From fadushin@ecs.syr.edu Sat Apr 7 03:31:56 2001 Return-Path: Received: from mailroom.ecs.syr.edu (ecs.syr.edu [128.230.208.14]) by minbar.fourfold.org (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f377VuN29713 for ; Sat, 7 Apr 2001 03:31:56 -0400 Received: (from fadushin@localhost) by mailroom.ecs.syr.edu (8.10.2/8.10.2) id f376RZa20928 for fadushin@www.ovlr.org; Sat, 7 Apr 2001 02:27:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from syr.edu (syr.edu [128.230.1.49]) by mailroom.ecs.syr.edu (8.10.2/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f376RY820925 for ; Sat, 7 Apr 2001 02:27:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from works.team.net (IDENT:root@[216.35.192.58]) by syr.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id CAA18161 for ; Sat, 7 Apr 2001 02:27:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by works.team.net (8.10.1/8.10.1) id f375oQv09173 for lro-digest-gone; Sat, 7 Apr 2001 01:50:26 -0400 Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2001 01:50:26 -0400 Message-Id: <200104070550.f375oQv09173@works.team.net> From: owner-lro-digest@works.team.net (LRO Mailing List DIGEST * * * *) To: lro-digest@works.team.net Subject: LRO Mailing List DIGEST * * * * V1 #318 Reply-To: lro-digest@works.team.net Sender: owner-lro-digest@works.team.net Errors-To: owner-lro-digest@works.team.net Precedence: bulk X-Subscriptions: http://land-rover.team.net/majorcool/cgi-bin/majorcool.cgi LRO Mailing List DIGEST * * * * Saturday, April 7 2001 Volume 01 : Number 318 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 10:22:45 -1000 From: "Peter Ogilvie" Subject: Re: LRO: Clutch and Brakes Clutch connects to bottom outlet, the brake to the outlet on the side. It goes on a fitting bolted to the top of the brake tower with the cannister hanging inside toward the engine. That's the way it is on my '66 109. Hope that helps, ask if there is anything else you need. Yeah I know, this rover stuff can get boring!! Aloha Peter >From: Mark Pilkington >Sorry to be a bore, but does anyone have a schematic of the way to assemble >a clutch master cylinder and a brake master cylinder for a single circuit >non-servo 1967 SWB Landrover. It has a single round reservoir with two >chambers in it for the fluid. Amazingly, I took the "brake" master out of >the clutch master position and am now trying to put it back the way it >should be. >Thanks, >Mark Pilkington > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: 6 Apr 2001 13:29:55 PDT From: Casey McMullen Subject: Re: LRO: re: power > Talking about engine swaps, wouldn't a little nuclear reactor that you only > had to fill up once, and drive forever, be a dandy source of power for the > old series. Eliminate the problem of high fuel consumption and pollution of > the Petrol engines. How about a "Mr. Fusion" like the Doc has rigged up on the DeLorean at the end of "Back To The Future," just dump in a little household trash and away you go! Casey ____________________________________________________________________ Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.amexmail.com/?A=1 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 13:31:17 -0700 From: "Rich Williams II" Subject: LRO: ROVER SIGHTING This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_00FB_01C0BE9D.DC33D060 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable So I break out of the office for a quick bite of lunch and there was a = fantastic sight. =20 Parked in an office parking lot (around 11:30am) in Bellevue, Washington = USA was a white Series IIa 109 Station Wagon. The whole thing was = white; sun shield, body, galvy. Black full length roof rack with = ladder, old Warn winch on a black front bumper with black bumperettes, = FWH, overdrive (of course I pulled over and looked around for a minute = or two). Looks like it spent some time on the east coast as it had an = Appalachian Mountain Club sticker in a back window. Oh, it also had a = rear window wiper unit. Was that a factory option? Anyway, it looked like a great truck. Just makes me want to get my 109 = on the road that much faster. Sigh...... So does this ring a bell with anyone out there? I'd like to know if = this owner is local or not - it did have Washington plates. Rich=20 SII 109 SW - ------=_NextPart_000_00FB_01C0BE9D.DC33D060 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
So I break out of the office for a quick bite of lunch and there = was a=20 fantastic sight. 
