MG-Rover.org Forums banner
1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,190 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
OK, so the OH came home the other day and pulled into the driveway with steam erupting out of the back. Not good, she thinks, having experienced two previous HGFs. "I think the HG may have gone" she said when she phoned me. Fingers crossed, maybe just the expansion tank cap?

So it went into the TF hospital on the back of a truck on Saturday morning. The garage rang back a few hours later and said "It may be a faulty cap". Fingers still crossed.

Come Monday and the bad news arrived. It looks like the second HGF has happened. The first was at 35,000km (22,000mi) and 15 months ago. Now the TF has done 55,000km (34,000mi) and it looks like it has gone again. They still have to remove the head and find out why it failed.

Had a talk with the mechanic today and discussed the Landrover HG. He said that it was "very different" compared with the MGR version, but did not know much about it. Does anyone know just how different it is?

So has anyone who has had an HGF changed to the Landrover version, and if so do you think that it s a good move or not. Has LR got it right when MGR could not?

Also, has NAG redesigned the HG again and have they got it right perhaps? (the last is tongue-in-cheek, a bit, as it will come out in the wash in time, hopefully).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,519 Posts
can only talk from recent experiences and a mechanic i trust and is very well respected within the MG community - He beleives that it will always be a potential weak spot i nthe car but feels that the Mk3 factory gasket has proved to be very reliable and fits these over the LR ones - reckons they perform similarly but more work gettng the LR one to fit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
42,093 Posts
when i had a potential HGF, i changed mine for teh LR gasket, IIRC, i was one fo the first really on here to get it done. its been a fair few thousand miles since and although its never skipped a beat since, its also far too early to say whether it is as brilliant as previously hoped.
there was a fairly indepth thread about teh LR gasket against the other options available a while back, a search on the forum should find it.

whethger i would go for teh LR or the new mkIII gasket if i had the option again, i think i would still go for the LR one. it is tried and tested on teh freelander, and IIRC, doing the job for the LR one isnt any more intense than changing it for a different type.

Best Auto Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,190 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Worth noting the extra work to fit the Landy HG is the requirement to fit the oil ladder too.
Thanks for the opinions so far, but has anyone got any definitive information on the subject? I have done a quick search and found one thread that is 20 pages long! It will take a while to get throught that.
http://forums.mg-rover.org/showthread.php?t=110090&highlight=Landrover

Also another discussion says that you DO NOT have to fit the new oil rail with the LR gasket.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
42,093 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
226 Posts
IIRC it actually says on the Landy packaging that the guarantee won't be valid unless the oil rail is fitted. Ergo I don't see a reason why PHYSICALLY it wouldn't fit (in that it does) but you would be wise to do this modification, as their research brought the pair to market together for a reason. :)

Our VVC Coupe has the Landy HG/Ladder, and i'm after the PRT thermostat kit too.
 

·
Registered
mgf
Joined
·
144 Posts
The land rover gasket is actually identical to an earlier gasket (made by Payen) designed to save cylinder heads that had lost some of their hardness e.g. had been skimmed from a previous hgf. If your cylinder liners are not standing the requisit height from the head this gasket will actually be worse than a standard one.
Now the standard line is that the oil ladder must be fitted, but, what you have to remember is that MG/Rover were by pressurised by Ford (Land Rover) to sort out the K series hgf issue and according to an insider Ford were just fobbed off with the MLS gasket and oil ladder.
Rover's solution to the problem was the PRT thermostat which Land Rover had fitted to their engines coming out of powertrain a year or so before the Rover.
If your head wasn't skimmed last time and didn't get badly overheated this I would go for the standard gasket and fit a low level coolant alarm.
If not it may be time to look for a good second hand head.
 

·
Never forgotten
Joined
·
8,633 Posts
I am not totally convinced on the thermostat theory, they state that the long cooling pipe run does not help either, if it were that simple, why do Freelanders suffer so many HGF's when the have a more conventional set up. (or the Rover 200/25 etc) Also as stated above, Landrover started fitting the PRT thermostat yet the gaskets still fail!

I did some reading on the Landrover forum, most people who use the new Landrover gasket don't bother with the oil rail and so far there have been no reported failures of the new gasket - but its early days yet
 

·
In the Garage
MG TF
Joined
·
33,680 Posts
I am not totally convinced on the thermostat theory, they state that the long cooling pipe run does not help either, if it were that simple, why do Freelanders suffer so many HGF's when the have a more conventional set up. (or the Rover 200/25 etc) Also as stated above, Landrover started fitting the PRT thermostat yet the gaskets still fail!
I personally think that has more to do this the k-series engine being unsuitable for the Freelander.
 

·
Never forgotten
Joined
·
8,633 Posts
You could be right there! The K series in the Freelander was surprisingly nippy but probably quite stressed and heavy on fuel. (I bought a 3 door one new and ran it for 27,000 miles with no HGF) The new Freelander 2 petrol engined option is a 3.2 litre, a tad larger than 1.8 litres!
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top