Land Rover Owner Message Digest Contents

[ First Message Last | Table of Contents | <- Digest -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

The Land Rover Owner Daily Digest

Send Submissions

From: Mike Rooth <M.J.Rooth@lut.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Springs
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 94 9:20:23 BST

I believe that "heavy duty" springs are available for 88" machines.
They are said to give a softer,more comfortable ride when lightly
loaded,and to stiffen up when loaded more heavily.I can look up
some addresses if anyone is interested,but they *will* be in the UK.
Cheers
Mike Rooth

------------------------------

From: Mike Rooth <M.J.Rooth@lut.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Usenet
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 94 9:30:57 BST

I agree wholeheartedly with TeriAnn.This mailing list is interesting,
informed,entertaining,well-respected,and successful.There are a
noticeable lack of flames,(ok,the odd squabble,but then,what family
*doesnt* squabble now and then).The technical content is well-
informed,and the social content pleasant,civilised,and amusing.I
fail *completely* to see why such a successful formula should be
changed,particularly for a newsgroup with all its attendant ills.
If you are on to a good thing,stick with it,or,to coin a phrase,
"If it aint bust,dont fix it".
Cheers
Mike Rooth

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Sep 1994 08:23:37 -0400 (EDT)
From: Steven M Denis  <denis@oswego.Oswego.EDU>
Subject: Re: Springs

The rear spring on a 109 sw are progressive...that is they get more 
resistant to compression as they flatten out....they are much to weak for 
the 109,but make a very fine replacement for the 88....
It has been my expirience that the *front* springs on a landrover make 
more difference in the ride quality than do the rears....
'nuff said

steve.....

"HEY! NICE JEEP,MISTER!"..........."Look,Kid,it's a ..Oh never mind..."

"NOTAJEEP"-1967 109 Station Wagon          Steven M. Denis
"        "-1957 107 Station Wagon          PO Box 61
"        "-1964 109 Pickup                 Erieville,New York USA
"        "_1967 109 NADA SW                13061

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Sep 1994 08:16:29 -0400
From: maloney@wings.attmail.com (maloney)
Subject: LRW Binders & Mailing List

I called LRW to order the back issues that I didn't have (all but #1 are 
available) and a binder this morning.  I wish I could have gotten the 
first issue also.  Ben and I were looking at the 1st issue of LRO last 
week and were pretty amused.  The ads are very horsey and there's even an 
ad for a helicopeter kit as well.  

The number listed is 081-597-7335.  The girl was very nice but said I had to 
call a separate number for the binders.  The number she provided was 
025-459-371.  I gave it a try and found it non-dialable.  I realized while 
dialing that the number seemed to be missing a digit, so I called her back.  
We read the number back and forth and she confirmed that it was one digit off 
but that she calls it all the time (she said it was different because it was 
"Lancashire {sp?}").  I asked if she could please call them and forward my 
request and Card number as I was unable to dial from overseas but she said 
she could not.  So much for customer service.  If you want the binders, use 
the form.

I also called LRO and renewed for another 2 years (L45/yr) with a free binder 
and asked if I could get a second binder at the special L5 rate (One year 
renewal-L5 Binder, 2 yrs- free binder).  She said no problem. 0137 989 0056. 
 In the September issue the editor stated that they were going to devote more 
of the magazine to Series Rovers and have more technical pieces in the 
future, so it should be getting better.

Re changing/improving the mailing list, let's not forget that Bill C. does 
this as a courtesy and none of us contributes a dime, or a pence, or a lira, 
or whatever to subscribe.  

On another note, I was watching one of the tabloid news shows last night and 
caught a clip from a new action movie (I think with Arnold, but it could have 
been Sly Stallone) and wasn't paying much attention until I saw what looked 
like a 110 SW falling through the air into a fire/explosion.  Sorry I don't 
have more.  It was a quick clip and they ran it only once.

