[Rovernet] 1970 3500S NAADA original

Wed Nov 6 15:28:40 EST 2013

Hi Patrick,

First off, I've worked on the DeDion, I don't think it's excessively heavy.
Certainly compared with a live axle. The Rover version has some advantages
over the Lancia DeDion in that it had the telescoping tube instead of
sliding splines on the half axles. The splines would bind under load
causing the suspension to lock up slightly then let go of a sudden (rather
like Triumph's semi elliptic IRS on the Spitfire/GT6/Herald/Vitesse
chassis).

Secondly, the front suspension had some virtues, and some downfalls,
The pros were a super rigid platform to mount the suspension to, McPhersons
are attached to a weak part of a monocoque chassis. It's quite common for
people to add bars across the engine bay to further stiffen the towers. The
design also allows for much further wheel travel than a McPherson or
conventional wishbone suspension, with the added advantage of a more
controlled variation in spring load. Both help with comfort on rougher
roads.
The Cons are that because the lower wishbone is pivoted inboard of the top
at a different angle under deflection you do get so changes in both camber
and caster angles. This is more pronounced on the 3500 as the lower
wishbones are shorter as they had to widen the engine bay to accept the V8.

The V8. Bear in mind that Rover was more of a luxury car maker than a fast
car maker. The V8 was more about refinement to them than ultimate
performance. Having said that the chassis can easily handle more power,
look at the larger engined versions folks in Oz and NZ have produced, I
know of at least one with a 4.2Lt Range Rover V8.
The SU carbs most likely do limit performance in standard form, so as
others have mentioned, change the carbs, go for a louder cam too. The
engine has one of the best tuning support networks out there, At this point
in our cars life its about what you want from a car and not how it was
built. We happen to have chosen a vehicle as our canvas. Some go for
originality, some go for something more unique.

I'm sorry that you had a poor experience with yours, but do remember you're
posting on a Rover forum. Folks here love the cars, so yes we have rose
tinted specs on a lot of the time. But that goes with the territory. I'm
sure if one of us posted something on a Jenson forum complaining about Yank
V8's being heavy and crude (I wouldn't, because I I wouldn't want to upset
strangers, I'm not a troll either) Jensen owners wouldn't take to kindly
either.

May rather long winded two pennith worth.

Cheers,

Steven

On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 3:03 PM, <phing at videotron.ca> wrote:

