Land Rover Owner Message Digest Contents


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

The Land Rover Owner Daily Digest

Send Submissions Land-Rover-Owner@Land-Rover.Team.Net

msgSender linesSubject
1 Roger Sinasohn [sinasohn25Re: Questions for the 4th month of LR ownership
2 Mr Ian Stuart [Ian.Stuar65 Re: International Subscription
3 Franz.Parzefall@Physik.T26more photos
4 Mr Ian Stuart [Ian.Stuar35 Re: Rover sales down 11%... Yeah...
5 LANDROVER@delphi.com 29Re: Condenser Failure
6 LANDROVER@delphi.com 36Re: My Bloody (er, bleeding) brakes!!!
7 Mike Rooth [M.J.Rooth@lu72Re: Rover sales down 11%... Yeah...
8 Mr Ian Stuart [Ian.Stuar23 Re: Rover sales down 11%... Yeah...
9 maloney@wings.attmail.co52Re: My Bloody (er, bleeding) brakes!!!
10 Alan Richer/CAM/Lotus [A15Re: Rover sales down 11%... Yeah...
11 Easton Trevor [TEASTON@D19Balls and Limericks
12 rvirzi@gte.com (Robert A41Re: Lucas strikes in a Discovery!
13 Lloyd Allison [lloyd@cs.24an aerodynamic "feature" ?
14 BwanaE@aol.com 21Another Rover for sale.
15 cw117@mole.bio.cam.ac.uk64Re: Rover sales down 11%... Yeah...
16 Russell Burns [burns@cis24Re: an aerodynamic "feature" ?
17 Easton Trevor [TEASTON@D16Emissions
18 Alan Richer/CAM/Lotus [A13Limerick
19 maloney@wings.attmail.co54Re: My Bloody (er, bleeding) brakes!!!
20 Dixon Kenner [dkenner@em10Re: Rover sales down 11%... Yeah...
21 hlapa@Zeus.signalcorp.co29Those Self-Loosening Exh Manifold Bolts
22 "BENJAMIN G. NEWMAN" [7139Turner engine
23 Brian Neill Tiedemann [s41drop arm balljoint
24 Mike Rooth [M.J.Rooth@lu50Re: Rover sales down 11%... Yeah...
25 Mike Rooth [M.J.Rooth@lu16Re: Rover sales down 11%... Yeah...
26 "TeriAnn Wakeman" [twak41Re: U.S. Defender 90 in '96?
27 rpeng@cadev6.intel.com 32re: '96 Defender 90's
28 DEBROWN@SRP.GOV 33Winch or Lockers?? Which one first?
29 jhoward@argus.lowell.edu12My Land Rover's name
30 John Brabyn [brabyn@skiv28Re: U.S. Defender 90 in '96?
31 Dixon Kenner [dkenner@em35Re: U.S. Defender 90 in '96?
32 rlarson@lsil.com (Rick L28re: '96 Defender 90's
33 Andrew Grafton [A.J.Graf58Re: Rover sales down 11%... Yeah...
34 Dixon Kenner [dkenner@em16[not specified]
35 rlarson@lsil.com (Rick L21Re: Winch or Lockers?? Which one first?
36 "John R. Benham" [BENHAM7 Unsubscribe
37 Tony_Bonanno@nps.gov (To35Another Learning Experience - Springs on an IIA
38 cw117@mole.bio.cam.ac.uk70Re: Rover sales down 11%... Yeah...
39 Dixon Kenner [dkenner@em10Re: your mail
40 "TeriAnn Wakeman" [twak16Re: '96 Defender 90's
41 Tony@hawtec.demon.co.uk 20RE: Turner engine
42 Tony@hawtec.demon.co.uk 47Heated Windscreens: Availability
43 Tony@hawtec.demon.co.uk 54RE: Idly Frustrated
44 jpappa01@InterServ.Com 26Re: BSROA & D90
45 LANDROVER@delphi.com 17Re: your mail
46 Mike Slade [SLCN3@cc.usu47bleeding them today (hopefully)
47 dwebb@waite.adelaide.edu38Re: an aerodynamic "feature" ?
48 JCassidyiv@aol.com 19Koenig Winch
49 a-robw@microsoft.com 39RE: Winch or Lockers?? Which one first?


------------------------------ [ Message 1 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 00:57:34 -0700
From: Roger Sinasohn <sinasohn@crl.com>
Subject: Re: Questions for the 4th month of LR ownership

> > my face ever time I get behind the wheel of my 88.  I have spent about

Heck, it's been nigh onto 5 years for me, and I still run around with a big 
grin!

> The biggest advantage of the (official) tropical roof is the 
> air-vents in the inner skin.  They are four small hatches that
> open up into the space between the two skins and direct air
> into the cabin.  Diagram(s) below.  The vents are really effective
> at 'speed' (ha,ha).  Please excuse crap ASCII art. 

Note that they are also quite effective at directing rain right at your 
clothes and sleeping bag if you forget to close them when driving in the rain!

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

Uncle Roger                         "There is pleasure pure in being mad
sinasohn@crl.com                                that none but madmen know."
Roger Louis Sinasohn & Associates
San Francisco, California

------------------------------
[ <- Message 2 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

From: Mr Ian Stuart <Ian.Stuart@ed.ac.uk>
Date:          Wed, 19 Jul 1995 10:00:24 +0000
Subject:       Re: International Subscription

On 18 Jul 95, Dixon Kenner wrote:

>  We are kinda lean on the post '74 through '95 civilian stuff.
>  Lots of military stuff though...  We have a huge gap from 1974
	 [ truncated by lro-digester (was 7 lines)]
>  towards 80%+ post '87 vehicles, while others are staying 90%+
>  pre 1980 vehicles.  Depends on area & club emphasis.
SLROC ranges from 1950's to 1995's & the only model I've not noticed at an 
event is a true stage 1 (plenty of V8 conversions though...)

> > * You will be sent (By airmail) our club magazine on a monthly basis
> > (there are 11 issues printed - we do not print a magazine in December).
>  to 1987 where British Leyland abandoned the NA market for 

>  North American scene:
>  OVLR is monthly, 
	 [ truncated by lro-digester (was 6 lines)]
>  ROAV is quarterly as is LROA's Aluminium Workhorse.  
>  All have the above too.
SLROC is quarterly (ish :)

> > * You are welcome to participate in all club trips (if you come to
> > visit us in Australia) including our trials, our fishing competition
> > and our Christmas Party!!!!

>  Am sure all the NA clubs are the same... :-)  
Ditto
Well, actually, we don't do a fishing trip - and we don't do a christmas 
party, but we do have two dinner-dances and an AGM each year..

> > * You will NOT have voting rights NOR be covered by our Club's public 
> > liability Insurance (for obvious reasons :-)
All club members can vote, if they get to the AGM

>  What if the member is there at an event?  OVLR's insurance
>  would cover members & visitors at events.  ROAV's covers non-
	 [ truncated by lro-digester (was 7 lines)]
>  clubs handle this at events).  Voting?  Depends if the club
>  ever has, or had, elections... :-)
ARC insurance covers ARC members at ARC events, SLROC is an ARC club & 
therefor you would be covered as a member.

> > If anyone is interested in joining, the fee is $45 Australian dollars
>  OVLR             = $20Cdn   
	 [ truncated by lro-digester (was 6 lines)]
>  LROA             = $20US    
>  BSROA            = $45US
SLROC = 10UKP

> > tiffanyd@tafe.sa.edu.au via E-mail
>  OVLR             = dixon kenner (dkenner@emr.ca)
	 [ truncated by lro-digester (was 6 lines)]
>  BSROA            = jim pappas   (jpappa01@interserve.com)
>  LROA             = brad blevins (unclebrad@aol.com)
SLROC = Ian Stuart (ian.stuart@ed.ac.uk)

     ----** Ian Stuart (Computing Officer)        +44 31 650 6205
Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, Edinburgh University. 
 <http://www.vet.ed.ac.uk/> or <http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~kiz/>

------------------------------
[ <- Message 3 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

From: Franz.Parzefall@Physik.TU-Muenchen.DE
Subject: more photos
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 11:05:03 +0200 (MET DST)

Hi Rovers
If anyone is interested in some pictures of my newly bought 110,
you might look at Peters www-page (http://ZDITR1.arcs.ac.at/~peter/LR/).
He was so kind to hook the jpgs in there. For now there are just
2 scanned polaroids but I hope to get better pictures soon.