Bill M.

maloney@wings.attmail.com

Wayne, NJ USA

------------------------------

Subject: Re: Usenet 
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 1994 06:06:49 -0700
From: Mike Fredette <mfredett@ichips.intel.com>

Mike Rooth writes:

	I agree wholeheartedly with TeriAnn.This mailing list is interesting,
informed,entertaining,well-respected,and successful.There are a
noticeable lack of flames,(ok,the odd squabble,but then,what family
*doesnt* squabble now and then).The technical content is well-
informed,and the social content pleasant,civilised,and amusing.I
fail *completely* to see why such a successful formula should be
changed,particularly for a newsgroup with all its attendant ills.
If you are on to a good thing,stick with it,or,to coin a phrase,
"If it aint bust,dont fix it".
Cheers
Mike Rooth

FWIW,    DITTO
						Rgds
						Mike Fredette
						94 DEFENDER 90
						61 Ser ll 109
						90 Range Rover

------------------------------

From: Mike Rooth <M.J.Rooth@lut.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Springs
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 94 14:35:46 BST

Ha!'Snotajeep strikes again!Oh all right:-)
It *seems* that,looking at Paddocks prices for springs,the LWB
rears and SWB H/D rears are the same.Well,they're the same price
anyhow.But there again,LWB *ordinary* rears are the same price
as the SWB/LWB H/D rears.

Goes like this....

SWB Petrol  Front22.33   Rear29.38
SWB Diesel       24.68       29.38
SWB H/D           -          34.08
LWB H/D           -          34.08
LWB Petrol/Diesel24.68       34.08

>From which it looks suspiciously as though for H/D springs on an 88"
petrol,you use 88" diesel fronts and 109" rears.

Bat Fastard reinforces this view.

SWB Petrol  front (9 leaf) 25.00
SWB Diesel  front (11 leaf)28.00
LWB Pet/Die front (11 leaf)28.00
SWB  "  "   rear  (11 leaf)33.00
LWB  "  "   rear  (10 leaf)38.50
H/D  "  "   rear           38.50

All copied from the ads.

So what happens if you want to put H/D springs on an 88" Diesel like
mine,I know not.
I have a sneaking feeling that you are right over the front springs
governing the ride quality(What's it like to live with perfection all
the time?),but have yet to replace my back shockers in an attempt to
stop;or at least curtail;a severe pitching motion.This was eased a
little after replacement of the front shockers (All springs have been
replaced during my ownership,I broke 'em),and I suspect the back
pitches more than the front,now.
I would appreciate any thoughts on what the preffered tyre pressures
for 205 16 radials are.These I currently run at 25psi all round as the
manual says,but for cross ply's.This is on a 2.25 diesel 88" 11A,mainly
road work,say driver and one passenger,dogs not counted,spare inside
(wheel,not dog)and about a half hundredweight of absolutely essential
junk.
Should anyone be interested in the figures in the tables,they are prices
in pounds sterling,including VAT.
Cheers
Mike

------------------------------

From: Russell Burns <burns@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: LRONA
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 94 6:37:19 PDT

>         You mean the Land-Rover Owners Association for the U.S.A., not
>         Canada.  While there are some Canadian members, the association is
	 [ truncated by lro-digester (was 7 lines)]
>         more established clubs that exist that publish regular quarterly
>         or monthly newsletters, and have been doing so for many years.

Dixon,
I am sure LRONA would love to hold the rally out in your neck of
the woods. At the August Rally, someone mentioned Kansas as a possible
site, but I think I would prefer mud to corn.> 
My five year old daughter is still mad I avoided the only mud
hole I could get stuck in.

Russ

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Sep 1994 09:20:55 EDT
From: CXKS46A@prodigy.com (MR ALEXANDER P GRICE)
Subject: A New Rover

It never fails...the day the newsletter gets mailed out is the day news
from across the pond surfaces...in this case, reports of a new product in
development, and we're not talking about "Pegasus" here.

In the last several weeks, many of the upper-level staff at LRNA have gone
off to Eastnor for briefings on the new vehicle.  Code name: "ODIN" (Where
do they get these?  At least Pegasus made some kind of sense?)  This is a
new "sport-ute" tenatively scheduled for the 1997 model year, and at a
lower price...maybe abound $20,000.

Our spies indicate that it will have a stepped roof like the Disco, but
will be more bulbous in shape like the Pegasus/Range Rover.  Body panels
will be of steel (its cheaper to work than aluminium).  It will *NOT* have
the box ladder frame :-0 but rather be of unibody construction after the
fashion of the Grand Cherokee.  Thus, it will weigh in a half a ton less
than Pegasus.  Expect to see bits and pieces of Discos and Range Rovers:
live axles and the trailing A-arms from the '95 Range Rover.  More as it
becomes available.