 
Parked in an office parking lot (around 11:30am) in Bellevue, = Washington=20 USA was a white Series IIa 109 Station Wagon.  The whole thing was = white;=20 sun shield, body, galvy.  Black full length roof rack with ladder, = old Warn=20 winch on a black front bumper with black bumperettes, FWH, overdrive (of = course=20 I pulled over and looked around for a minute or two).  Looks like = it spent=20 some time on the east coast as it had an Appalachian Mountain Club = sticker in a=20 back window.  Oh, it also had a rear window wiper unit.  Was = that a=20 factory option?
 
Anyway, it looked like a great truck.  Just makes me want to = get my=20 109 on the road that much faster. Sigh......
 
So does this ring a bell with anyone out there?  I'd like to = know if=20 this owner is local or not - it did have Washington plates.
 
Rich
SII 109 SW
- ------=_NextPart_000_00FB_01C0BE9D.DC33D060-- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 14:38:39 -0600 From: Rick Grant Subject: Re: LRO: Re: Frank Elson, The Quest for Tunesmiths At 10:05 06/04/01 -1000, Peter Ogilvie, wroteWas there a guy named Nanker Phelg (did his parents hate him) or are these the last names of two people?? Peter, check out this web site. . . http://www.btinternet.com/~james_phelge/phelgeworld.htm Rick Grant 1959 Series II "88" VORIZO Rick Grant Communications Media and Crisis Management Calgary Ottawa www.rickgrant.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 16:46:41 -0400 From: William L Leacock Subject: LRO: Shifting >Funny, but if I try and go from 1 to 2 with out double clutching I get a horrendous grinding. Pete It is easy to upshift without double de clutching, indeed it is easy to upshift without single de clutching too! I think the mistake most "novices" make when shifting in a LR is to try and change too quickly, it is difficult for me to describe how I shift gear, after thirty years it is an "automatic" action. However I think that a slight pause whilst in between gears helps. The alternative is to change 'very" quickly Regards from Western New York State Bill Leacock. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 16:51:26 EDT From: NADdMD@aol.com Subject: Re: LRO: Vehicle identification needed - --part1_103.167c523.27ff864e_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 4/6/01 2:10:38 PM Eastern Daylight Time, john.cranfield@ns.sympatico.ca writes: > The square shape of the rear step says it is a series 2 > so 58 to 62. > I would argue later than that. My reasoning: The license plate light. I believe that was added with the early IIa's. Before that, I thought they used the bottom half of the tailight (clear) to illuminate the plate. Anybody know for sure? Nate - --part1_103.167c523.27ff864e_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 4/6/01 2:10:38 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
john.cranfield@ns.sympatico.ca writes:


The square shape of the rear step says it is a series 2
so 58 to 62.


I would argue later than that.  My reasoning:  The license plate light.  I
believe that was added with the early IIa's.  Before that, I thought they
used the bottom half of the tailight (clear) to illuminate the plate.  
Anybody know for sure?

Nate - --part1_103.167c523.27ff864e_boundary-- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 14:04:02 -0700 From: Mark Pilkington Subject: Re: LRO: Clutch and Brakes Really I need to see a picture of all the internal pistons and seals because I have forgotten how they came apart AND the brake master was in the place of the clutch master and all the pipes are F----d up. A picture of someone's masters in-situ and a diagram of the guts, would be a dream come true. Thanks. Mark Peter Ogilvie wrote: > Clutch connects to bottom outlet, the brake to the outlet on the side. It > goes on a fitting bolted to the top of the brake tower with the cannister > hanging inside toward the engine. That's the way it is on my '66 109. Hope > that helps, ask if there is anything else you need. > > Yeah I know, this rover stuff can get boring!! > > Aloha > Peter > > >From: Mark Pilkington > >Sorry to be a bore, but does anyone have a schematic of the way to assemble > >a clutch master cylinder and a brake master cylinder for a single circuit > >non-servo 1967 SWB Landrover. It has a single round reservoir with two > >chambers in it for the fluid. Amazingly, I took the "brake" master out of > >the clutch master position and am now trying to put it back the way it > >should