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

From: Mr Ian Stuart <Ian.Stuart@ed.ac.uk>
Date:          Fri, 21 Jul 1995 08:43:10 +0000
Subject:       Re: re; 96 defenders...

On 20 Jul 95, John Hong wrote:

The top selling 4x4 in the UK sells almost twice as many units as it's 
nearest competitor, at that top seller is the Discovery

     ----** 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/>

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

From: Mr Ian Stuart <Ian.Stuart@ed.ac.uk>
Date:          Fri, 21 Jul 1995 08:56:00 +0000
Subject:       Re: The comments of Mike Rooth on Ian Smith

On 20 Jul 95, Nckcharles@aol.com wrote:

> To change subscription write to: Majordomo@Land-Rover.Team.Net
> Mike, thanks for the rebutal of Ian Stuart's recent rant and rave.

:-)

> (Wait a minute, I think I understand Mr. Stuart's objection, they made a
> "profit", how declasse' )
No, what I said was that Mr White would take a scrapped car (value 50 
quid) and sell a death-trap to people who would see the "make 200 quid" 
and not see the reverse side of the coin - they're driving a car that has 
been cobbled together as cheaply as possible.

I realise that other countries have different social environments, but the 
Thatcherite era (the "get rich quick" & the "loads money" 1980's) happened 
in Britain and the north of the country is still suffering from it.
(this is soon going to have to shift to alt.crap.politics.uk or something 
:-)

>  " That idea is so dumb, only an intellectual would believe it"
I prefer "Never underestimate the level of human stupidity"
:-)

     ----** 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/>

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

From: dwebb@waite.adelaide.edu.au (Daryl Webb)
Subject: Diff locks take #4
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 18:09:37 +0930 (CST)

Oh Sh*T why did I open my mouth today :-)

The info on diff lock sources is on Lloyd's page
http://www.cs.monash.edu.au:80/~lloyd/tildeLand-Rover/

under parts or something.

not on the Rover web like i said...   Sorry Ray sorry Lloyd

-- 

  Daryl (half cocked) Webb

2
1

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

From: Richard Jones <rich@apricot.co.uk>
Subject: Re: save the D90!
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 9:55:06 +0100 (BST)

John Hong wrote:
> ... We were 
> shown both the new Range Rover line (4.0??) and the "classic" Range Rover 
	 [ truncated by lro-digester (was 6 lines)]
> kept a smaller line going to make em - the thing is the orders were there - 
> not just the desire.

LR are currently building about 70 Classic's per week.
__ 
  _ __              Apricot Computer Limited
 ' )  )      /      3500 Parkside                 Tel:   (+44) 121 717 7171
  /--' o _. /_      Birmingham Business Park      Fax:   (+44) 121 717 0123
 /  <_<_(__/ <_     BIRMINGHAM  B37 7YS
 Richard Jones      United Kingdom                Email: richardj@apricot.co.uk 

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

From: Andrew Grafton <A.J.Grafton@lut.ac.uk>
Subject: Diesel emissions, running in, etc.
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 95 10:51:01 BST

A little data about our adventures with our 2.286 diesel 5 bearing.

Background ; engine blew up trying to pass MOT test and was rebored
40 thou oversize, had new pistons and bearings etc.  Also, recon 
injectors and good dist. pump fitted.

We have now almost completed running it in and here is some data
which may or may not be useful.

0 miles - engine very smoky.  Filled it with 15W40 diesel oil, not 20W50
as we wanted it to run in 'quickly'...  Injection timing adjusted to
be late to reduce load on engine in first stages.

30 miles - blue smoke almost gone.  Lots of white smoke from retarded
timing.  Advanced timing a little.  Lots of black smoke on acceleration.
Tappets needed adjusting.

200 miles - engine starts to develop a bit more power.  Advanced timing 
almost to correct setting but not quite.  Still shedloads of black smoke
on accelearation, but less and less white at idle (none when warmed up).
Tappets needed adjusting (again), but engine is starting to loosen up and
give more power easily.

450 miles - changed oil to 20W50.  Quite a lot of crap in oil filter housing,
despite engine being stripped totally and pressurewashed with steam/paraffin/
steam/duck oil.  Smoke tested giving a reading of 10 (irrelevant units),
which dropped to 8 (irrelevant units) after 6 tests.  Tested at 3000 rpm
peak.  Tappets adjusted again.  Head bolt torque checked.  Engine sounding
really nice.

