha - turns out that Rimmer brothers have what appears to be the correct gasket set in their sale at the moment: Here. I've checked and the picture is of exactly the item for sale so it should be fine. There's one on its way to me as we speak.

FYI, the Turbo HG seems to have a round hole gasket, too - Rimmers have got this set on sale at the moment as well, Here. £71.94 is a better price than £97.33 but it's still a bloody expensive gasket set!! - Might be of use to someone.

You also asked how the round hole lines up on the head and block - I'm not quite sure what you were asking, if you meant: 'do the round holes in head, gasket and block line up' then judging by the gasket that came off the answer is yes. In the case of the elongated hole gasket, the round hole sits at one end of the elongated apperture.

I'll take a picture if you'd like to see the relative sizes!!

Cheers for now...

[G Force]

One last question if I may - is it acceptable to use a headgasket with an oval oil feed hole on a round-feed hole engine? I've bought two headgaskets now that claimed to be suitable for HB onwards engines and both have the oval hole in the headgasket. I've checked and there's plenty of room on the head and block but I guess if that area is prone to leakage I might be better off looking for the correct gasket....

Hi SimonR

If you can get the correct gasket, it has got to be the best way forward. I actually never came across a 2.0l Maestro Montego without an oval hole gasket so this must have been late in production. Might be worth a double check if you have not done so already Simon, that the oil feed lines up with the old round hole type gasket on the block & the head, just for my education if nothing else

The oil feed gallery through the gasket is a common leakage area, so sourcing of the correct gasket is important. Perhaps the Maestro turbo head gasket could be worth checking out to see if that has a round hole, as that would possibly have used the last generation of 2.0l engine? When the oil leak first became an issue early on in production, one of the first service fixes was to use the monty "HB on" oval hole turbo gasket across the range.

I would only use the oval hole gasket as a last resort if the correct one is not available.

Regards, Gary

[SimonR]

Update: Although I'm finding it difficult to find time to get out into the garage at the moment due to other commitments, I've so far had the time to clean both manifolds and assemble them onto the head.

I ended up using the inlet manifold from my spare engine as it was a lot cleaner and lower-mileage than the original, I also hope that the replacement fuel pressure regulator might cure the over-fuelling problem I was previously experiencing.

I should hopefully get time within the next week to stick the head back on and see if everything's working as it should. Obviously I'll be taking a copy of the instructions above with me.

Having also read Gary's thread elsewhere on setting up an O-Series engine, I'll also make the time to remove the throttle body and give it a thorough clean out before I re-fit it to the car.

Once that's done, I think the only things between me and a working Maestro are a few very small jobs (such as filling the gearbox with oil, fitting a plastic front wheel arch liner and securing a hubnut) and the gearbox linkage... Yay!

One last question if I may - is it acceptable to use a headgasket with an oval oil feed hole on a round-feed hole engine? I've bought two headgaskets now that claimed to be suitable for HB onwards engines and both have the oval hole in the headgasket. I've checked and there's plenty of room on the head and block but I guess if that area is prone to leakage I might be better off looking for the correct gasket....

[G Force]

Thats quite interesting, thanks roperman.

Freight Rover & Leyland Daf often had different views on technical procedures with the various units they used from the Rover parts bin, such as the O2 engine, the MDI diesel, LT77 gearbox (SD1) and V8 Engine.

I think either bolt torque down order & settings will do just fine, but I think I prefer the Leyland Daf torque setting procedure to the earlier rover setting as it does not involve slackening the bolts, and turning bolts through a number of degrees after initial torque value may help prevent the typical oil leak around the oil feed on the Rover version.

One possible explaination for the extra torque on the LDV is probably because they suffered many HGF due to overheating around No.4 cylinder on the O series. This is mainly due to the engine being mounted longditudally making No.4 cyl tight up against the bulkhead well out of the cool air flow.

This is out of the LDV service manual for the O2 Commercial if its any use to anyone. Same engine afaik. Think the manual is dated about 2001 so I doubt its been revised since. Rover may have specified differently but don't have anything else with the O series in it.

[G Force]

Thanks guys, but you give me too much credit. Like countrydude comments it is mainly just good common sense and best practice really.

It would be better if someone could confirm if there was any revisions to the torque procedure in later years, post gary so to speak. Having said that I used this method all the time with no problems.

Regards, Gary

[countrydude]

How to master a unicycle? In fairness that was a good write up. Having recently done the hg of my L series that was a mirror of all I have recently done!
I was surprised to find the valves proud of the head on the o series, Simon's was the first O series I have worked on.

[G51 NAV]

Is there absolutely nothing which modern science can do to like scan his brain to make all his knowledge instantly available whenever it is needed? There just doesn't appear to be anything he doesn't know.

What a comprehensive reply, Gary - I have copied this to FAQs for future reference!