be. > >Thanks, > >Mark Pilkington > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 14:06:16 -0700 From: "Faure, Marin" Subject: LRO: Re: Power Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 07:23:00 -0700 From: SJH Subject: LRO: Re: Power >Hey Marin: Dude, lighten up. Take a day off. Relax and envision a clear blue ocean, or some other calm, serene scene. I can't see them through all the "yutes" blocking the view :-) >As to using the digest thanks for your suggestions (as well as your assumption that my software is inferior to yours)... Not inferior, just different perhaps. At work, I use software supplied by Boeing, which in its infinite wisdom has embraced the archaic PC world wholeheartedly (I was one of the last Mac users in the company, but alas, that's all over now). So I would be hard pressed to claim the software I use here is superior (our engineers get the superior stuff, not us folks down here at the coal face). >but please keep in mind that not everyone is like you (!).... Probably a good thing, eh? >and that some of us prefer to participate real time, not in digest mode. But that still shouldn't make a difference. Look at the subject line and if it ain't interesting to you, ditch it. Three seconds, maybe less. Not a big drag on your schedule, I shouldn't think. But it appears you work for a law firm unless I'm misreading your address, so I suppose even three seconds that aren't billable to somebody is a major no-no......:-) ___________________________ C. Marin Faure (original owner) 1973 Land Rover Series III-88 1991 Range Rover Vogue SE Seattle ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 17:09:02 EDT From: Lemurstew@aol.com Subject: LRO: Vehicle ID on Vietnam Truck The truck in the photo is post 1959 and before 1965. While it is true that it has a square rear step, it is not the SII rear step. The SII rear step is about 18 inches long. Instead this is a SII side step that has been attached to a later SIIA/SIII rear (half-round style) step bracket. The lights are early lucas (probably 3 inchers) They appear an odd color because they are faded by the sun. The rear door latch with its straight internal handle gives the truck away as pre 65. I would say it is a early SIIA probably a 1962 that has a side step off a SII fitted to its original step bracket. . . - -Regards - -Ike Goss ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 14:15:07 -0700 From: "Rich Williams II" Subject: Re: LRO: Vehicle identification needed This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_003B_01C0BEA3.FBD59880 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable There is definitely a license plate light on my 1960 109. And the tail = lights look the same. I have the image here on my computer but fear the = wrath of the list should I have attached it to this email so I didn't - = just take my word for it. =20 - ----- Original Message -----=20 From: NADdMD@aol.com=20 To: lro@works.team.net=20 Sent: Friday, April 06, 2001 1:51 PM Subject: Re: LRO: Vehicle identification needed In a message dated 4/6/01 2:10:38 PM Eastern Daylight Time,=20 john.cranfield@ns.sympatico.ca writes:=20 The square shape of the rear step says it is a series 2=20 so 58 to 62.=20 I would argue later than that. My reasoning: The license plate = light. I=20 believe that was added with the early IIa's. Before that, I thought = they=20 used the bottom half of the tailight (clear) to illuminate the plate. = =20 Anybody know for sure?=20 Nate=20 - ------=_NextPart_000_003B_01C0BEA3.FBD59880 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
There is definitely a license plate light on my 1960 = 109.  And=20 the tail lights look the same.  I have the image here on my = computer but=20 fear the wrath of the list should I have attached it to this email so I = didn't -=20 just take my word for it. 
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 NADdMD@aol.com
Sent: Friday, April 06, 2001 = 1:51=20 PM
Subject: Re: LRO: Vehicle = identification=20 needed

In a = message dated=20 4/6/01 2:10:38 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
john.cranfield@ns.sympatic= o.ca=20 writes:


The square shape of the rear step says it is a series 2 =
so=20 58 to 62.


I would argue later than that. =  My=20 reasoning:  The license plate light.  I
believe that was = added=20 with the early IIa's.  Before that, I thought they
used the = bottom=20 half of the tailight (clear) to illuminate the plate.   =
Anybody know=20 for sure?