If someone is interested in copying them, feel free to do so.

Happy rovering
Franz
-------------------------------------------------------------
Franz Parzefall     fparzefa@physik.tu-muenchen.de
       _______
      [____|\_\==
      [_-__|__|_-]           exmil. 110 2.5D
 ___.._(0)..._.(0)__.._
#4
#3
#2
#1

------------------------------
[ <- Message 4 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

From: Mr Ian Stuart <Ian.Stuart@ed.ac.uk>
Date:          Wed, 19 Jul 1995 10:17:05 +0000
Subject:       Re: Rover sales down 11%...  Yeah...

On 18 Jul 95, Dixon Kenner wrote:

>    First, what is the purpose of the =A3500 carrot being waved under the
>    noses of banger owners? To rid us of dangerous, polluting wrecks, says
>    the SMMT. New cars are clean and safe, they proclaim, with
>    sanctimonious greenness.
Imagine the number of sharks who are going to buy up all the scrapped 
cars, "repair" them and then flog them for 300 quid.

"Sharkies" will sell you a car for 300 quid, so that you can then trade it 
in for 500 quid. "Do yourself a Deal" exclaims Mr White, managing director 
or Sharkies.

What El Punter gets is a death-trap that has been repaired for 100 quid 
and shoved out to turn a profit!  This is just another example of Fat Cats 
takingf advantage of the Tory "Get rich quick @ F*ck everyone else" 
ideals.

The very concept of trading in cars already exists - all this is, is 
another publicity excercise to "raise people awareness that 
environmentally, they should trade in their cars every three years".

It's Cr@p.

<I'll get off my soap-box now...>

     ----** Ian Stuart (Computing Officer)        +44 31 650 6205
Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, Edinburgh University. 
 <http://www.vet.ed.ac.uk/> or <http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~kiz/>

------------------------------
[ <- Message 5 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

From: LANDROVER@delphi.com
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 05:36:14 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Condenser Failure

Guy Arnold tells us...

> I put the "Green Machine" insurance on the same policy as my other 
> vehicles. I told my agent that it was a 1973 Land-Rover Series III 
> and when I got my insurance card from Allstate it said Range Rover. I 

Me too! My cards arrived today and have "65 Range Rover" on them! I have had
my '72 SerIII insured through Allstate since about 1988 (I dropped the
insurance on that when the transmission died last December) and the cards
always just had "Rover" for the make. I just hope they don't charge me at
Range Rover rates!!! 

As far as your condenser problem, I've seen condensers fail, but never new
ones. If you had figured out that the condensor was the problem, you could
have just disconnected it and driven home. 

Cheers
  Michael Loiodice       E-MAIL   landrover@delphi.com              
  166 W.Fulton St.       VOICE    (518) 773-2697                    
  Gloversville                                                      
  NY, 12078              1965 Ser IIa 88 Petrol (Range Rover! Ha!)
              7          1972 Ser III 88 Petrol ("Fern")
           #:-}>         1971 Ser IIa 88 Petrol (Parts is Parts)

------------------------------
[ <- Message 6 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

From: LANDROVER@delphi.com
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 06:56:35 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: My Bloody (er, bleeding) brakes!!!

Mike Slade asks...

> I can't bleed the rear brakes as the bleed nipples have BOTH broken off
> thanks to the PO.
> So, in the mean while how do I go about bleeding the brake system as best
> I can without doing the rear brakes.

Maloney's suggestion about the cracking open the lines to the rear cylinders
will work. The seal is not the threads, but the compression between the
flare on the line and the mating surface on the wheel cylinder. Of course,
there is the chance of the fitting being rusted to the line. Loosen it up
and the line twists. Not a good look. At least that's been my experiance
here in the NorthEast Rust Belt...

>  What about the master cyl (CB type)?  How about raising

Power bleed works well. If you have an old, usuable cap for the master
cylinder you can make your own for a few dollars in fittings. I used a
home-made pressure bleeder to bleed the brakes on my '65 after replacing all
of the hydraulic system. Used an old bicycle pump to pressurize it. Works
like a charm. Just make sure you stop and check the fluid level in the
resevoir from time to time.

Cheers
  Michael Loiodice       E-MAIL   landrover@delphi.com              
  166 W.Fulton St.       VOICE    (518) 773-2697                    
  Gloversville                                                      
  NY, 12078              1965 Ser IIa 88 Petrol (On the Road!)      
              7          1972 Ser III 88 Petrol ("Fern")
           #:-}>         1971 Ser IIa 88 Petrol (Parts is Parts)

------------------------------
[ <- Message 7 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

From: Mike Rooth <M.J.Rooth@lut.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Rover sales down 11%... Yeah...
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 95 12:07:12 BST

I agree with Ian,of course its crap.Proveably so,because they
could get away with a lot less that 3500 if they gave the
punter money to buy a new engine!Or a remanufactured one.
After all,*that's* what they are beefing about,not the chassis
etc.If someone gave me 3500 quid,I'd beat a path to Turner
Engineering so fast my feet wouldnt touch!
In my view the bottom line is this.Land Rover are doing well,
simply because what they are making,people want to buy.
The rest of them(and this,mind you is supposed to be a market
economy),are making what people *dont* want to buy.Tough.
I simply dont beleive this environmental bullshit.
Any field of endeavour,such as the one which discovered the
hole in the ozone layer,that postulates not "we have discovered
such and such" but "we have *invented* such and such" cannot be
credible.After all,Columbus discovered America,but he didnt claim
that he *made*it.I beleive he was perfectly well able to accept
it was always there!And what,I ask you,is "environmentally friendly"
about a bit of exhaust equipment that sets the grass on fire?
Having started my working life at a time when cities were often
afflicted with fogs that not only restricted vision to the end
of an outstretched arm,but that you could *taste*,which no longer 
exist,I ask myself just what sort of a plce do these people expect?
We are now entertained by the toght of river "pollution" being
blamed on cattle pissing and crapping on the land!What,for crying
out loud,do the silly bastards *expect* them to do,except that which
they've done for countless centuries?
As for cities,have they not always been polluted? Where did the
Great Plague start?Again,what the hell*do* these people expect?
If the wind is blowing *along* a city street,with high buildings
either side,it acts like a wind tunnel.If,on the other hand its
blowing across it,the air is trapped,the same as if there was no
wind at all.Result,fumes.
I'm not saying that all attempts to make things better should cease,
far from it.But I *do* think that a sense of proportion is essential,
rather than this airy fairy ideal of "the good old days when all was
sweet and pure".It never was.These people should remember when they
see the pretty picture of the main street of Ye Olde Englishe Village,
thatched cottages on either side,one or two basic facts.One,it stank.
The street was an open sewer.The pretty cottages with roses round the
door had a midden just outside said door.Why the hell do you think
the roses grew so well?The thatch was full of bugs,and the cottage
infested with rats.All the effluent went into the stream,then into
the river.People DIED at thirty,utterly worn out by harsh living,
and riddled with disease.Get a cut,and chances were you got it
infected and died of the infection.Flo Nightingale was around in
the Crimean War,not the Wars of the Roses!
But..has anyone ever tried to find out how naturally immune these
people were?Remember the saying when your old aunt died at ninety
odd?"They were tough in those days".Isnt there a chance,just a 
chance,that you can make your own patch so antiseptic that you
catch your death if you step outside it?And that you label dangers
so clearly that your inbuilt sense of danger atrophies?
The problem,IMO,is that science is the new religion.Unfortunately 
it doesnt seem to be any more reliable than the old ones.We are
being asked to take on faith,that which science doesnt seem able
to prove.Plus,of course,politics jumping on the wagon,as they
always have done,but with the difference that they have more
exposure in the media these days.
So I'll trundle about trailed by unburned diesel with no conscience
at all.Just because you can see it and smell it doesnt mean its bad for
you necessarily.The only reason I'll put any effort into curtailing
it is that its fuel I've paid for and havent used.
OK,I've done.Sorry for the outburst,but it never ceases to amaze me
how the well-educated western world will beleive everything its told!
Cheers
Mike Rooth

------------------------------
[ <- Message 8 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

From: Mr Ian Stuart <Ian.Stuart@ed.ac.uk>
Date:          Wed, 19 Jul 1995 12:24:41 +0000
Subject:       Re: Rover sales down 11%... Yeah...