800 miles - Tappets adjusted, timing advanced to correct setting.  Smoke
readings taken as before, started at 4 and dropped to 3.1 after the mandatory
6 tries.  Will pass MOT on that basis.  Engine is now saying 'drive faster'
 - a whole new experience in diesel LR ownership!

And that brings us up to date...

So - if you have to rebuild your diesel, try and do it at least 1K before
the emissions test (and limit it to 3000 rpm for the test).

Not sure if anyone is interested in the above, but there it is anyway.

All the best,

Andy
A.J.Grafton@lut.ac.uk

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

From: Andrew Grafton <A.J.Grafton@lut.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: U.S.Specs and Defender
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 95 10:25:39 BST

> > Its all about U.S.Specs.Its simply not economical to modify
> > what is,after all,a nearly fifty year old concept to suit
	 [ truncated by lro-digester (was 7 lines)]
> Rover that carrys on the spirit and looks but can keep its passangers alive from
> a 50 or 60 MPH side or front impact.  If they design it correctly and build it 
A little picky point...

The chance of anyone designing a viable car that can keep its passengers 
alive in a 50 or 60 mph side or front impact is almost nil.  Anything over
50mph (frontal) is usually unsurvivable as there is just too much energy to 
dissipate.  Side impacts are even worse. 

Those are crashes into a brick wall or angled brick wall, as per the
statutory tests, which are the easiest for production cars to pass.  
For real-life crashes (e.g. driving into rear of
stationary truck) reduce the allowable speed by about a third...

A Series LR would probably pass the current US regulations if fitted with
appropriate seatbelts and stronger doors.  A Trabant will, as will 
Reliant Robins and VW Beetles <scary>.  The only problem is that the
doors need to be stiffer to withstand the totally unrealistic side
impact test.

Emissions tests, however, are another matter...

I think Landrover's problem in the US is one of market share and 
the way the cars have (or haven't) been protrayed in the past.  It
would be economically viable to modify the cars for the US market
if only there was a larger, established customer base.

I would also expect that the Defender (or equivalent) will still be 
sold in the US because the UK isn't that far behind the US with its 
regulations.  It may be withdrawn every now and then but I reckon
the US will see sporadic shipments when the specs on both sides
of the pond match up. 

Just my opinions,

All the best,

Andy
A.J.Grafton@lut.ac.uk

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

From: Andrew Grafton <A.J.Grafton@lut.ac.uk>
Subject: MOT test for diesels to change (2nd go)
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 95 11:44:04 BST

It's just come to my attention that the diesel MOT emissions
test will change on 1 September this year, vastly for the 
worse re: LR diesel engines.

The method of testing remains the same (it will still be a load of crap,
testing the wrong things), but the values of smoke opacity will have
to be even lower.

Engine			Was	Will be

Normally Aspirated 	3.2	2.5 
Turbo or other mods.	3.7	3.0

The units are irrelevant as they do not exist in the real world.

I'd suggest that if your MOT is running out and your engine is smoky,
that you get a test before Sept. 1 when the goalpoasts move _again_.

The changes only apply to vehicles first registered after August 1,
1979.  Earlier vehicles are still subject to the same tests they
were before (lucky buggers).

The above is just in case there is anyone else out there feeling
victimised...

All the best,

Andy
A.J.Grafton@lut.ac.uk

P.S. Can't get lro-uk@team.net to work...  Am I doing it wrong?

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

Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 11:59:58 +0059 (BST)
From: Charlie Wright <cw117@mole.bio.cam.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: The comments of Mike Rooth on Ian Smith

Ahem:

A Northern oil burner once grieved-
That he felt science always deceived.
Some loudly complained,
But the wise ones abstained,
And I'm not quite sure what we've achieved...

Hey, guys, relax.  We're all friends here... right?
(head down).