Nate - ------=_NextPart_000_003B_01C0BEA3.FBD59880-- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 14:16:16 -0700 From: "Faure, Marin" Subject: LRO: Re: Conversions Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 12:35:34 EDT From: Lemurstew@aol.com Subject: LRO: Conversions >I think its pretty funny that there are those folks on the list who say conversions have no place in Land Rover History. Classic head in ass syndrome. For some classic head-in-ass syndrome, take a look in the mirror. The conversation hasn't been about the non-authenticity of factory "conversions," it's been about the non-authenticity of owner-conversions. Of course factories have been trying out different engines and drive-trains over the years. Some manufacturers like Morgan have NEVER made their own engines, but no one here is suggesting that a Morgan Plus-8 with the Rover V-8 engine isn't a Morgan. The issue under discussion is whether or not factory-manufactured vehicles, regardless of what engines or whose engines they used, still qualify to be considered examples of that make after an owner has swapped the engine and drive train and possibly other major components for units never used or installed by the factory. Look before you leap next time. ___________________________ C. Marin Faure (original owner) 1973 Land Rover Series III-88 1991 Range Rover Vogue SE Seattle ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 16:18:30 -0400 From: "A. P. \"Sandy\" Grice" Subject: LRO: Nukes "Peter Ogilvie" wrote: >Talking about engine swaps, wouldn't a little nuclear reactor that you only >had to fill up once, and drive forever, be a dandy source of power for the >old series. Eliminate the problem of high fuel consumption and pollution of >the Petrol engines. Not in our club...ROAV's insurance policy (which is several dozen pages long) specifically mentions nuclear-powered vehicles (absolute truth...no lie!) and that we are no covered if they, umm, *overheat*.... Cheers *----jeep may be famous, LAND-ROVER is Legendary----* | | | A. P. ("Sandy") Grice | | Rover Owners' Association of Virginia, Ltd. | | 1633 Melrose Pkwy., Norfolk, VA 23508-1730 | |(O)757-622-7054, (H)757-423-4898, FAX 757-622-7056 | | www.roav.org | | (original owner) (pre-production) | *----1972 Series III------1996 Discovery SE-7(m)----* ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 18:24:27 -0300 From: john.cranfield@ns.sympatico.ca (John Cranfield) Subject: Re: LRO: Vehicle identification needed Judging from the fact some of the lenses don't even exist I wouldn't want to use lenses as an age marker. John and Muddy Alan Richer/CAM/Lotus wrote: > > Re: Step: > > Don;t want to argue with you John (I've never even SEEN a Series II step), > but the taillights on that beast don't look like Sparto lights or even > earlier Lucas ones. The step may be S.II, but opinion on the IIa taillight > lenses? > > ajr ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 18:32:03 -0300 From: john.cranfield@ns.sympatico.ca (John Cranfield) Subject: Re: LRO: re: power Peter wrote < Your fear of nuclear power is irrational given the Subject: Re: LRO: Re: Re: The Quest for Verisimilitude In message , Alan Richer/CAM/Lotus writes > >Y'know, Frank, the vision of you lot staggering about the countryside in a >GPO 90 singing Christmas carols and delivering mail is going to make me >giggle for the next week or so... > Alan, you didn't see Frank dancing on the table at the ARC National a couple of years ago. That image will stay with me for a while 8). - --- Andy Smith 1965 ser2a V8 swb road/ccvt.1971 ser2a 2.25p swb road. 1974 ser3 swb diesel 80" coil sprung Chassis. Hybrid 100" Perkins Tamworth Staffs ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 17:25:22 -0400 From: William L Leacock Subject: LRO: Webber Carb question. I have just recieved a Webber Carb, model 341CEV which is significantly different to the Webber carb I purchased 8 or 9 years ago. It came with no instructions. Thge throttle butterfly is mounted in a separate casting which is fixed to the base of the carb by a couple of screws. In this separate base is the obviuos connection for the distibutor vacuum supply. There are two additional - approx. 1/4" dia - pipes fitted to the base casting. Anyone any idea what these are used for? If I blow into one, the air exits the other one, if I block one off with a finger and suck on the other I can feel the suction at my finger. It appears to me that these pipes are of no use. Seems odd to fit a couple of pipes that serve no function, unless the base is used on another carb variant that has some use for them. Regards from Western New York State Bill Leacock. 21 years old ( for the 34th time!) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 14:30:39 -0700 From: Paul Quin Subject: RE: LRO: Vehicle identification needed FWIW, my early '61 SII has the separate license plate light. Paul in Victoria. I would argue later than that. My reasoning: The license plate light. I believe that was added with the early IIa's. Before that, I thought they used the bottom half of the tailight (clear) to illuminate the plate. Anybody know for sure? Nate ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 18:31:45 -0300 From: rosvall@ns.sympatico.ca (Peter Rosvall) Subject: LRO: RE: Re: LRO Mailing List DIGEST * * * * V1 #313 Does anyone have the URL? Peter Rosvall Wolfville, Nova Scotia > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-lro@Works.Team.Net [mailto:owner-lro@Works.Team.Net]On > Behalf Of Wise Owl > Sent: Friday, April 06, 2001 2:59 PM > To: lro-digest@Works.Team.Net > Subject: LRO: Re: LRO Mailing List DIGEST * * * * V1 #313 > > > > > > >Seriously, get some ally-backed insulation and use that - Dynamat's too > >damn expensive! > > > > ajr > > > There is a cheap, perfect copy of Dynamat sold through Mcmaster-Carr. It > appears to be exactly the same, but without the Dynamat logo. > Sells for $12 > a sheet. They call it "High temp accoustic mastic"or something. It is on > there web page under acoustics or sound, etc. > > 73, Chris > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 18:41:54 -0300 From: john.cranfield@ns.sympatico.ca (John Cranfield) Subject: Re: LRO: Vehicle identification needed Series 2 did use a seperate plate lamp John and Muddy verified by Bruce who is looking over my shoulder as I type. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 18:46:24 -0300 From: john.cranfield@ns.sympatico.ca (John Cranfield) Subject: Re: LRO: Vehicle ID on Vietnam Truck Ike, there were two rear steps available for the series 2 One as you say was longer almost the width of the door but this couldn't be used with a hitch. When a hitch was fitted the short version was used, John and Muddy Lemurstew@aol.com wrote: > > The truck in the photo is post 1959 and before 1965. While it is true that > it has a square rear step, it is not the SII rear step. The SII rear step is > about 18 inches long. Instead this is a SII side step that has been attached > to a later SIIA/SIII rear (half-round style) step bracket. The lights are > early lucas (probably 3 inchers) They appear an odd color because they are > faded by the sun. The rear door latch with its straight internal handle > gives the truck away as pre 65. I would say it is a early SIIA probably a > 1962 that has a side step off a SII fitted to its original step bracket. . . > -Regards > -Ike Goss ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 15:52:28 -0600 From: "Kirk Hillman" Subject: LRO: Re: Webber Carb question. Bill, My carb came like that too. I was told it was for multiple ports, whatever that means. The solution to the problem was that the unused tubes were supposed to be plugged from the factory but they can't do that without knowing the application. I hope someone else out there has a better idea. I would like to know as well. Kirk ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 16:05:56 -0600 From: Ivan Van Laningham Subject: Re: LRO: Vehicle identification needed Hi All-- Rich Williams wrote: > There is definitely a license plate light on my 1960 109. And the tail lights look the same. I have the image here on my computer but fear the wrath of the list should I have > attached it to this email so I didn't - just take my word for it. Send it to me; I can post it on my webserver for everyone's delectation. Thanks, Ivan - ---------------------------------------------- Ivan Van Laningham Symantec http://www.pauahtun.org http://www.foretec.com/python/workshops/1998-11/proceedings.html Army Signal Corps: Cu Chi, Class of '70 Author: Teach Yourself Python in 24 Hours ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 18:33:07 -0400 From: Keith Tanner Subject: Re: LRO: Shifting >It is easy to upshift without double de clutching, indeed it is easy to >upshift without single de clutching too! I was able to take my SIIa for a spin around the block without the clutch, shifting both up and down. It's possible. It was actually the first time I'd driven a non-synchro tranny but it all went easily enough. Keith ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 18:47:49 -0400 From: Keith Tanner Subject: Re: LRO: Clutch and Brakes Oh, I can do part of that. in situ: http://keith.miata.net/landy/images/brake_reservoir1.jpg (you can see part of the L-shaped bracket there) no diagram, but here's the view from the top: http://keith.miata.net/landy/images/brake_reservoir2.jpg a shot of the bottom: http://keith.miata.net/landy/images/inside_fluid_reservoir.jpg (there's an extra plug attached to the bottom of that exit because of my SIII clutch reservoir. Keith At 14:04 06/04/2001 -0700, Mark Pilkington wrote: >Really I need to see a picture of all the internal pistons and seals because I >have forgotten how they came apart AND the brake master was in the place >of the >clutch master and all the pipes are F----d up. A picture of someone's masters >in-situ and a diagram of the guts, would be a dream come true. >Thanks. >Mark > >Peter Ogilvie wrote: > > > Clutch connects to bottom outlet, the brake to the outlet on the side. It > > goes on a fitting bolted to the top of the brake tower with the cannister > > hanging inside toward the engine. That's the way it is on my '66 > 109. Hope > > that helps, ask if there is anything else you need. > > > > Yeah I know, this rover stuff can get boring!! > > > > Aloha > > Peter > > > > >From: Mark Pilkington > > >Sorry