On 19 Jul 95, Mike Rooth wrote:

> After all,*that's* what they are beefing about,not the chassis
> etc.If someone gave me 3500 quid,I'd beat a path to Turner
> Engineering so fast my feet wouldnt touch!
Bear in mind, folks, that scientists are now saying that Unleaded petrol 
is more damaging that leaded petrol - the Benzine replacement for Lead is 
more harmful to life that the origional Lead!

Resist the change to Unleaded petrol!

Diesel's only problems are (1) the smell and (2) the large particulate 
waste product....

     ----** Ian Stuart (Computing Officer)        +44 31 650 6205
Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, Edinburgh University. 
 <http://www.vet.ed.ac.uk/> or <http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~kiz/>

------------------------------
[ <- Message 9 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 08:06:37 -0500
From: maloney@wings.attmail.com (maloney)
Subject: Re: My Bloody (er, bleeding) brakes!!!

twakeman asked about my response to Mike Slade's question re bleeding wheel 
cylinders with broken bleeder nipples by loosening the line fitting entering 
the cylinder:

Bill have you ever tried this?

Only once.  When I first got my 88.  I did it so I could move it with some 
degree of confidence.  Since it was the weekend the new cylinders would not 
arrive for several days.  The pedal wasn't perfect but no longer went to the 
floor on the first stroke.  I have not had to do it since after applying 
antisieze to all fittings on the new cylinders.

There are a lot of threads to deal with and since the line and cylinder have 
to be perfectly lined up to thread correctly if unthreaded, it strikes me as 
a disaster in the making that can induce even more air into the system. 

This is correct if you remove the line as I believe you are saying.  If you 
crack the line as I suggested while an assistant depresses the pedal and 
tighten it before they release it, the fitting will not become unthreaded.  
This would take quite a few turns, as you probably know.  It is a mess, 
however, as the fluid runs down the backing plate.  A can of brake parts 
spray cleaner will help clean things up.  It's not a bad idea to remove the 
drum to 
check if fluid ran down the inside also if the original rubber seal between 
the cylinder and plate has disintigrated.

Remember this will do nothing to eliminate any air in the wheel cylinder 
itself since you would be opening the system before the cylinder.

As the wheel cylinder cavity is below the fitting, gravity will do the rest. 
 

I would sooner have asked BP to send the parts overnight UPS and not play 
games while waiting for a BP order to arrive.

New parts would certainly have been the better solution in this case, but 
Mike asked for an interim solution for bleeding wheel cylinders with broken 
bleeders, and I answered. 

Bill

maloney@wings.attmail.com

line 4
line 3
line 2
line 1

------------------------------
[ <- Message 10 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

From: Alan Richer/CAM/Lotus <Alan_Richer/CAM/Lotus.LOTUS@crd.lotus.com>
Date: 19 Jul 95  8:20:33 EDT
Subject: Re: Rover sales down 11%... Yeah...

Ian Stewart said:

>Diesel's only problems are (1) the smell and (2) the large particulate 
>waste product....

and 3) the inability of anyone behine Mike or Charlie to see where they're going
with all the smoke and oil....<grin>

     ajr

------------------------------
[ <- Message 11 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

From: Easton Trevor <TEASTON@DQC2.DOFASCO.CA>
Subject: Balls and Limericks
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 95 08:30:00 DST

As the subject of the anonymous limerick writer's (AKA Jim Dolan) musing. 
Congratulations on a fine limerick. I suggested to Jim some minor changes to 
metre and also that we should have an annual LRO Digest Limerick 
Competition. Limericks to be related to Land Rover happenings, problems, joy 
of ownership etc.
Starting now and to be judged August 1996. I will collect entries and 
publish the full list for judging by the subscribers. A Prize for the best 
and next to be provided by Land Rover Canada. (They don't know yet). Keep 
them clean (Cleanish) and maybe we'll have enough to publish in LRO or LRW. 
Please submit your limerick with your name below so it can be easily cut and 
pasted to the list

Trevor Easton

------------------------------
[ <- Message 12 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 08:24:58 -0400
From: rvirzi@gte.com (Robert A. Virzi)
Subject: Re: Lucas strikes in a Discovery!

Stefan writes:
        Well durn, some other poor soul is afflicted with the same malefic
        "BlipBlupBlipBlup" turn signal.  . . . fixed it, claiming it was a
        corroded connection in the right front blinker.

Thanks for the encouraging (I think) story.  My blinkers only go on the
blink in extreme heat.  Driving a short while cools whatever needs cooling
off enough to restore normal operation, so I don't have a bulb burned out
as some suggested.  I was wondering if it is the relay that gets cooked in
the heat.  Now I'm beginning to suspect I should look to a more outbound
source.  Other folks have written to me about the bulbs and corrosion, so
I'll have to take a peek.  Thanks to all for the input!

And a little later, Stefan continues:
        By the way, I really enjoy my disco, even with its few quirks. The
        little beast is wonderful off-road. The only things I would tell
        the Solihull folks is they need to raise that blasted air dam or
        make it easy to remove (I've mashed it into a few things
        off-roading)

Agree totally about the damn dam.  Partially trashed mine recently offroad.
Luckily I was able to reattach it because the screws that hold it together
at the corners popped out.  5 minute fix.

I wonder if this might not be a solution for offroading.  Unscrewing the
four screws that hold it together at the corners allows the dam to fold up
under the bumper.  The problem, as I see it, are the lights on the corner
pieces.  Even if you remove the front dam, these two parts out at the very
corners (almost on the sides of the truck) hang down with exposed electric
bits.  Not a good thing to smash, given the price of most factory light
replacement parts.  Anyone have a solution for this part of the problem?

-Bob Virzi

  rvirzi@gte.com             Think Globally. ===
  +1(617)466-2881                            === Act Locally!

------------------------------
[ <- Message 13 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 22:30:53 +1000
From: Lloyd Allison <lloyd@cs.monash.edu.au>
Subject: an aerodynamic "feature" ?

My stage-1 L-R has an interesting aerodynamic "feature". Since
the bonnet (hood) of the 110/90s seems to be the same I wonder
if they have it too.

If you drive along in rain or drizzle, water collects just round
the leading edge of the bonnet somewhere out of sight.
It stays there above 30 kph approx, even if the rain stops.
As you slow down for a junction, at about 20 kph, it (the H2O)
suddenly flings itself at the windscreen, reducing visibility considerably,
if you've turned off the wipers - because it stopped raining, remember?
It's a bit of a shock the first few times that it happens.

I was just wondering if 110/90s (and other stage 1's) do this too?

An old chestnut I've not seen aired here:
why do L-R drum brakes all (?) squeal and is there any way to
stop them? - apart from lubricating with oil!

lloyd

------------------------------
[ <- Message 14 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

From: BwanaE@aol.com
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 08:38:28 -0400
Subject: Another Rover for sale.

Per a phone conversation today, I'm posting this for a non-netter.
Usual disclaimers...

' 76 Series III, Lightweight.
Overdrive
Rebuilt head
New diff            

Now take a deep breath .....  $ 14,000  ( YIKES ! )

Simon at 916.778.3937

Okay, you can breath now...

Eric.

------------------------------
[ <- Message 15 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 13:45:48 +0100
From: cw117@mole.bio.cam.ac.uk (Charlie Wright)
Subject: Re: Rover sales down 11%... Yeah...

I think you have a lot of good points to make, Mike, but I have a hard time
considering 'science' a new religion or blaming it for the attitudes of
many whom you consider to follow it.

Science, in and of itself, is neither prejudiced nor biased. Now this is as
sensible as saying "pure" democracy represents the people, communism makes
for a happier and fairer system, or a perfect lucas alternator produces 14
volts.  It looks really good on paper, but these things don't really exist.
They are theory/fiction, choose one of the above.

Scientists can be biased, and they can look for what they want to see. Even
when trying not to, it happens.  What makes it worse is the way in which
science is packaged by those who want to use it as an argument in support
of their ideas.  An utter lack of understanding of the field in question
means that the reporter picks out the interesting/exciting/controversial
bits and elaborates on them. The reader then interprets in his/her own way,
and BOOM... a new 'science' is born... based mostly on tertiary sources and
hearsay. Then someone writes a book/film about it (Jurassic Park, Congo,
Outbreak....JFK?) and fact suddenly blends with fiction... but the exciting
bit is more fun (usually the fiction).