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

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

Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 12:32:40 +0059 (BST)
From: Charlie Wright <cw117@mole.bio.cam.ac.uk>
Subject: Crash test dummies

I've always been dubious of high speed side-impact tests, because even a
strong frame will not stop you getting punctured by something coming
through a door skin. You'd need an armoured car for that. The skin and
door together are just not enough metal to absorb the impact. If you
dissipate it into the top and bottom with clever geometrical design, you
would need a seriously strong space frame IN THE DOOR and buttressed to
the rest of the cage. Could be done, but not easily in a conventional
door.

I suppose volvo's side air-bags are a budding idea, but I don't think 
they're quite there yet.

The Land Rover advantage is primarily its mass in a collision. With a 
wall, the chassis is not a very good crumple zone...

I would think that on a vehicle this high, a sort of outer chassis frame 
rail along the passenger compartment (at 'car' height) would be the only 
practical side-impact protection without changing the doors completely 
(and the internal space).

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

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

From: "Tom Rowe" <TROWE@AE.AGECON.WISC.EDU>
Date:          Fri, 21 Jul 1995 07:09:54 GMT -0600
Subject:       Re: Limited slip not in a LR Series IIa.

> I'm afraid that a limited slip does NOT come with a Land Rover series
> IIa. (I wish!)

Once in a great while you might find a IIA with a limited slip that 
was an option. Apparently they were real junk and LR quit offering 
them, and most of them have long since gone to that great scrap heap 
in the sky.

> I am hoping that someone, somewhere knows of another alternative, not
> that the ARB's are bad, just expen$ive.

In the '80's Al at DAP was selling a locker similar to the ARB, only 
it was operated manually via a cable. I can't remember if it was from 
the UK or from AU.

> Warn doesn't make a receiver hitch mount
> for this winch,

Make one.
Tom

Tom Rowe
UW-Madison Center for Dairy Research    
608-265-6194, Fax:608-262-1578        
trowe@ae.agecon.wisc.edu                

 Four wheel drive allows you to get
 stuck in places even more inaccessible.

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

From: Easton Trevor <TEASTON@DQC2.DOFASCO.CA>
Subject: Next question
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 95 08:23:00 DST

Re winches
Does anyone know of a self contained portable winch with an IC engine? 
Something like a chain saw with wire instead of a chain. This could be a 
valuable recovery tool attachable between and two objects that need to be 
pulled together.

Trevor Easton

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

From: "Tom Rowe" <TROWE@AE.AGECON.WISC.EDU>
Date:          Fri, 21 Jul 1995 07:19:26 GMT -0600
Subject:       Re: Prices for 2nd Hand Landies 

> > Does anyone have a vague idea what $38K is an Australian Dollars. 
Check out http://bin.gnn.com/cgi-bin/gnn/currency.
Happy converting,
Tom

Tom Rowe
UW-Madison Center for Dairy Research    
608-265-6194, Fax:608-262-1578        
trowe@ae.agecon.wisc.edu                

 Four wheel drive allows you to get
 stuck in places even more inaccessible.

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

From: "Tom Rowe" <TROWE@AE.AGECON.WISC.EDU>
Date:          Fri, 21 Jul 1995 07:49:28 GMT -0600
Subject:       Re: Next question

> Does anyone know of a self contained portable winch with an IC engine? 
> Something like a chain saw with wire instead of a chain. This could be a 
	 [ truncated by lro-digester (was 7 lines)]
> pulled together.
> Trevor Easton
Trevor,
Yes, there is an attachment that you can get that replaces the bar 
and chain on a saw. Several thousand pound pull as I reacall. Place 
here called Northern Hydraulics sells them. I have one of their 
catalogs at home and I'll see if I can get the particulars for you.
Tom

Tom Rowe
UW-Madison Center for Dairy Research    
608-265-6194, Fax:608-262-1578        
trowe@ae.agecon.wisc.edu                

 Four wheel drive allows you to get
 stuck in places even more inaccessible.

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

From: Alan Richer/CAM/Lotus <Alan_Richer/CAM/Lotus.LOTUS@crd.lotus.com>
Date: 21 Jul 95  8:56:37 EDT
Subject: Infamous Rover front engine covers...

Greetings to the assemblage!

Please help settle an argument that Charlie and I are having.

We both know that there are front engine covers for the 2.25/2.5L
petrol and Diesel engines that are modified to be able to mount
options such as vacuum pumps, hydraulic pumps and the suchlike.