> Subjective ,Moi??
> As a long time Rover nut I bought my P6 in anticipation , I sold it with
> relief
> My comments are based on my " experience with other comparable cars of the
> era" '
> Have you ever stripped out the complete P6 rear suspension ?? It IS Heavy
> and is  not a  particularly clever piece of engineering  ;
> The front suspension IS complex , most people managed with a Macpherson
> strut or double wishbones  rather than a mass of ironmongery to transfer
> the loads into the bulk head
> Like it or not the NASA v8 engine IS gutless, this combined with the
> incredible weight of the P6  does not produce a performance car
> The P6B was the last hurrah of a long serving team of ROVER engineers ,
>  the Leyland bean counters weren't let loose until the SDI was born .
> Volvo and Mercedes and others  were selling ship loads of well built, safe
> , reliable cars into the NA market at the same time as Rover were shipping
> unsold P6Bs back to Solihull .
> Patrick
> From: Alan Francis
> Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 2:18 PM
> To: Rovernet
> Subject: [Rovernet] 1970 3500S NAADA original
>
>
> Any assessment of the car, 50 years on, is always going to have the benefit
> and influence of hindsight. Whilst your comments may have a basis in fact
> some are clearly an expression of opinion rather than fact and phrases such
> as "the rear end was heavy" "the V8 was gutless" "a complex front
> suspension" are surely subjective and dependent on your experience of other
> cars it is being compared with.
>
> The car was not perfect, no car ever is, it's level of imperfection is
> dependent on the expectations of the observer, a gutless V8 to you was a
> breath of fresh air to UK motorists used to a 4 cylinder motor in the car.
> This gutless V8 in Mk 1 form had a better 0-60 figure than a 3.4 Mk 2 Jag
> and only a second slower than a 3.8 which had another 50 bhp on tap...so by
> no stretch of the imagination could it be described as sluggish in
> comparison with other similar saloons.
>
>
> I agree the Ambla and Formica are somewhat 'tacky' but of course by the
> time it was in 3500S guise it was no longer a Rover it was a British
> Leyland product carrying all the baggage that being a member of that family
> entailed, but you did get electric windows, power steering and an air-con
> option when such things were still some way off in the UK. Whilst it may
> not of been, with hindsight  'right' for the US market it was a genuine
> attempt to meet the expectations of the US buyer and in general did
> receive, intitially good reviews from the US motoring press in 4 cyl form,
> unfortunately by the time the 3500s arrived the pitfalls of trying to
> service the motoring needs and servicing requirements of a country
> thousands of miles across had taken their toll on Rovers reputation.
>
> It's important you don't forget it was, compared to other automobiles on US
> highways at the time safe, very safe, and it cost many US lives to achieve
> the safety standards now regarded as the norm. Other cars may have had less
> complicated brakes and suspension, simpler rear brakes and a livelier
> V8............not much consolation as it folds up around you in a hard
> shunt and the steering column heads ever closer to your chest because it
> had a non complex front suspension with a rack and pinion mounted low
> down at the front.
>
> In the UK Ford still hadn't fitted a brake fluid level warning light in the
> 1970's and of course the main cause of auto fires in the sixties wasn't
> actually fuel, it was brake fluid pouring all over a hot manifold in a
> shunt, something Rover also tried to prevent with a flexible plastic
> reservoir.
>
> Personally I love em , warts an all, and accept some of the criticism
> levied, but I do think you have chosen to highlight the 'faults' whilst
> ignoring the positive aspects of the car, or perhaps you genuinely believe
> there were none?
>
> That being the case I'm happy to take any NADA 3500's anyone is looking to
> off-load........well they are rubbish aren't they. ;) ;)
>
> Best Regards
>
> Alan Francis (partviking)
>
> On Tuesday, November 5, 2013, wrote:
>
>  Hi
>> I hate to tell you  but this car is priced properly ,any P6B is not worth
>> more. A  NADA P6B cured me of a life long addiction to Rovers. These cars
>> were hopelessly, stupidly,  over engineered  . The engine bay was
>> supposedly designed for a gas turbine !! resulting in a complex front
>> suspension , the rear end De dion was a heavy  rust prone joke [ Triumph
>> built a proper IRS ] The V8 was gutless even after removing the AED and
>> smog stuff , the brakes were a pig to overhaul , the rear brakes made an E
>> type Jaguar's accessibility  look good , Rover were too cheap to either
>> find a decent 5 speed ,manual or a modern auto box , instead they
>> persisted
>> with that dreadful Borg Warner box. . Build quality was atrocious , the
>> interior used plastic seats and wood trim  instead of leather and tree
>> wood
>>  etc . The contemporary Triumph 6 cylinder sedan was a better car
>> The P6B was a gas guzzling disappointment .
>> I was happy to swap it for another British car with a V8, excellent
>> automatic transmission and A/C a Jensen interceptor  which uses similar
>> amounts of fuel but is a lot more fun
>> Cheers Patrick
>>
>> -----Original Message----- From: GeffMcCarthy
>> Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 1:06 PM
>> To: 'Rovernet'
>> Subject: Re: [Rovernet] 1970 3500S NAADA original
>>
>> PPS...!  My car is 433000340A, this one is 1552A, and James Taylor's book
>> shows that 2043 Federal 3500S were produced. I assume these went to both
>> USA
>> and Canada.
>> It is sad that our beloved Rovers do not command higher prices...
>>
>> AvMedSafe
>> Geoffrey W. McCarthy MD MBA DipAvMed
>> 677 NW Melinda Ave Portland OR USA 97210
>> 503-241-8468(h) 503-799-3809 (mobile)
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Rovernet [mailto:rovernet-bounces at rovernet.org] On Behalf Of Tom
>> Rymes
>> Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 7:10 AM
>> To: Rovernet
>> Subject: Re: [Rovernet] 1970 3500S NAADA original
>>
>>  On Nov 5, 2013, at 9:37 AM, "Ben Saunders" <bsaunders at firstva.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Here is the link to a 1970 Rover 3500S NADA that seems to be very
>>> original and in fantastic condition.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Here's a better link, Ben's was broken:
>>
>> http://cgi.ebay.com/141105430488
>>
>> Tom
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Rovernet mailing list
>> Rovernet at rovernet.org
>> http://rovernet.org/mailman/listinfo/rovernet_rovernet.org
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Rovernet mailing list
>> Rovernet at rovernet.org
>> http://rovernet.org/mailman/listinfo/rovernet_rovernet.org
>>
>>
>> -----
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 2013.0.3426 / Virus Database: 3222/6810 - Release Date: 11/05/13
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
>> Name: Jensen Interceptor Mk II 011.jpg
>> Type: image/jpeg
>> Size: 644575 bytes
>> Desc: not available
>> URL: <http://rovernet.org/pipermail/rovernet_rovernet.
>> org/attachments/20131105/15cbbbee/attachment.jpg>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Rovernet mailing list
>> Rovernet at rovernet.org
>> http://rovernet.org/mailman/listinfo/rovernet_rovernet.org
>>
>>  -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://rovernet.org/pipermail/rovernet_rovernet.
> org/attachments/20131106/89119cb8/attachment.html>
> _______________________________________________
> Rovernet mailing list
> Rovernet at rovernet.org
> http://rovernet.org/mailman/listinfo/rovernet_rovernet.org
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2013.0.3426 / Virus Database: 3222/6813 - Release Date: 11/06/13
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rovernet mailing list
> Rovernet at rovernet.org
> http://rovernet.org/mailman/listinfo/rovernet_rovernet.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rovernet.org/pipermail/rovernet_rovernet.org/attachments/20131106/9284cc99/attachment.html>