to be a bore, but does anyone have a schematic of the way to > assemble > > >a clutch master cylinder and a brake master cylinder for a single circuit > > >non-servo 1967 SWB Landrover. It has a single round reservoir with two > > >chambers in it for the fluid. Amazingly, I took the "brake" master out of > > >the clutch master position and am now trying to put it back the way it > > >should be. > > >Thanks, > > >Mark Pilkington > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 18:06:49 -0500 (CDT) From: David Scheidt Subject: Re: LRO: Shifting On Fri, 6 Apr 2001, Keith Tanner wrote: : :>It is easy to upshift without double de clutching, indeed it is easy to :>upshift without single de clutching too! : :I was able to take my SIIa for a spin around the block without the clutch, :shifting both up and down. It's possible. It was actually the first time :I'd driven a non-synchro tranny but it all went easily enough. I took my IIA for a spin around the mid-west without a clutch. I now carry spare clutch hydraulic bits, as Chicago rush hour traffic is much worse than awful without a clutch. - -- dscheidt@tumbolia.com Bipedalism is only a fad. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 18:14:22 -0400 From: "Jean-Leon Morin" Subject: LRO: Re: Re: The Land-Rover Bodied Bastard > > >After all, once I'm done, I'll be able to say that even with a simple body > left, I'll still have more rover in my ford than you have in that restored > beauty of yours. > > Let's see....You have a vehicle that has a Land Rover body but a different > engine, drivetrain, frame, etc., etc., etc. The other guy has a restored > stock Land Rover in perfect condition. But you claim your vehicle > is more a Land Rover than his. I'd love to know what you've been > smoking (or injecting) to come up with that logic, as it sounds like > something that could get me through my workday a hell of a lot easier. Marin, I am tiring of this debate. We are obviously not getting anywhere. I personally thought I might gain something by discussing this with you, but I am not gaining anything. You are right, I know that. Technically, of course you are right. You were right all along. We all know that. But life is not technical. Those who dwell on technicalities waste their lives. Life is color, not numbers. In the end, I know I am right, and that's all that matters to me. I have spent an enormous amount of time reading your replies in the last little while, but I regret it now, as I have not profited from them at all, other than reinforcing my desire to continue modifying rovers to suit my needs, instead of paying homage to a vehicle. Marin, I'm sorry if I have offended you in any way, didn't mean to do it. Your aggressive attacks on young people did get to me a bit, not because I feel singled out, but they reinforce the notion that I will have to prepare myself in order to deal with you when I enter the real workforce. I forgive you as you obviously have never come into contact with smart young people, and I feel sorry for you. It must be hell living when you think everything you do is to benefit a generation that is without value. I am now wondering if this whole debate thing was simply a contest, to see who would come out winning. To see if the restoration crowd would be able to shut up the kids and their damn new ideas. If you are so petty as to think the point of a debate is to crown a winner, if it takes this to make you feel better, you win. You won. You won the round, and you are winning the race at keeping your precious little Land-Rover hobby away from the kids. The real truth is, I'm twenty. This is my first Land-Rover, not my last. I will have many more. By trying to alienate all newcomers, you are assuring that the numbers of enthusiasts will dwindle. Junk trucks will stay in fields, as no one will want to rebuild them, because they think all Land-Rovers have to be bone stock. They will never have the chance to modify an old vehicle because they'll always have some old person telling them that by cutting up a rotted out old junk III, they are destroying history. They will tire of all this crap, and move on to other vehicles. And they will never get older and appreciate Land rovers long enough to restore one of them. J-L ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 18:38:34 -0700 (PDT) From: joe mulqueen Subject: LRO: re. soundproofing Hi David, I did the underside of my seatbox, tunnel (and even floorboards) as follows: 1. Remove all mentioned pieces from truck. 2. scrape off and degrease every bit of grease and oil. 3. Apply 1 complete (trimmed to fit) layer of dynamat type material to every available surface. 