I contend that these mountings are two posts that are cast onto the
front cover, to the left and slightly above centerline of the crankshaft
pulley.  These are drilled for bolts, but contained nothing on my engine.

Charlie is of the opinion that these are not for use like this, and that the 
proper mounting is
actually farther up the engine and is a fabricated mounting.

Opinions?

    Yours, Alan

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

Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 06:04:33 -0700
From: jjbpears@ix.netcom.com (Jeremy Bartlett)
Subject: Re: The Land Rover Owner Daily Digest

You wrote: 

>Date: Thu, 20 Jul 95 09:46:00 MST
>From: DEBROWN@SRP.GOV
	 [ truncated by lro-digester (was 6 lines)]
>FROM:  David Brown                           Internet: debrown@srp.gov
>       Computer Graphics Specialist * Mapping Services & Engr Graphics

>?? Anyone use the "receiver hitch" type mount on a Land Rover??
>   (To allow it to be mounted in front OR rear)
>Subject: Next question... (Written in "Taylor-ease")
I have this set up on my D90 and have been pleased with it.  There are plusses and 
minuses to the setup.  One minus is that due to front and rear take off angle 
reduction I usually keep the winch/skid in the vehicle until needed - of course this 
has the plus of keeping the winch itself cleaner and prolonging its life.  By the way 
I use a dual battery set up with an isolator.

snip
>And the "Taylor" question of the day... "If I hook the hook of a front
>mounted winch to the rear end, can I shorten my wheel base? Say, turn
>my "88" into an "80"?
>FROM:  David Brown                           Internet: debrown@srp.gov

Sure! Just make sure the center of the vehicle is braced from below so that central 
ground clearance increases rather than decreases :)

Cheers,

Jeremy Bartlett
'94 D90 (going, going,....)
'65 SIIA 109 SW (Matilda)

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

From: ScottFugate_Group8@ctdvns1.ctd.ornl.gov
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 95 9:15:50 EDT
Subject: RR Brake Squeal - SCREEEECH

Gang,

Anybody ever experience obnoxious brake noises after changing brake pads on a 
RR?  I put new pads on all four corners last week, and now am most annoyed at 
the sounds I am hearing.  Pads are silent under brake pressure, and at highway 
speeds.  At moderate speeds or immediately after braking, however, they sound 
like a cat walking up the keyboard of the church organ.  Each corner has a 
distinctive note and the squeals start at millisecond intervals.  I used 
replacement pads from a local source.  I mean, who goes to an "authorized 
parts source" for BRAKE PADS?  They are Beck-Arnley brand and are marked "non 
asbestos" and "Made in Canada".  The only difference that I can ascertain from 
the original setup is that the original pads were stuck to the calipers with 
some sort of fibrous looking two-sided adhesive stuff.  Reason tells me that 
that stuff probably aids in pulling the pads away from the rotors after 
braking.  Do pads in the green and white boxes come with this adhesive?   
Anybody suggest a substitute?  Will this cacophony go away eventually?  It's a 
little embarrassing to slow for a red light and sound worse that the '75 
Maverick in the other lane.

Screeeeech! WHAT? I can't hear you.

Scott Fugate

1970 IIA 88
1989 RR - You can hear me coming.

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

Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 14:47:48 +0059 (BST)
From: Charlie Wright <cw117@mole.bio.cam.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Infamous Rover front engine covers...

> Charlie is of the opinion that these are not for use like this, and that the 
> proper mounting is
> actually farther up the engine and is a fabricated mounting.

Charlie is also of the opinion that he has the two mounts mentioned, but 
was told there was a special set (made for early 110 diesels?) of these 
covers that had a bracket mount for the vacuum pump.

However, Charlie has never seen one live and in person...

Charlie

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

Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 14:45:50 +0059 (BST)
From: Charlie Wright <cw117@mole.bio.cam.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: RR Brake Squeal - SCREEEECH

A mechanic I know swears by 'anti-sqeal' liberally applied to metal pads 
(Repco metal masters in this case).  I haven't ever had a problem on that 
car, admittedly, but I didn't change the pads, either. The 109 doens't 
suffer from squeal (nor does it suffer from braking very often either...)