Another ideal example is the recently decomissioned Shell platform in the
North Sea.  Greenpeace protested, got international news coverage, and
morally blackmailed Shell into dragging the oil platform back to dock and
dismantling it on land.  Because: They 'knew' it was 'wrong' and
'dangerous' to dump it in the 'unspoiled' deep ocean!? It had <gasp>
cadmium and heavy metals on board!

The government in the U.K. supported Shell, which naturally polarized the
issue (and put more fence-sitters on the side of the chartruese
scourge...).

While cadmium and heavy metals are, very clearly, not good for you:

A) At the bottom of the ocean they are a whole lot farther from human
beings at what could be a dangerous concentration (and a WHOLE lot more
dilute if they ever get out). Just try to figure out how many barrels of
water are in the North Sea, let alone the ocean. And I hate to disappoint,
but metals in dilute quantities are found in ocean water, and they've been
there longer than mankind has.

B) Disposal on land is much more expensive and much more risky both in the
short (handling and transporting) and long (leaks, gradual diffusion into
the earth) terms.

No report could find a scientist (except the advisor to Greenpeace) who
thought that it was safer to dispose of the platform on the terra firma,
but this was COMPLETELY overshadowed by the disingenuous moral outrage of
the Greenpeace PR folk. Victory for the environment, hurrah.

So, please don't blame the scientists entirely, we aren't high-priests to
the dim and impressionable by choice.

Charlie

C. R. Wright                                    Dept. of Genetics
+44 (0)1223 333970 telephone                    Univ. of Cambridge
+44 (0)1223 333992 telefax                      Downing Street, Cambs.
cw117@mole.bio.cam.ac.uk                        CB2 3EH, England

------------------------------
[ <- Message 16 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

From: Russell Burns <burns@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: an aerodynamic "feature" ?
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 95 6:17:04 PDT

> To change subscription write to: Majordomo@Land-Rover.Team.Net

	 [ truncated by lro-digester (was 16 lines)]
> suddenly flings itself at the windscreen, reducing visibility considerably,
> if you've turned off the wipers - because it stopped raining, remember?
> It's a bit of a shock the first few times that it happens.
I thought this was a design feature. after a rain, a lot of mud, and
dirt collect on the windshield. Since we all understand lucas, this seems
like a failsafe way to get the wind screen washed with out electrics.

Russs
I have noticed that water does strange thing on both my R-Rover,
and the D-90 
> I was just wondering if 110/90s (and other stage 1's) do this too?
> An old chestnut I've not seen aired here:
	 [ truncated by lro-digester (was 11 lines)]
> stop them? - apart from lubricating with oil!
> lloyd

------------------------------
[ <- Message 17 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

From: Easton Trevor <TEASTON@DQC2.DOFASCO.CA>
Subject: Emissions
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 95 09:52:00 DST

Photonics Magazine for July has a short article about the University of 
Denver and their FEAT. Their FEAT smells!!!. Automobile exhaust that is, the 
device provides a means to measure the pollution level of vehicles passing 
through an IR beam. Measurement of over 500,000 vehicles in several US 
cities indicated that targeting poorly maintained vehicles with remote 
sensors (photo-sniffers) would be more cost effective than simply scrapping 
old cars. The myth of old cars being the polluters was soundly put to rest. 
Anybody out there at U of D to tell us more?

Trevor Easton and Miss Golightly

------------------------------
[ <- Message 18 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

From: Alan Richer/CAM/Lotus <Alan_Richer/CAM/Lotus.LOTUS@crd.lotus.com>
Date: 19 Jul 95  9:46:36 EDT
Subject: Limerick

There once was a car from Lode Lane,
That could travel in mud, snow or rain.
In the bush, hauling logs, 
Fording streams deep in bogs,
 Land-Rover lives up to its name!

   Al Richer/ Churchill the 109

------------------------------
[ <- Message 19 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 10:06:59 -0500
From: maloney@wings.attmail.com (maloney)
Subject: Re: My Bloody (er, bleeding) brakes!!!

RESEND - MAJORDOMO SLIGHTLY REVISED THE LAST COPY

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

twakeman asked about my response to Mike Slade's question re bleeding wheel 
cylinders with broken bleeder nipples by loosening the line fitting entering 
the cylinder:

>Bill have you ever tried this?

Only once.  When I first got my 88.  I did it so I could move it with some 
degree of confidence.  Since it was the weekend the new cylinders would not 
arrive for several days.  The pedal wasn't perfect but no longer went to the 
floor on the first stroke.  I have not had to do it since after applying 
antisieze to all fittings on the new cylinders.

>There are a lot of threads to deal with and since the line and cylinder have 
>to be perfectly lined up to thread correctly if unthreaded, it strikes me as 
>a disaster in the making that can induce even more air into the system. 

This is correct if you remove the line as I believe you are saying.  If you 
crack the line as I suggested while an assistant depresses the pedal and 
tighten it before they release it, the fitting will not become unthreaded.  
This would take quite a few turns, as you probably know.  It is a mess, 
however, as the fluid runs down the backing plate.  A can of brake parts 
spray cleaner will help clean things up.  It's not a bad idea to remove the 
drum to check if fluid ran down the inside also if the original rubber seal 
between the cylinder and plate has disintigrated.

>Remember this will do nothing to eliminate any air in the wheel cylinder 
>itself since you would be opening the system before the cylinder.

As the wheel cylinder cavity is below the fitting, gravity will do the rest. 

>I would sooner have asked BP to send the parts overnight UPS and not play 
>games while waiting for a BP order to arrive.

New parts would certainly have been the better solution in this case, but 
Mike asked for an interim solution for bleeding wheel cylinders with broken 
bleeders, and I answered. 

Bill

maloney@wings.attmail.com

line 4
line 3
line 2
line 1

------------------------------
[ <- Message 20 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 10:39:41 -0400 (EDT)
From: Dixon Kenner <dkenner@emr1.emr.ca>
Subject: Re: Rover sales down 11%... Yeah...

On Wed, 19 Jul 1995, Mike Rooth wrote:

> I agree with Ian,of course its crap.

	Bravo!  :-)

------------------------------
[ <- Message 21 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

From: hlapa@Zeus.signalcorp.com
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 95 10:36:11 EST
Subject: Those Self-Loosening Exh Manifold Bolts

So you say the foldover tabs don't work.  Looked under the 
bonnet and noticed that the tabs were not always folded over 
the flats.  No wonder they still loosen.

Had a thought -- Why not use matching aircraft bolts of the 
type with the head drilled through for lockwire and wire the 
heads of adjacent bolts two at a time?  Or have a machine 
shop drill a full set of Genuine bolts and replace the 
offenders at next convenient opportunity.  A little .028 CRS 
safety wire should make the bolts stay in place for the life 
if the manifold.  

Only problem I see with doing this mod preemptively is 
access/available working space to manipulate and properly 
twist the wire between adjacent bolts.  There are many 
places on a L-R this could be done if loosening of 
more-or-less closely spaced hex-head bolts would cause 
serious peril.

I've got the safety wire and the special twisting pliers; so 
why *not* do this if the opportunity presents?

Hank

------------------------------
[ <- Message 22 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

Date: 19 Jul 95 11:29:03 EDT
From: "BENJAMIN G. NEWMAN" <71773.3457@compuserve.com>
Subject: Turner engine

John,

I wish I could be of more help to you regarding your engine conversion. I just
recently finished converting my NADA 109 from a 6 cylinder, as you know, to a
Turner 4 cylinder. Not being a mechanic, this was done by Gary Landes, whose
phone number is 410-461-7162. I know he has some troubles in doing this
conversion, mainly with the exhaust system. Though as you will find from other
people in the net, Gary has somewhat of a strange personality, but I am sure he
would confer with you on the telephone about the problems he encountered during
this conversion.

Turner Engineering Company, the manufacturer of this engine, said the conversion
should take approximately 3 to 4 hours. Gary had my car from January and it was
just finished last week. Admittedly, he did some other work for me, but
nevertheless the time was excessive.

I imported the engine personally from Turner for this vehicle specifically. The
other Rover I have is an '88, which I got from Warwick had a Turner engine put
in that one during the rebuilding phase. I have approximately 8,000 miles on
this engine and it runs absolutely magnificently.

Again, I wish I could give you some specs about the Turner engine, but I cannot
and I would refer you to Frieda Turner who is a wonderful lady who will spend
all the time in the world talking to you about their engines. Their phone number
is 0342834713. Fax number is 0342834042. I would encourage you to speak to
Frieda, as she has a wealth of information and might even advise who could make
this conversion for you on the West Coast.