    *----"Jeep may be famous, LAND-ROVER is Legendary"-----*
    |                                                      |
    |  Sandy Grice,  Rover Owners' Association of Virginia |
    |  E-Mail: CXKS46A@prodigy.com       FAX: 804-622-7056 |
    |  Voice: 804-622-7054 (Days)  804-423-4898 (Evenings) |
    |    1633 Melrose Pkwy., Norfolk, VA, 23508-1730 USA   |
    *------------------------------------------------------*

------------------------------

From: WILSONHB@ctrvax.Vanderbilt.Edu
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 1994 10:28:57 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Disco info--attn RBrooks

Could you email me your email address so I can respond?  I've misplaced it!
Thanks, 
Henry Wilson

------------------------------

From: <DAVE@andataco.com>
Date:          Tue, 13 Sep 1994 08:32:44 PST
Subject:       remove me from list

remove me from list....

this is my third request......

Love your show, but not enough time to read

Yours in Better Service,

W. David Sykes
President

Andataco
10140 Mesa Rim Road, San Diego California 92121
619-453-9191 ext 1200, 619-453-2676 (fax)
dave@andataco.com

The best kept secret in the industry??????

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Sep 1994 12:08:51 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jon Humphrey <jh5r+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: remove me from list

Dave, in order to get off the list you must mail the message to;

land-rover-owner-request@stratus.com

This is a separate address for administrative stuff, and Bill just hates
it when people get impatient.
Happy Rovering
Later
Jon

------------------------------

From: wloka@adtaz.sps.mot.com (Markus G. Wloka)
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 94 09:24:55 MST

subscribe wloka@adtaz.sps.mot.com

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Sep 1994 12:35:37 -0400 (EDT)
From: Steven M Denis  <denis@oswego.Oswego.EDU>
Subject: Re: Springs

but remember...the 109 2 dr and the 109 station wagon use different 
springs....you want the sw springs!..*snot*-a-jeep....are you some sort 
of a toyota owner or suptin'...SNOT-A-Jeep?....rassa frassa ricka snicka 
bloody flatlander...... :-)

"HEY! NICE JEEP,MISTER!"..........."Look,Kid,it's a ..Oh never mind..."

"NOTAJEEP"-1967 109 Station Wagon          Steven M. Denis
"        "-1957 107 Station Wagon          PO Box 61
"        "-1964 109 Pickup                 Erieville,New York USA
"        "_1967 109 NADA SW                13061

On Tue, 13 Sep 1994, Mike Rooth wrote:

> Ha!'Snotajeep strikes again!Oh all right:-)
> It *seems* that,looking at Paddocks prices for springs,the LWB
	 [ truncated by lro-digester (was 50 lines)]
> in pounds sterling,including VAT.
> Cheers
> Mike

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Sep 1994 10:11:22 +0800
From: William.Grouell@Eng.Sun.COM (William L. Grouell)
Subject: Re: Brakes

> Having accidently tried an 88 master brake cylinder on 109 brakes...Do not use> this combination unless you have a good safety harnes, are well insured and 
> don't mind dents in the front of your Land Rover.  
	 [ truncated by lro-digester (was 6 lines)]
> Consider a 109 master brake cylinder a must for converting to 109 front brakes
> TeriAnn Wakeman 

  I'll keep this in mind next time I use my brakes and they work perfectly.

 If done correctly, this IS a nice improvement. Of course, it is possible to
screw it up and hurt your self.  

R, bg  Just a dumb, old, mechanical engineer.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 00:03:30 +0200 (METDST)
From: S|ren Vels Christensen <velssvch@inet.uni-c.dk>
Subject: Re: Axles (109 brakes)

On Mon, 12 Sep 1994, Morgan Hannaford wrote:

> 2) What is the difference between a 109 and a 88 axle set-
> up (besides the Salisbury rear axle on the ser.III 109)? What
> would keep a creative individual from putting those nice 11inch.
> 109 brakes onto an 88?
none

Nothing: My brother recently bought an 88 with 109 brakes in front. 