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

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

Date: 21 Jul 95 09:50:52 EDT
From: "R. Pierce Reid" <70004.4011@compuserve.com>
Subject: D90's in U.S. Business Perspective

A lot of excellent points have been made on keeping the D90 in the U.S., and I
think we are all in agreement that LRNA should find a way to keep the D90 in the
country...

But let me take on the role of businessman for a minute and say that the best
way to ensure the future of the D90 in this country is to *buy one*. 

Ok, not a totally practical idea for those of use not named Gates or Perot...,
but business is business and LR is not in the business of supplying us with our
favorite vehicles. They are in the business or working to ensure a
solidfinancial return to their parent company (BMW) and ultimately to
shareholders.  

We can raise a hue and cry that says keep the D90, we're your loyal fans...(And
they will listen to some extent).  But unless we are loyal,*paying customers*
and there is a monetary reason for Solihull to keep the D90 in the U.S., we're
going to lose it.

If I remember my numbers right, Land Rover is only selling about 600- 700 D90's
each year in the U.S.  Not sure how many worldwide, but certainly a whole lot
more than that.  With that limited volume in the U.S.,  it's very difficult to
justify modifying vehicles for U.S. Spec. etc.  And, the modifications and
federalizing drive the vehicle goes through the roof, making the vehicles
prohibitively expensive -- limiting the number of potential buyers.  I believe
nearly 1/3 of the new D90 cost in the U.S. is tariffs of one kind or another.  

Another issue is that everyone loves the *concept* of a D90.  They love the
rugged looks, the huge wheels, the convertible, etc.  But loving the concept of
owning one and living with one day-to-day are not practical for the average U.S.
consumer.  Car companies go through this same kind of challenge when proposing
concept cars and asking consumer inputs on designs.  Everyone *wants* a 500 HP,
rear-engined 2 seater all-wheel-drive sportscar that does 0 - 60 in  0.7
seconds.  Everyone will tell a car company that they should build it, damn the
cost.  Then only the few people who can afford such a vehicle as a second or
third 'impractical' vehicle ever buy one and the company loses its shirt.
Persaonally, I would not be able to justify my D90 as my "only" vehicle.  Some
can, true, but I also need a 4-door sedan for business reasons.  I cannot ask
clients to clamber up the sides of a D90.   If I were a family sort, I would
probably have a Suburban (or Ugh -- a minivan -- nah, scratch that... no
minivan).

There are some solutions... the D90 can become a loss-leader (like the Dodge
Viper which brings lots of people into the showroom who then buy stealths,
minivans and Shadows, etc).  The D90 can and does get people into other vehicles
in the line becaus they want a vehicle "associated" with the D90 (ie. the more
practical -- from a U.S. Market standpoint -- Disco or the more luxurious Range
Rover) etc.   From that standpoint, it perhaps can be written off as a marketing
expense, continue to come to the U.S. as a high-price vehicle that will win all
the magazine contests and keep the LR name in the news and maybe even make a
little money.

The D90 could also be offered in a low-price, high-volume configuration.  But if
I put my businesssmans hat on again, I remember that in the U.S. market *most*
people looking for utility are going to buy Chev, Ford and Dodge work trucks
which have more cargo space and, frankly, appeal to the buy-American sentiment
that is prevalent in that market.  The low-price folks in that marketplace will
buy S-10's and Toyotas...  The D90 and even the 110 are also handicapped by a
lack of space as well.  Remember, the U.S. buyer judges a pickup on whether it
will take a 4 x 8 sheet of plywood lying flat in the bed.  The D90 is not a
practical work-truck for the U.S. market.

You could go after the Jeep buyers, but that market has switched over to the
suburban teens/Gen X/22-30-year-old market.  They think the Land Rover is really
cool.  But in general they also want CD players, carpet, A/C, power everything,
windows that roll down, etc, etc, etc.  By the time you add all that to a D90,
you're back at about double the price of a loaded Wrangler -- way beyond the
reach of that market segment.  

So, having rambled here a bit, I agree I would love to see Defender 90's (and
would really like the 110 to come over in some configuration!).  But, unless we
fans start buying them along with admiring them, I have a hunch the folks at
Solihull will have no choice to drop the LR out of this market to be replaced by
RR's, Discos and whatever new vehicle LR is considering.  