Again, John, I wish I could be of more help to you. I have enjoyed the past four
months reading about your Dormobile and your trip from Maine to California.

Good luck and keep me advised as to your progress.

Benjamin

------------------------------
[ <- Message 23 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

From: Brian Neill Tiedemann <s914440@minyos.xx.rmit.EDU.AU>
Subject: drop arm balljoint
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 1995 01:41:34 +1000 (EST)

Hi all,
Tonight saw me getting MAD at a certain Solihull product; clue: big, ugly, 
yellow (well sahara gold if u please), _random steering_ thingy. So the 
time was right to install the drop arm ball joint rebuild kit which I 
have had sitting here a while, and see if I am able to confine myself to 
just one lane hereafter!
Well, I have not completed the job. Here's why:
Removed drop arm (easy, as nut on bottom of power steering box was loose-more
 wanderings). Popped drag link off old ball joint with a puller. Cleaned.
Removed circlip retainer, bottom plate, spring, bottom cup, ball pin and 
lots of rust. Manual says then to tap out top cup section- well mine was 
99% worn away anyway, so no edge to speak of was left protruding at the 
top to "tap" on. Ended up using a thick washer of just exactly the right 
size to catch on what remained of the cup, a large nut and bolt, and 
another thick washer to make a crude internal puller. Used this to 
tension the cup, then "tapped gently" with a mediun sledge, retensioned, 
tapped etc....
Spent some time cleaning up the seat area for new parts, emery, wire brushes.
Now the holdup: I figured that the reason my old ball was full of rust 
and could be shaken around "like dogs'" ummm "ears", was the lack of any 
way to grease it beyond the initial time. The bottom cover plate is thick 
enough to hold a thread for a grease nipple, and the internals of the 
thing have a path for grease to get to the whole joint, so I have decided 
to install one at the centre of the cover plate. Didn't have any new 
nipples lying around, so first thing tomorrow...
I'll let you all know how it turns out tomorrow sometime.
BTW part # for the rebuild kit is RTC4198.

Anyone know if I should NOT use Locktite on the big nut securing drop arm 
top PS box? Has a tagged washer, but ineffective. Other suggestions?
Please mail ASAP as I wanna finish tomorrow am.

cheers,
Brian.
77 RR (Steerless)

------------------------------
[ <- Message 24 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

From: Mike Rooth <M.J.Rooth@lut.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Rover sales down 11%... Yeah...
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 95 15:21:32 BST

OK Charlie,I half guessed you'd come up with that argument,and
by and large you're right.But.We are constantly bombarded with
"scientific" crap uttered by those who term themselves scientists.
Now,either they are trying to get themselves in print(and therefore
consolidate their academic positions)or after money.Fine.But I
reserve the right to dibelieve the findings.How often for example,
have you seen the experimental method published,or,come to that,
their controls.I have to add the medics are particularly sweeping
in *their* statements.Like the percentages etc quoted for passive
smoking.Where is the control that proves the experiment,and how,in
fact could you even set one up?
FWIW I agree with you over the oil fiasco,if only because there must
be many millions of tons of fine ships on the bed of the sea,sunk
during the war,and carrying gawd knows what at the time.I think the
time to get a little disturbed would be if it became ea regular thing,
but one off,no way,give it the deep six.One more oversize dustbin
is going to make no odds.
Where science is concerned,I suggest the scientific community should
perhaps give thought to putting its house in order,i.e publish/disseminate
the truth,but the *whole* truth.And then let people make up their own minds.
But that can only be done "in house" so to speak.
Isnt it a fairly old argument that science is not in itself evil,and that
no blame attaches to the scientist if it is put to a use that is?
Could in fact be used of almost any discipline,profession or trade in fact.
Like I built this gun as a target weapon.So someone got killed?Not my
fault.And if an individual sees the results of his/her research
misrepresented,misused or whatever,surely that person has not only the
right,but the *duty* to ensure matters are put right.After all,the
results wouldnt be there *to* misrepresent if the individual hadnt
done the research in the first place.
And we*are* frequently asked to beleive,apparently as an act of
faith,that research by Joe Bloggs has proven...whatever.Just that.
Joe Bloggs never get his gob open.So its about time Joe Bloggs stod
up and said"Oy,sunshine,it didnt prove any such thing".But he doesnt,
so by his silence it goes through on the nod.
All of which leaves aside the contradictions as to what is good for
you *this* week.
Problem is,that when the thing reaches persecution level,as it already
has over certain issues,old motors being one of them,it becomes time
for any relevant discipline to put a damper on it,for sheer humanitarian
reasons.Sadly,there is little evidence that this will ever occur.
YMMV,of course.
Cheers
Mike Rooth

------------------------------
[ <- Message 25 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

From: Mike Rooth <M.J.Rooth@lut.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Rover sales down 11%... Yeah...
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 95 15:32:36 BST

> To change subscription write to: Majordomo@Land-Rover.Team.Net

	 [ truncated by lro-digester (was 25 lines)]
> Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, Edinburgh University. 
>  <http://www.vet.ed.ac.uk/> or <http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~kiz/>
Particulate what? Oh*soot*.Not a waste product,Ian.Put it round your
cabbages.Keeps the slugs off a treat:-)

Cheers
Mike Rooth

------------------------------
[ <- Message 26 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 95 09:00:09 -0700
From: "TeriAnn Wakeman"  <twakeman@apple.com>
Subject: Re: U.S. Defender 90 in '96?

In message <199507190538.AAA11174@butler.uk.stratus.com> Randy Parker writes:

> Again, there will be NO *1996* Defender 90 of any type. 

Gee no wonder Land Rovers don't sell large numbers in the US.  By the time 
Americans start to find out what they are, they are no longer being imported.

109s discontinued in the US at the end of '67 because Rover did not want 
to meet US specs

88s discontinued in the US at the end of '74  because Rover did not want
 to meet US specs

110s 500 US spec cars brought into US.  Almost all presold before they were 
imported...Market no big enough

90s discontinued in the US at the end of '95 because Rover did not want
to meet US specs

So what does it take to get Rover to make a commitment to bring Land Rovers to 
the world's largest car crazy economy, build a dealer support network and stay 
for a while?

This means all the Land Rover articals in US auto mags will disappear.  That 
they will no longer be included in comparison tests, that land Rovers will no 
longer be before the eyes of the forgetful fickle American public.  This means 
people who just started calling my car a Land Rover will start caling it a 
Toyota again soon.  This means since no one will remember what a Land Rover is 
that prices for used ones will go down and there will be less incentive for 
compitition in Land Rover spares in the US.  Also, since they will again be 
worth less, there will be less incentive to fix up ones in poor or worn out 
condition because its cheaper to pick up a better condition one.

Grumble

TJ Wakeman

------------------------------
[ <- Message 27 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

From: rpeng@cadev6.intel.com
Subject: re: '96 Defender 90's
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 95 9:00:03 PDT

>I have been saving my money and was planning on getting a new '96
>Defender 90 in December or January. Just took a trip to my local dealer
>and he indicated that '95 would most likely be the last model year for
>the Defender 90 in the states due to changes needed to meet '96 federal
>safety standards. Can anyone verify this?

That's what a salesman at SF British Motors said too, but I figured
he was just saying that to rush me into buying one. Actually, I
probably wouldn't want to buy one if it's no longer going to be
imported after just 2 years, because pretty soon, the parts dealers
and the mechanics will start their extortion campaign.

I believe the D90 should do very well here if the price weren't so 
high, at least initially. When Lexus first entered the U.S. market,
the price for the top of the line model was about $20K lower than what 
it is today. This gave a greater number of consumers a chance to
try out the product and prove its worth. If the product is product, the
company will surely win market share. Today, the D90 sells at such
low volume that many Consumer Guides don't even test it.

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roger Peng                                     (408)765-7863
Intel Corporation
Design Technology, Physical CAD
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------
[ <- Message 28 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 95 09:11:28 MST
From: DEBROWN@SRP.GOV
Subject: Winch or Lockers?? Which one first?