> Thanks in advance if you can shed some light on this-
> Morgan Hannaford
	 [ truncated by lro-digester (was 7 lines)]
> 1969 88"
> U.C. Berkeley

+----------------------------+--------------------------------+
| Soren Vels                 | 1976  sIII  109"   2.25 petrol |
| velssvch@inet.uni-c.dk     | "Lawrence of Arabia"           |    ((|||))
| Royal Danish Air Force     | Dansk Land-Rover Klub no. 3564 |   ((|||))
| Communications Specialist  | DL-RK: Approx. 1000 members.   |    ((|||))
+----------------------------+--------------------------------+__((|||))______

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 00:31:14 +0200 (METDST)
From: S|ren Vels Christensen <velssvch@inet.uni-c.dk>
Subject: Strange Land Rover on TV

When surfing the extra terrestrial channels last saturday night i landed on
the german Sat1. The film seemed to be an adult movie of an extremely bad
quality and my thumb prepared to work the remote control again. But suddenly
i saw a very strange vehicle. It seemed to be a normal dirt-brown sIII 109 
cab conversion, but it had seat tank (filler in the center like the 88) and 
a one piece windshield with rounded corners , -like the one on (i think) a 
CJ5, not quite as close to the top as on the Defender.

Could be a very late sIII but the ''actors'' clothes looked like late '70 
style and the rover didn't look brand new, so to speak.

Does anyone know this model? 

+----------------------------+--------------------------------+
| Soren Vels                 | 1976  sIII  109"   2.25 petrol |
| velssvch@inet.uni-c.dk     | "Lawrence of Arabia"           |    ((|||))
| Royal Danish Air Force     | Dansk Land-Rover Klub no. 3564 |   ((|||))
| Communications Specialist  | DL-RK: Approx. 1000 members.   |    ((|||))
+----------------------------+--------------------------------+__((|||))______

------------------------------

Date: 13 Sep 94 18:58:55 EDT
From: "R. Pierce Reid" <70004.4011@compuserve.com>
Subject: Add-a-leaf saga, part II

Greetings:

Yesterday, I went over how to get the springs off your Land Rover in preparation
for adding a set of add-a-leaf-springs.

Today, Part II will cover disassembling the spring packs, inserting the leaves
and reassembling the spring packs.

To lead off part II, a reminder about safety:  In these operations more than any
others in this project, springs that contain considerable stored-up energy.
Disassembling spring packs and clamping them back together should be undertaken
with caution.  If you slip up and let a spring pack fly apart, you can lunch
pieces with the energy of a bullet.  When clamping things, double and
triple-check that things are secure and don't bend over a spring pack when
clamping it together!

Ok, so you have a spring pack off the Land Rover and you have safety on your
mind... now it's time to disassemble the spring pack.

First step is to loosen the center bolt that is holding the springs together in
a pack.  This bolt will have a nut at the bottom and a round head at the top
that serves double duty to locate the axle on top of the springs.  The nut will
come off with penetrating oil and a breaker bar most of the time, but may have
to be hacksawed if it is really far gone.  I would recommend against torching
this nut off as it is a bad idea to get any excessive heat near springs.

Once the nut is off, you can remove the bolt, though this may also be rusted in
place, necessitating separating the leaves one-at-a-time until you can knock the
bolt out. A cold chisel to gently tap the elaves apart is just the tool for the
job.  FYI, two of centering bolts came out easily, the other two had to have the
heads cut off with a hacksaw as they were rusted.

At this point, the two bottom leaves on the spring pack (the two shortest ones)
will have come loose, but you will still have several more leaves bound by
two-more sets of clips (inner and outer.)  You don't want to touch the outer
clips.  They stay in place.  You do want to remove the inner clips, since the
add-a-leafs fit directly above the leaf to which the inner clips are riveted.

The inner spring clips are made of a mild, malleable steel and will bend and
separate readily.  I started by bending the tops of the clips away from the top
of the spring back with a 1" cold chisel and light hammering with the sledge.
Once there was space for a pry-bar, I slipped that in and separated the ends of
the clips further.  After doing the first pack manually (a bear of a job!) I
discovered that I could use my small hydraulic floor jack to bend the clips
apart, if I hooked the ends of the clip over the jack axle and a pin on the
lifting arm.  One pump on the jack and the clips opened right up.

Since the tension was removed from the leaves when you undid the center bolt,
the pack will not tend to come apart with any force here.  You now have about 7
loose leaves, an add-a-leaf spring and a remaining pack of about 4 leaves held
together by the outer spring clips. (I have to check these numbers, but you get
the idea).

I recommend wire-brushing the rust off the leaves at this point.  If you are
feeling really motivated, de-grease them and throw some paint on them.  I opted
just to wire-brush them as I wanted to complete the job over the weekend.

Now it's time to reassemble the spring packs... this is where it can get
dangerous, since the add-a-leafs have slightly more camber than the originals
and are quite strong, thick springs.