Unfortunately, with a $30K pricetag...my 'just buy one' recommendation is
another solution easier said than done for most of us.

Anyway, as a happy D90 owner in the US, I say let's save it, let's keep more
coming and I hope LRNA continues to work to crack this market.  It won't be
easy, but I'd hate to see Solihull pull the Land Rover out from the U.S. market
a second time!

Cheers, 

R. Pierce Reid

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

Date: 21 Jul 95 09:58:19 EDT
From: "R. Pierce Reid" <70004.4011@compuserve.com>
Subject: DuPont Registry

Anyone else see the "Rare" Series IIa lightweight in the DuPont Registry for
$54,000!

If anyone is interested, I have a *Rare' D90 for just $80,000  and an ultra-rare
fire engine for just $2,034,165.99  

And I can come up with lots more rare Land Rovers starting at just $37,000.

What a joke.  I wonder if Taylor will buy it?  (Sorry Taylor, could not resist)

RPR

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

Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 10:06:43 -0400 (EDT)
From: Dixon Kenner <dkenner@emr1.emr.ca>
Subject: Re: Limited slip not in a LR Series IIa.

On Thu, 20 Jul 1995 DEBROWN@SRP.GOV wrote:

> I'm afraid that a limited slip does NOT come with a Land Rover series
> IIa. (I wish!) 

	NADA rear end?

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

From: Brian Neill Tiedemann <s914440@minyos.xx.rmit.EDU.AU>
Subject: lotsa stuff!
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 1995 00:23:43 +1000 (EST)

A happy Friday 2u all!
Happy because my not really that ugly Range Rover now *wait for it* 
Goes where you point it without going other places along the way....
WOW.
The difference is unbelieveable, ball joint replaced, and spline cleaned 
up and reseated, then assembled with locktite and lock tab and lots of force.
This thing would almost pass for a car to drive now if it were not for 
that aeroplane which follows me everywhere, or is that just my Super 
Swampers telling me that they like MUD, not this black hard stuff.
Replys:
Mysterious jumping water- Happens on the Rangie too, I have decided that 
at least on RRs the large bonnet with a dip in the middle collects water 
at any speed, just watch it flow around. When braking, this water is 
thrown forward by its own inertia, dropping into space in front of the 
truk, then flying up and onto the screen in the prevailing airflow over 
the (still moving) car body. 
Also noticed a similar effect with snow... collects mainly around bullbar 
and bumper areas, then long after getting below the snow line and seeing 
the last of bonnet snow, a chunk or two flits up from nowhere to scare 
the living ummm daylights out of you.
Lockers vs Winch- What? did u say looks better?!! Who is looking when 
either of them is worth a pinch of poo?( cept for that bogged, red faced 
tojo driver when u drag him out with the 40 sumthin year old landie).

For some locker options talk to :
Mal Storey, Key 4 wheel drive, Queensland, Aus. +61 75 303 943 (fax 303 932)
and
Jeff McNamara, Jack McNamara Differential Services, Victoria, Aus
+61 3 9555 2213

LR Brake Squeak- Doesn't a landie include an antisqueak system, something 
along the lines of a self oiling device known as an oil *seal*< (joke).

US D90s- Anyone else going to get the US spec if they don't anymore? 
Here in OZ, we just want 90s full stop (plees).

Heated screens- 1990 on RRs have heated screens, incorporating a 10 or so 
minute timer to cut out the heat after that period.

Questions:
Heated screens- Anyone know if one is available to suit a 77RR? price, 
part #, will a late model one fit or don't they use rubbers anymore???

Manifolds (EFI)- anyone know what internal diameter the ram tubes in a 
3.9 EFI are? same as 3.5? Is 4.0 or 4.6 bigger? (is the 4.0/4.6 still 
anything like the 3.5/3.9) - My 5 litre will like bigger airways...

PS. Mike- who in their right mind would use a Mog to sweep streets?!
Why- well cos the bos gave them the key I guess... roads like these don't 
need sweeping, look at all this mud!

BT.
77 RR (steer, steer)

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

Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 10:13:10 -0400 (EDT)
From: Dixon Kenner <dkenner@emr1.emr.ca>
Subject: Re: Prices for 2nd Hand Landies

On Fri, 21 Jul 1995, Tiffany Downing wrote:

> Does anyone have a vague idea what $38K is an Australian Dollars.  We are 
> selling our IIA and buying (hopefully) a County (Can't afford a Discovery 
> yet)  :-(

	One Oz $ is about 74 cents greenback.