FROM:  David Brown                           Internet: debrown@srp.gov
       Computer Graphics Specialist * Mapping Services & Engr Graphics
       PAB219 (602)236-3544 -  Pager:6486 External (602)275-2508 #6486
SUBJECT: Winch or Lockers?? Which one first?
Hi, I have a '71 Land Rover Series IIa 88, and some extra $ coming in
shortly. 33" tires and 2" lift are planned. My questions are:

   1. Should I get a Warn 8274 or ARB locker(s?) first?
    1b. Should I get F/R lockers? Or just rear?

   2. Are there ANY other lockers available for this besides the ARB air
      lockers? (I've been searching, but found no others so far.)
      (If you know of any, PLEASE include part number and phone #
       so I can order them!!)

   3. What other additions would you recommend?

Other planned mod's include a rollcage, rino bars, stereo, heat shielding,
possible air vents for footwell...

Any used 8274's or lockers to fit this rig out there???

Thanks, Dave Brown

#=======#                Never doubt that a small group of individuals
|__|__|__\___            can change the world... indeed, it's the only
| _|  |   |_ |}          thing that ever has.
"(_)""""""(_)"                                          -Margaret Mead

------------------------------
[ <- Message 29 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 95 09:31 MST
From: jhoward@argus.lowell.edu (James D. Howard II)
Subject: My Land Rover's name

I gave the PO a tour of the telescope I am working on yesterday, and
of course we talked Land Rovers a lot.  He did not tell me this when
I bought it, but my SIII has a name.  Ephriam, pronounced eefrum.
Seems the mountain men used to call grizzly bears "Old Ephriam".

James Howard
1972 SIII 88	Flagstaff, Arizona, USA

------------------------------
[ <- Message 30 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 10:02:52 -0700 (PDT)
From: John Brabyn <brabyn@skivs.ski.org>
Subject: Re: U.S. Defender 90 in '96?

Yes, it seems a pity to me if the Defender is to be discontinued in the 
US after such a short run. I realize the number they sell is not large, 
and the price is high due to the 20% tarriff on 2-door vehicles, but I 
would have thought it worthwhile to LRNA for image purposes alone to have 
the only vehicle available in the US (apart from the Hummer) which is 
built for off-road as its only priority.

Since image is all in marketing campaigns, it seems that LRNA gets a lot 
of mileage out of its association with the "real" Land Rover, and it 
would be worth spending a couple of grand per Defender 90 (and even 
raising the price accordingly) to cobble on airbags and side impact beams 
or whatever. The vehicle would not be much more overpriced than it is now 
and would still have no competitors; nobody buys it for its bargain value 
anyhow.

Just my thoughts in case anyone from LRNA or Lode Lane is monitoring this 
list!

Cheers

John Brabyn
Mill Valley, Ca
89 RR

------------------------------
[ <- Message 31 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 13:16:14 -0400 (EDT)
From: Dixon Kenner <dkenner@emr1.emr.ca>
Subject: Re: U.S. Defender 90 in '96?

On Wed, 19 Jul 1995, TeriAnn Wakeman wrote:

> Gee no wonder Land Rovers don't sell large numbers in the US.  By the time 
> Americans start to find out what they are, they are no longer being 
> imported.

	Add stopping the import of the Mini in '68 to the USA becasue it
	they didn't want it to meet California spec, yet it sold happily
	in Canada until 1980 when the whole rotten BpL gave up the ghost
	(actually if they had waited 24 hours on that decision they would
	probably have stayed as the currency exchange then swung around...
	Later, 20/20 analysis shows that dumping NA was dumb, dumb, dumb
	as was ditching the TR-8 and a lot of other stuff.)

	Of course, if they did want to sell a few more Defenders... well
	better keep quiet... <ahem>

> So what does it take to get Rover to make a commitment to bring Land 
> Rovers to the world's largest car crazy economy, build a dealer 
> support network and stay for a while?

	Can't use Rover in Canada.  The name equates to junk up here, or
	in other words only slightly lower than British L*yl*nd sunk down
	too...  Remember, this is a company that has cut and run more
	than once.  Remember the Sterling?  Rover Group is just the latest
	name change, probably because it causes the least anger in the UK.
	If they were really so good outside the LR group & Mini (still sell
	every one made) why does Ford, GM, Honda, et al sell so much
	better on their own home turf?  They didn't call the BL headquarters
	at Longbridge the "Kremlin" for nothing...

------------------------------
[ <- Message 32 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 95 10:23:30 PDT
From: rlarson@lsil.com (Rick Larson)
Subject: re: '96 Defender 90's

Roger Peng says:
>Actually, I
>probably wouldn't want to buy one if it's no longer going to be
	 [ truncated by lro-digester (was 7 lines)]
>and the mechanics will start their extortion campaign.
>-- 
Have to disagree.  Most of the drivetrain is Discovery compatible.  Most
of the other parts are common across D90's and D110's throughout the world.
While I'd never expect to see Chevy or Ford type availability/pricing, I also
don't expect any serious price inflatation.

My biggest fear now is that some #$%*& will run a red light and total my 
irreplacable D90, 3 months after the 95's have sold out.  It is going 
to be interesting to see what happens to the used D90 market now that
supplies are limited.

>Actually, I
-Rick
'94 D90

Richard Larson
LSI Logic Corporation
(408) 433-7149

------------------------------
[ <- Message 33 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

From: Andrew Grafton <A.J.Grafton@lut.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Rover sales down 11%... Yeah...
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 95 18:24:02 BST

I'd just like to add (keeping well clear of the debate about 
sceintists, morals &c.) that the politicians and manufacturing
industries are not blameless in all this claptrap.

A massive reason for the government to introduce an incentive
for scrapping old cars is the financial and political pressure 
that car companies can bring to bear.  More often than not the 
opinions of a less 'powerful' or 'popular' group (perhaps in 
this case, those who know that old cars aren't necessarily the 
polluters) get trampled by popular opinion or quashed by the 
big boys.

Case in point - Greenpeace with popular support vs. government
and the 'evil polluters'.  <As an aside; IMHO they made the 
right decision there as I was worried what would be the next thing 
to be sunk deep down once a precedent about waste disposal/dispersion
had been set.  If it was only going to be a one-off then I reckon
it would have been alright.  I don't, however, want the Russians
scuttling their nuclear icebreakers there just 'cause it is OK 
for Shell to dump their equipment.>

So, just to express an opinion, I reckon the business of introducing 
an incentive to scrap cars is a load of old bollocks.  Imagine what
the recycling problems would be like if we all had a new car every 3
years?  

Doesn't it create a site more pollution to make a new car and run it
for 3 years than to run an existing one for another 3?  Even if it
is less efficient...

Within limits of course.

Perhaps car companies should be concentrating their efforts on making
efficient cars that _stay_ efficient and can be easily and cheaply 
repaired once they begin to wear out, rather than lobbying for stupid
incentives?  You can't design something to last forever, but you can
make steps toward planned replacement of parts rather than the whole
vehicle.  

There will always be those who want to own an old vehicle
either because it *is* old, or because it is cheap.  Give them the
opportunity to keep it as good as it ever was in performance terms.

Anyhow, that's my thoughts.

All the best,

Andy
Who sometimes feels guilty about travelling around in a Mobile Brick,
and often feels guilty about the amount of unburnt hydrocarbons it
throws out.  Sadly, the Mobile Brick is the only viable alternative
for what he wants to do.

------------------------------
[ <- Message 34 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 13:53:49 -0400 (EDT)
From: Dixon Kenner <dkenner@emr1.emr.ca>

WEIRDNUZ.386 (News of the Weird, June 30, 1995)

LEAD STORY

* In a May column, film critic Roger Ebert reported on the
popular Japanese animated film, "Pompoko," which features a
family of cute badger-like animals, but said the film would not
likely be successful in America.  The badgers' secret weapon is
an ability to make their testicles grow large so that they can crush
opponents.  Said a Japanese film fan, "The Japanese are more
open about bodily parts."  He said kids in Japan find the secret
weapon "hilarious." [Chicago Sun-Times, 5-23-95] 

------------------------------
[ <- Message 35 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 95 10:45:01 PDT
From: rlarson@lsil.com (Rick Larson)
Subject: Re: Winch or Lockers?? Which one first?

>From: DEBROWN@SRP.GOV
>   1. Should I get a Warn 8274 or ARB locker(s?) first?
	 [ truncated by lro-digester (was 6 lines)]
>   1. Should I get a Warn 8274 or ARB locker(s?) first?
>    1b. Should I get F/R lockers? Or just rear?
My, admittedly limited, experience with both is that the winch gets me out
of places my lockers got me into.  The winch has proved far more useful
to others on the trail too.  The lockers (ARB's) are awesome, fun to play
with, etc, but I'd have to vote winch first. 