Start by stacking the springs together and use one of the center bolts supplied
in the kit to locate the leaves.  They will line up on the center hole.  The
leaves should go back together in the same order as they came apart... longest
to shortest with the add-a-leaf above the spring that has the clips riveted to
it.

This is as good a point as any to mention that the add-a-leaf kits have springs
that are slightly narrower than the stock Land Rover leaves.  About 3/16 on each
side when lined up.  In addition, when put in place in the spring pack, they are
marginally shorter than the springs below them in the stack.  Personally, I
would have liked the kit designers to make the leaves slightly wider and
slightly longer, if for no other reason than aesthetics.

In any case, in clamping the leaves together, you will not get all the leaves
over the bolt, which is too short to hold the springs if they are not compressed
at all  This means that you will have to compress them enough to start the nut
on the center bolt.

For this, I used a large vice.  I clamped the loose springs in the vice.
Holding them together was a bit like herding cats until I tried Duct taping them
loosely together... that helped a lot.  Then, I only compressed them enough to
get the nut on the center bolt started about a half-inch onto the bolt.  This
way, I was not clamping down all the way on a potentially explosive spring pack
in a vice where there is always a potential to fly apart.

If you don't have a vice, a pair of large carpenters clamps will work, and you
can add one or 2 leaves at a time, clamping them down and bolting them, removing
the clamps and so on.  Somewhat more tedious, but it can done.

Once I had the nut started, I removed the spring pack from the vice and
tightened the nut down while also keeping the leaves aligned.  You really want
to tighten this bolt all-the way down or you will end up with a loose spring
pack that will rattle (at least) and could be very dangerous to handling and
safety.  I did not check the torque setting, but I turned it until I could not
get it any tighter.

Now that you have the spring pack bolted together, it's time to tighten the
clips by rebending them around the spring pack.  This is something that you can
do yourself, but you may want to consider having a spring shop do it for you.  I
did not price it, but it is probably quite reasonable and you end up with a
guaranteed tight spring pack.

However, I did this job myself and by the second spring pack was doing it fine
(I am going back into the first one next weekend and re-tightening the clips).
Basically, you have to re-bend the ends over the top spring so that the ends of
the spring leaves are tightly fastened together, again, so you don't get rattles
or worse.  

I started by using a propane torch to heat the clips.  It takes some time, but
they are mild steel and easily worked when hot.  A propane torch won't put out
enough heat to damage the spring pack, either.  

I started by straightening the clips so that they made a nice U shape -- like
this: |_|

Then, I put the spring pack in a vice, clamped around the clip tightly so that
only the parts to be bent over were sticking up.  Then I used the 12 Lb. sledge
to bend the ends tightly over the top leaf.  They bend easily when hot and
bending in a vice tends to make for a neat job.  And, not to sound like Ralph
Nader here... but wear glasses when doing this... if you slip with a sledge, you
can send little pieces of shattered vice in every direction.

Once you have the clips in place, and the spring pack is nice and tight and
aligned, you are ready to put the spring pack back on the vehicle.  That
presents challenges all its own and is the most complex, heavy and difficult
part of the operation.  However, I think I have engineered some methods that
will work well for you.  

Part III of the Add-A-Leaf saga will arrive tomorrow.

Thanks to everyone who gave feedback on part 1.  Again, I plan on turning this
into an Aluminum Workhorse tech piece, so any feedback on confusing parts (or
questions you would like clairified) would be welcomed.

     
R. Pierce Reid
'62 Ser IIa 88 Military (The Sgt. Major)  

"An analog guy muddling thorugh a digital world"

------------------------------

Subject: mail list vs. newsgroup
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 1994 16:50:54 -0700
From: Benjamin Allan Smith <ranger@ugcs.caltech.edu>

     Here's another data point on the newsgroup vs. mailing list 
debate.  About two weeks ago Bill Caloccia switched 20 to 30 of us 
over to the digest mode because our computers were bouncing too 
much mail.  All of this bounced mail was sent back to him, 
filling his system's mailbox.  His SysAdmin complained.  (Mail 
didn't bounce all the time, so statistically there would be fewer 
bounces if mail was sent out once a day instead of 30 times a 
day.  (I'm summarizing what Bill sent me from memory--Bill 
correct me if I'm wrong).  
     At Caltech, one of the SysAdmins piped the mailing list to a 
newsgroup (yes now there are 5000 people who could post to this 
if they wanted to, but only one or two read it). We the newsgroup 
disk has a habit of filling up and bouncing all other mail back 
to the sender.  The net effect, Bill converted the mail sent to 
the newsgroup to the digest mode.
     So don't be surprised if one of you converts the output of 
this to a newsgroup for your own use, and suddenly it too ends up 
on digest mode.
     As a side note, it is a Caltech policy by those that run the 
newsgroups to convert any mailing list to a newsgroup 
(mlist.listname) if it can be established that more than one 
person reads the list.  This is done to conserve disk space.