4. Apply several layers of carefully trimmed foil backed fiber blanket material. Seal all edges with aluminum adhesive tape. I am very happy with the decreased sound and the thermal heat up of the seatbox and floorboards is zilch. Try it! Joe Mulqueen '67 SIIA 109 SW Cotati, CA Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 10:12:40 +1000 From: David Pillekers Subject: LRO: Dynamat/sound proofing... G'day All, Recent discussions on sounds proofing caught my eye... Thoughts anyone???........... Regards, David. Melb, Australia __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 22:43:58 -0700 From: christian147@juno.com Subject: Re: LRO: Coil and Flasher On Fri, 6 Apr 2001 07:32:29 -0400 "Alan Richer/CAM/Lotus" writes: > > Neat (RPM curve dwell management electronically). > > WOnder what that would do interfaced to a typical mechanical system > like a > Rover though? > > ajr > > Well, The Toyota's were a mechanical system like the Rover, just dwell is set by a silicon chip not a cam profile. saves points from burning and makes rubbing block ware less bad. Chris hall ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 23:09:03 -0700 From: christian147@juno.com Subject: Re: LRO: Webber Carb question. Coolant to prevent carb icing? Chris hall ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 22:47:32 -0700 From: christian147@juno.com Subject: Re: LRO: Conversions The Honda Prackport is made in the Isuzu-Subrau plant in Illinois, with a French GM transmission. No wonder it is such a POS. Chris Hall On Fri, 6 Apr 2001 15:17:18 -0400 "Alan Richer/CAM/Lotus" writes: > > >iesels fitted to RR's by the > factory. > > You mean like the York and VM? > > Italian Diesel in a British car with a German automatic > transmission... > > This is a truly frightening concept. > > ajr > > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 15:38:58 -0600 From: "Coates, Clinton" Subject: LRO: Land Rover Conversions A few more conversions, mentioned by a friend of mine, with some of the more inflammitory bits removed ;-) and THAT is why I dont bother with most of the Rover mailing lists any more.. For someone who professes to a knowledge of rover hsitory, he seems to have entirely forgotten about things like the 81" military/rolls royce conversions, the Turner engieneering diesel conversions of the 50's and 60's, and the Tempo, Minerva, and Santana derivatives, all of which are, essentially conversions. (actually, you might want to point those items out to him, as the british motor history museum has an 81", a tempo, and a Minerva, and has been trying to get a mint turner diesel for years..I wonder if he considers THOSE butchered, or hot rods. how about the series 1 80" command cars, that were based on the (already rare) 80" station wagons...test him out, and see if he's ever heard of either. ( the 80" wagons actually had hand made bodies done by a coach builder NOT by rover... I haven't found out for sure if the 'mythical' s1 6x6's (built for/by the royal engineering corps) truly existed, or were actually later conversions based on the firefly chassis...again, they'd be worth mega$$$ is they were period conversions. As for the aussie models ( they're talking about the Nissan engined perentie 4x4, and 6x6 models) they are truly awesome. He also fails to take into acount that after 50 years, some of these trucks are way beyond restoration: the only alternative to scrapping them is re-engineering. Mine 'looked' ok, but was made from parts of a S1, S2, and S3 trucks, and I think I've identified at least 5, possibly 6 donor vehicles so far !! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 14:57:22 -0700 From: Paul Quin Subject: LRO: RE: Webber Carb question. Just a guess... Maybe it has a water heated choke and these pipes are the water inlet and outlet?? ¼ inch sounds a bit small though. Paul. -----Original Message----- From: William L Leacock [SMTP:roverbilly@juno.com] Sent: Friday, April 06, 2001 2:25 PM To: lro@land-rover.team.net Subject: LRO: Webber Carb question. I have just recieved a Webber Carb, model 341CEV which is significantly different to the Webber carb I purchased 8 or 9 years ago. It came with no instructions. Thge throttle butterfly is mounted in a separate casting which is fixed to the base of the carb by a couple of screws. In this separate base is the obviuos connection for the distibutor vacuum supply. There are two additional - approx. 1/4" dia - pipes fitted to the base casting. Anyone any idea what these are used for? If I blow into one, the air exits the other one, if I block one off with a finger and suck on the other I can feel the suction at my finger. It appears to me that these pipes are of no use. Seems odd to fit a couple of pipes that serve no function, unless the base is used on another carb variant that has some use for them. Regards from Western New York State ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2001 00:05:33 -0400 From: "Bill Fishel" Subject: LRO: Re: Nukes I wonder how thick the shielding would need to be? Mounted low enough it could probably be used as part of a good skid plate and to really lower the center of gravity. - ---------- > From: A. P. "Sandy" Grice > To: lro-digest@Works.Team.Net > Subject: LRO: Nukes > Date: Friday, April 06, 2001 4:18 PM > > "Peter Ogilvie" wrote: > > >Talking about engine swaps, wouldn't a little nuclear reactor that you only > >had to fill up once, and drive forever, be a dandy source of power for the > >old series. Eliminate the problem of high fuel consumption and pollution of > >the Petrol engines. > > Not in our club...ROAV's insurance policy (which is several dozen pages > long) specifically mentions nuclear-powered vehicles (absolute truth...no > lie!) and that we are no covered