-Rick
'94 D90

Richard Larson
LSI Logic Corporation
(408) 433-7149

------------------------------
[ <- Message 36 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

From: "John R. Benham" <BENHAM@WFOCLAN.USBM.GOV>
Date:          Wed, 19 Jul 1995 11:13:08 +1100
Subject:       Unsubscribe

unsubscribe digest

------------------------------
[ <- Message 37 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 11:53:23 -0400
From: Tony_Bonanno@nps.gov (Tony Bonanno)
Subject: Another Learning Experience - Springs on an IIA

Andrew Grafton posted a message about the effect of a loose prop shaft
on his Land Rover gearbox and clutch.  I recently had a similar
experience of changing one component only to find that it had a
dramatic effect on some other problems.  After driving my IIA for
approx. 25 years, I decided to replace the old and tired rear springs
as the bushings were also shot.  WOW!  What a difference!  Not only
does the car handle and ride better, but about 80% of the slop, play,
and clunking in the drivetrain that I had attributed to other
components wearing simply dissappeared!  The clutch judder I have been
experiencing the past couple of years (which in part is due to rear
main leaking) diminished significantly too!  I guess the obvious point
here is that if the rear wheels and axle aren't locked down
adequately, its going to aggravate everything in the drive path.
Components we often hear about include loose and worn U-joints,
gearbox output shaft, etc.  However, don't overlook those spring
bushings!  Can't wait to save up some money and see what happens when
I replace the front springs..

By the way, I decided NOT to replace the springs with the "handed"
versions as I never cared for the fact that my Land Rover always
wanted to lean to the passenger side due to the different camber of
the "handed" parts.  I still can't see the logic in that approach, at
least not on US roads.  I used the "driver's side" spring on both
sides... and the LR sits nice and level.  I will do the same for the
front.

Cheers!

Tony Bonanno, Santa Fe, NM
(SWB IIA hardtop - a rolling restoration since new)

------------------------------
[ <- Message 38 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 19:57:57 +0100
From: cw117@mole.bio.cam.ac.uk (Charlie Wright)
Subject: Re: Rover sales down 11%... Yeah...

At 6:24pm 19/7/95, Andrew Grafton wrote:

>I'd just like to add (keeping well clear of the debate about
>sceintists, morals &c.) that the politicians and manufacturing
>industries are not blameless in all this claptrap.

Are they ever?

>opinions of a less 'powerful' or 'popular' group (perhaps in
>this case, those who know that old cars aren't necessarily the
>polluters)

It all comes down to who wields the power, and in most modern western
societies, knowledge is no longer power... 'shame.

>I don't, however, want the Russians
>scuttling their nuclear icebreakers there just 'cause it is OK
>for Shell to dump their equipment.>

I do think cadmium and hydrocabons are in a different category than
plutonium and uranium, honestly...

>Imagine what
>the recycling problems would be like if we all had a new car every 3
>years?

Exactly. Even if it was five years, you'd have to do an AWFUL lot of miles
in those years to distribute the energy used and waste produced in making
the car. This is the logic that is (finally) making people re-consider
"Zero-emissions" vehicles.  Lead acid batteries' manufacture and disposal
for a "Zero-emissions" car puts more lead into the system than a car
burning leaded fuel would... and the electric is less efficient and
generally less useful.

>Doesn't it create a site more pollution to make a new car and run it
>for 3 years than to run an existing one for another 3?

yep. dunno where they want to pile all these dead ones. The EU doesn't want s

>Perhaps car companies should be concentrating their efforts on making
>efficient cars that _stay_ efficient and can be easily and cheaply
>repaired once they begin to wear out, rather than lobbying for stupid
>incentives?

BMW, and perhaps now Rover, has been working on both easily
reconditioned/renewed vehicles and fully-recylable vehicles.  The 325,
officially, can be fully recycled. BMW even set up a facility that could do
it as a test bed and proving ground. The idea doesn't seem to be catching
on in a big way, however.

>There will always be those who want to own an old vehicle
>either because it *is* old, or because it is cheap.

Why are my old cars never cheap? Must be that "one more thing to fix and...
oh, gosh, that looks pretty bad next to the new widget, better
replace/refurbish the whatsit too...." mine always suffers from... oh well,
at least they're old...

Cheers,
Charlie

C. R. Wright                                    Dept. of Genetics
+44 (0)1223 333970 telephone                    Univ. of Cambridge
+44 (0)1223 333992 telefax                      Downing Street, Cambs.
cw117@mole.bio.cam.ac.uk                        CB2 3EH, England

------------------------------
[ <- Message 39 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 14:46:07 -0400 (EDT)
From: Dixon Kenner <dkenner@emr1.emr.ca>
Subject: Re: your mail

On Wed, 19 Jul 1995, Dixon Kenner wrote:

> WEIRDNUZ.386 (News of the Weird, June 30, 1995)

	Opps, sorry, wrong list!

------------------------------
[ <- Message 40 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 95 12:05:40 -0700
From: "TeriAnn Wakeman"  <twakeman@apple.com>
Subject: Re: '96 Defender 90's

In message <199507191735.MAA12740@butler.uk.stratus.com> Rick Larson writes:

; My biggest fear now is that some #$%*& will run a red light and total my 
; irreplacable D90, 3 months after the 95's have sold out.  It is going 
; to be interesting to see what happens to the used D90 market now that
; supplies are limited.

As long as you have a commision number and a pink slip you don't have a totaled 
Land Rover, you have a rebuildable Land Rover.

teriAnn 

------------------------------
[ <- Message 41 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 95 20:07:11 PDT
From: Tony@hawtec.demon.co.uk
Subject: RE: Turner engine 

I fitted a Turner 4 cylinder engine last year and am pleased with it. If 
there is any information you need I'll do my best to help.
-------------------------------------
Tony Chapman             E-mail: Tony@hawtec.demon.co.uk
HAWTEC                   Tel:    01905 723200
Haswell House            Fax:    01905 613338 
St. Nicholas Street      Mobile: 0973 316835
Worcester
WR1 1UW

Date: 04/22/95
Time: 09:26:25

This message was sent by Chameleon 
-------------------------------------

------------------------------
[ <- Message 42 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 95 20:24:45 PDT
From: Tony@hawtec.demon.co.uk
Subject: Heated Windscreens: Availability

Thanks for the replies to my earlier posting.

Local enquiries indicate that the heated windscreen kit (includes swithches, 
 wiring, etc.) is no longer available from Land Rover. However John Craddock 
has been advertising the screens for some months in Land Rover Owner 
International magazine.  It was a vist to his stall at the Royal Show on 3 
July that prompted my question.  I had seen the advertisements but had not 
actually seen a screen.  However Craddock's actually had two on display.  I 
enquired about availability and was told there was no problem, although 
supply had been difficult last year. The screens are genuine Land Rover and 
are apparently still available through them.  

Craddocks price is 65 (65 pounds) sterling and they offer an export service. 
 The address is:

John Craddock Ltd
70-76 North Street
Bridgtown
Cannock
Staffordshire
WS11 3AZ
UK

Tel: +44 (0)1543 577207

Fax: +44 (0)1543 504818

I've ordered mine!
 
-------------------------------------
Tony Chapman             E-mail: Tony@hawtec.demon.co.uk
HAWTEC                   Tel:    01905 723200
Haswell House            Fax:    01905 613338 
St. Nicholas Street      Mobile: 0973 316835
Worcester
WR1 1UW

Date: 04/22/95
Time: 09:26:25

This message was sent by Chameleon 
-------------------------------------

------------------------------
[ <- Message 43 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 95 20:17:01 PDT
From: Tony@hawtec.demon.co.uk
Subject: RE: Idly Frustrated 

You may wish to look at the following if you have not already done so:

1) Are the valve clearances correctly set?

2) Have you checked the compression on each cylinder and are the results 
roughly equal?

3) Is the centrifugal adavnce in the distributor working properly? It';s not 
unknown for this to seize up.

4) Rotor arm is a bit worrying could be the wrong one.  If you like, measure 
it and I'll check dimensions against that fitted to my vehicle ('68 88").

5) Does the rotor arm fit the shaft firmly? I recently had a loose one that 
caused a clicking sound.