Benjamin Smith
ranger@ugcs.caltech.edu
1972 Land Rover SIII 88

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 13 Sep 1994 21:42:21 -0500 (CDT)
From: David John Place <umplace@CC.UManitoba.CA>
Subject: Re: Springs

I had a chance to look at the old diesel springs I have out back.  They
are heaver than the normal petrol types, so perhaps just switching to the
diesel set will give you the extra load capacity and stiffness you are
looking for. Dave VE4PN Tue, 13 Sep 1994, Mike Rooth wrote:

> I believe that "heavy duty" springs are available for 88" machines.
> They are said to give a softer,more comfortable ride when lightly
	 [ truncated by lro-digester (was 7 lines)]
> Cheers
> Mike Rooth

------------------------------

Subject: Re: LRONA
From: dixon@fourfold.ocunix.on.ca (dixon kenner)
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 94 21:10:17 -0500

Russell Burns <burns@cisco.com> writes:

> I am sure LRONA would love to hold the rally out in your neck of
> the woods. At the August Rally, someone mentioned Kansas as a possible
> site, but I think I would prefer mud to corn.> 
> My five year old daughter is still mad I avoided the only mud
> hole I could get stuck in.

        Kansas is an awful long way away.  Sandy's little rally in
        central Virginia is pushing it, but at least it is attainable in
        something other than a thirty years old Land Rover and without
        a week of travel time each way (Getting a bit grumpy, Stats
        cancelled all my leave for September, so now two & a half years
        with no vacation.  No matter, quit and am becoming a policy
        expert on international mining in three weeks for the Federal
        department of Energy, Mines, & Resources.  Better pay too... :-))

        Kids on a mud run can be a pain.  Their incessent shouting about
        "Let's get stuck in the Mud!" wears thin when the water is pouring
        in the doors and you are going nowhere fast...  Kids should be
        no where near a heavy mud run.  Too dangerous, they don't sit tight
        and can go flyiong through the air inside the vehicle.  Rather
        disconcerting and distracting.

        Rgds,

        Dixon

--
dixon kenner, dixon@fourfold.ocunix.on.ca
FourFold Symmetry,            |    Ottawa Valley Land Rovers
Nepean, Ontario, Canada       |    1016 Normandy Crescent, Nepean
(OVLR's InterNet site)        |    Ontario, Canada, K2C 0L4

------------------------------

Subject: Robin's Status
From: rc@fourfold.ocunix.on.ca (Robin Craig)
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 94 22:42:41 -0500

I have just been accepted into a Diesel Equipment Mechanic course for the 
next 30 weeeks, will come on the system weekly now.

Catch y'all later

Robin

's

--
Robin Craig, rc@fourfold.ocunix.on.ca
FourFold Symmetry,            |    Ottawa Valley Land Rovers
Nepean, Ontario, Canada       |    1016 Normandy Crescent, Nepean
(OVLR's InterNet site)        |    Ontario, Canada, K2C 0L4

------------------------------

Subject: Loaner to CARE Canada
From: rc@fourfold.ocunix.on.ca (Robin Craig)
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 94 22:44:32 -0500

CARE Canada have been loaned a Defnder 90  ( NAS ) for a 12 month period 
by Land Rover Canada. The vehcile will be used to help promote CARE's 
projects and help them with fund raising and promotions.

The vehicle is currently based in Ottawa, Ontario. 

rgds

Robin.

--
Robin Craig, rc@fourfold.ocunix.on.ca
FourFold Symmetry,            |    Ottawa Valley Land Rovers
Nepean, Ontario, Canada       |    1016 Normandy Crescent, Nepean
(OVLR's InterNet site)        |    Ontario, Canada, K2C 0L4

------------------------------

  END OF LAND ROVER OWNER DIGEST 

    Back
	
    Forward
	


	
    
          
	



Photos & text Copyright 1990-2011
	Bill Caloccia, All rights reserved. 

Digest Messages Copyright 1990-2011 by the original poster or/and
	Bill Caloccia,
	All rights reserved.