if they, umm, *overheat*.... > > Cheers > > *----jeep may be famous, LAND-ROVER is Legendary----* > | | > | A. P. ("Sandy") Grice | > | Rover Owners' Association of Virginia, Ltd. | > | 1633 Melrose Pkwy., Norfolk, VA 23508-1730 | > |(O)757-622-7054, (H)757-423-4898, FAX 757-622-7056 | > | www.roav.org | > | (original owner) (pre-production) | > *----1972 Series III------1996 Discovery SE-7(m)----* ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2001 06:11:02 +0200 From: Paul Oxley Subject: Re: LRO: Conversions Peter Ogilvie wrote: > > You left out the BMW 6 cylinder petrol engined Defenders of South African > manufacture plus a whole host of different diesels fitted to RR's by the > factory. I should mention that the 2.8i BMW engine is the official replacement for the Buick/Rover V8 in the Defender model. Although L-R still doesn't have a workshop manual for it (three, almost four years after it entered service they're still using photocopied BMW manuals). Looks like it'll be ditched when they get the Lincoln engines. Regards Paul Oxley AfricanAdrenalin.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 22:46:37 -0700 From: Michael Hatton Subject: Re: LRO: Re: Re: The Land-Rover Bodied Bastard J-L Marin did not win, he never won, he only belongs to this mailing list to read his own diatribes as truth.He and his type are the reason most of the shit that happens today does. As cynical as I maybe, I am aware of its destructiveness. He does bring up a good point tho, don't listen to anyone else's opinion! If I buy a Honda, put on over sized muffler crap, and supersized air wing things on it and decide to call it a "Land Rover" Then it damn well IS! If my friends say it is one too, all the more to me, if OVLR says it is one too even better! If I convince Land Rover UK that is, then Marin will have to say that I have a Land Rover too - bwahahahahahahah...hahahaha Michael "punk/fart" Hatton Jean-Leon Morin wrote: > > > > >After all, once I'm done, I'll be able to say that even with a simple > body > > left, I'll still have more rover in my ford than you have in that restored > > beauty of yours. > > > > Let's see....You have a vehicle that has a Land Rover body but a different > > engine, drivetrain, frame, etc., etc., etc. The other guy has a restored > > stock Land Rover in perfect condition. But you claim your vehicle > > is more a Land Rover than his. I'd love to know what you've been > > smoking (or injecting) to come up with that logic, as it sounds like > > something that could get me through my workday a hell of a lot easier. > > Marin, I am tiring of this debate. We are obviously not getting anywhere. I > personally thought I might gain something by discussing this with you, but I > am not gaining anything. You are right, I know that. Technically, of course > you are right. You were right all along. We all know that. > > But life is not technical. Those who dwell on technicalities waste their > lives. Life is color, not numbers. In the end, I know I am right, and that's > all that matters to me. I have spent an enormous amount of time reading your > replies in the last little while, but I regret it now, as I have not > profited from them at all, other than reinforcing my desire to continue > modifying rovers to suit my needs, instead of paying homage to a vehicle. > > Marin, I'm sorry if I have offended you in any way, didn't mean to do it. > Your aggressive attacks on young people did get to me a bit, not because I > feel singled out, but they reinforce the notion that I will have to prepare > myself in order to deal with you when I enter the real workforce. I forgive > you as you obviously have never come into contact with smart young people, > and I feel sorry for you. It must be hell living when you think everything > you do is to benefit a generation that is without value. > > I am now wondering if this whole debate thing was simply a contest, to see > who would come out winning. To see if the restoration crowd would be able to > shut up the kids and their damn new ideas. If you are so petty as to think > the point of a debate is to crown a winner, if it takes this to make you > feel better, you win. You won. > > You won the round, and you are winning the race at keeping your precious > little Land-Rover hobby away from the kids. The real truth is, I'm twenty. > This is my first Land-Rover, not my last. I will have many more. By trying > to alienate all newcomers, you are assuring that the numbers of enthusiasts > will dwindle. Junk trucks will stay in fields, as no one will want to > rebuild them, because they think all Land-Rovers have to be bone stock. They > will never have the chance to modify an old vehicle because they'll always > have some old person telling them that by cutting up a rotted out old junk > III, they are destroying history. They will tire of all this crap, and move > on to other vehicles. And they will never get older and appreciate Land > rovers long enough to restore one of them. > > J-L Can you say Flame Bait........... heh oooh err, too many bottles of wine tonight ------------------------------ End of LRO Mailing List DIGEST * * * * V1 #318 **********************************************