6) Any sign of shorting on the distributor cap or HT leads?

Hope this helps.
-------------------------------------
Tony Chapman             E-mail: Tony@hawtec.demon.co.uk
HAWTEC                   Tel:    01905 723200
Haswell House            Fax:    01905 613338 
St. Nicholas Street      Mobile: 0973 316835
Worcester
WR1 1UW

Date: 04/22/95
Time: 09:26:25

This message was sent by Chameleon 
-------------------------------------

[VERSION]
version=4.01.2

----------------------------------
Tony Chapman             E-mail: Tony@hawtec.demon.co.uk
HAWTEC                   Tel:    01905 723200
Haswell House            Fax:    01905 613338 
St. Nicholas Street      Mobile: 0973 316835
Worcester
WR1 1UW

Date: 04/22/95
Time: 09:26:25

This message was sent by Chameleon 
-------------------------------------

------------------------------
[ <- Message 44 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

From: jpappa01@InterServ.Com
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 95 16:02:31 PDT
Subject: Re: 	BSROA & D90

Hi all:

Thanks to D. Kenner for his US/CDN Club update(s). BTW the Dues for BSROA are 
$40/year initial year and 35/year renewal thereafter. As far as the insurance 
issue(s) we ask all attendees to sign a standard release prior to 
participation. 

As for D90 info - as I posted earlier, the D90 is NA for `96. The ragtop 
versions have ALL BEEN PRODUCED and are either in the shipping pipeline or at 
dealers now or in the port. The supply of these is beginning to wane as our 
store (Metro West) is only allocated two units for August! 

A little more info. on the D90 station wagon - again NOT IN PRINT YET - but 
possibly 3 color choices available - Conniston, Portofino, and Alpine. Pricing 
still N/A - but I was told low 30's?? Updates as I get them.. Please don't 
hold me accountable for the accuracy of the info. in these D90 postings unless 
I verify same from printed and/or official sources. Thanks!

Cheerz
Jim - now completely mad... and loving it!

------------------------------
[ <- Message 45 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

From: LANDROVER@delphi.com
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 19:05:28 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: your mail

Dixon sends a message and then, realizing his error..... 
 
> On Wed, 19 Jul 1995, Dixon Kenner wrote:
> > WEIRDNUZ.386 (News of the Weird, June 30, 1995)
>         Opps, sorry, wrong list!

-
Shoot! It was looking pretty good, too... 

Cheers
Mike

------------------------------
[ <- Message 46 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 17:11:09 -0600 (MDT)
From: Mike Slade <SLCN3@cc.usu.edu>
Subject: bleeding them today (hopefully)

Thanks to all who offered suggestions.

Teri-  You're right about not driving the car if it takes 4 pumps.  It actually
took about 6 or 7 before I could feel any serioius braking.

As for the Jack-All, well, I do have one (well broken in BTW) but I think I'll
pass on raising the car up 3 feet with it.  I do have a friend with a TR3
though...

Do I need to bleed the master cylinder with the whole system, or will doing the
wheels suffice?

Oh, and I would have had BP send the cylinders with the shipment for the frotn
ones, but they didn't have them in stock until Monday, so I got them as soon as
I could.

I guess I could put down a few of the parts I'm looking for here, if anyone has
them and is willing to part, please drop a line.

Needed:

Headliner - front/rear for IIA w/roof vents

Carb - Weber or Solex (a rebuildable cheap one would be nice)

Tailgate - need gate and hardware

Front bumper - a calf on the West Desert necessitated this replacement.

Thanks for the advice and everything.  

Oh, I just remembered seeing a show on Fox yesterday about some South African
miliatary something or other.  (caught it at the end)  Anyhow, there was a
shootout between a Willy's that had a howitzer in the rear end of it and a
black 109 wagon down a mountain road.  It ended at an airfield with lots of
gratuitous explosions and an '88 or two running around the tarmack.

Anyone else seen this?  Just wondering.

Adios,

Michael

------------------------------
[ <- Message 47 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

From: dwebb@waite.adelaide.edu.au (Daryl Webb)
Subject: Re: an aerodynamic "feature" ?
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 1995 10:54:23 +0930 (CST)

Lloyd ponders solihul delayed rain:
> It stays there above 30 kph approx, even if the rain stops.
then,
> suddenly flings itself at the windscreen, reducing visibility considerably,
> if you've turned off the wipers - because it stopped raining, remember?
> It's a bit of a shock the first few times that it happens.
> I was just wondering if 110/90s (and other stage 1's) do this too

Well my stage 1 certainly does, only way to reduce it is to mount a tyre on the
bonnet, which catches most of the spray.  (or drive a long way after the
rain stops and dry off the accumulation)
 
> An old chestnut I've not seen aired here:
> why do L-R drum brakes all (?) squeal and is there any way to
> stop them? - apart from lubricating with oil!

My hunch; dust buildup is the major cause, the secondary one is the rather
roughly finished rebonded linings which seem to be all yoy can get now.  Try
chamfering the leading edge of the lining with a file, this sometimes helps.
Oh yeh Glazed drums probably dont help....  When was the last time you had
the drums skimmed, if your anything like me the idea of replacing those 3"
x11" drums after only a couple of re-surfacings puts me off, I dread to think
what they will cost.
Hey i'm on a roll here (g), steady posts rubbing on the shoe ( my "rubbing
blocks fell to bits years ago :-(  

cheers
-- 

  Daryl

#end#

------------------------------
[ <- Message 48 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

From: JCassidyiv@aol.com
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 23:11:49 -0400
Subject: Koenig Winch

First off, thanks to all who have offered help on my new(old) winch purchase.
 I have figured out how I need to mount the winch, but the drive shaft
extends rearward from the bottom left edge of the winch-too far to the left
for connection to the front output(where the hand crank nut is).  Is it
supposed to connect to the output where the overdrive unit currently is?  If
so, do I have to remove the overdrive if I want to winch?(the overdrive is
new).  Thanks again for all the help I've received. 
Cheers!  John
P.S.  My '87 3.5l RR is getting 15.5mpg with the K+N air filter and
Flowmaster exhaust.  This is about a 2 mpg increase over baseline.  What are
others getting with their stock RR?  I'll let you know if it improves(and it
better, for the $) after the addition of the Jacob's Electronics Energy
team(high performance coil and ignition computer). 

------------------------------
[ <- Message 49 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

From: a-robw@microsoft.com
Subject: RE: Winch or Lockers?? Which one first?
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 95 10:50:00 PDT

For me, I found that I wouldn't have needed to use the winch when I have if 
I'd had better traction (i.e. better tires and/or lockers) The problem with 
a winch is that you have to get out find something to hook up to, hook it 
up, then unhook it, etc, etc, etc, OTOH, you can't pull a stump with 
lockers. An electric winch is pretty easy to hang, while lockers (depending 
on the model) can require some machine work to the axles (i.e. a lot of 
work). In my case, I put the winch on first a) because it looks "cooler" 
than lockers do (you can't even see them!) and b) I ran across a good deal 
on a used one. (pretty scientific, huh?)

 -- Bob W.
 ------------------
FROM:  David Brown                           Internet: debrown@srp.gov
       Computer Graphics Specialist * Mapping Services & Engr Graphics
        PAB219 (602)236-3544 -  Pager:6486 External (602)275-2508 #6486
SUBJECT: Winch or Lockers?? Which one first?
Hi, I have a '71 Land Rover Series IIa 88, and some extra $ coming in
shortly. 33" tires and 2" lift are planned. My questions are:

   1. Should I get a Warn 8274 or ARB locker(s?) first?
    1b. Should I get F/R lockers? Or just rear?

   2. Are there ANY other lockers available for this besides the ARB air
      lockers? (I've been searching, but found no others so far.)
      (If you know of any, PLEASE include part number and phone #
       so I can order them!!)

   3. What other additions would you recommend?

Other planned mod's include a rollcage, rino bars, stereo, heat shielding,
possible air vents for footwell...

Any used 8274's or lockers to fit this rig out there???

------------------------------
[ <- Message 50 -> end | Table of Contents | <- Digest 950720 -> Archive Index | <- Browser -> ]

  END OF LAND ROVER OWNER DIGEST 
 Input:  messages 48 lines 2308 [forwarded 201 whitespace 569]
 Output: lines 1912 [content 1141  forwarded 144 (cut  57) whitespace 528]

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.