> Not that it helps us any but I was just interested in what sort of prices 
> vehicles sell for in the States and what their equivalent price is over here.

	Meaningless question except for curiousity.  There were 525 110's
	brought into NA iduring 1992.  No others.  Makes them a bit rare,
	and to some desirable.  If you want a five door (and don't want a
	Disco or RR) your next bet is either the NADA Station Wagon (109
	Station Wagon with the 6 cylinder w/ westlake head) or some
	form of the generic IIA 109 Station Wagon.  There is nothing
	else (legal that is) available.  Hence the premium price.  There
	are places in the USA and Canada where Land Rovers are pretty cheap.
	That's because there are lots about.  Where they are more rare,	
	the price rises.  Simple supply and demand

> We're planning to ask for $5,000 for our Series IIA, LWB, Ex-Army.  What 
> sort of prices to they sell for over there?

	MOT'd etc. you should get that easily over here, assuming it is
	straight etc...

	Rgds,

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

From: Andrew Grafton <A.J.Grafton@lut.ac.uk>
Subject: Re : Crash test dummies
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 95 15:00:00 BST

Woah!

You didn't want to get me going on this subject.  Too late now!
Just for the picky buggers, the following are my opinions based
on my reading and observations so don't blame lut.ac.uk!!

>>I've always been dubious of high speed side-impact tests, because even a
strong frame will not stop you getting punctured by something coming
through a door skin. You'd need an armoured car for that. The skin and
door together are just not enough metal to absorb the impact. If you
dissipate it into the top and bottom with clever geometrical design, you
would need a seriously strong space frame IN THE DOOR and buttressed to
the rest of the cage. Could be done, but not easily in a conventional
door<<

Too right!  Fortunately, most side impacts are from other vehicles
and are therfore 'blunt' in the extreme.  The existing US side impact
test does not reflect this and basically consists of a telegraph pole
sized bar being pressed into the side of the vehicle and measuring
the deformation (a quasi-static test - not dynamic).  Door beams
are highly effective at preventing intrusion from this kind of test,
which is why they are fitted.  Most intrusion problems occur from
destruction of the impacted vehicle's own safety cage whacking into
the occupant, not penetration from outside. 

The percentage of crashes involving 'pole' impacts of this type is tiny
compared to those from a 'blunt' object (another car?), a fact
neatly sidestepped by legislation.  At some stage in the next couple
of years we will see the introduction of a 'proper' side impact test
based around a rolling chassis used as an impactor on the side of
a vehicle.  The versions which have been tested have a honeycomb
structure on the front of what looks very like a Landrover chassis.
The honeycomb deforms to simulate crumple zone deformation of the
impacting vehicle.

Door beams are ineffective when the impacting load
is spread across the door width and the A and B (windscreen and 
back of front door) pillars.  Some of the testing that has been
carried out indicates that in realistic side impact tests, cars with
door beams are more likely to cause injury to the occupants than those
without.  If you'd like to know the reasoning I will go into it, but
it requires some lengthy explanation.  What is important is that 
when the door presses into the cabin (it will), it must do so evenly
without angling top or bottom towards the occupant - this reduces
peak loads by presenting a flat impacting face to the occupant.

<<I suppose volvo's side air-bags are a budding idea, but I don't think 
they're quite there yet.>>

The Volvo bags work (maybe) because they introduce a site more 
padding between occupant and door than is presently available.  
They also cause the accelerations on the occupant to start earlier 
so they can be spread out over a longer period of time, reducing 
peak forces.  

Risking *huge* flames and what-not, I would hazard that the Volvo SIPS
system actually does little for the occupants in the crash (collisions
with telegraph poles excepted), but is very effective at passing the
current legislation for side-impacts.  It will prevent intrusion,
but at the cost of far higher accelerations on the occupant.

SIPS is the door/floor beams without the airbag.

The side airbag (SIPS bag) will help the car pass the better side
impact test I described before.  Risking an even larger moral/
intellectual thrashing I would go so far as to say that Volvo 
have made their cars too stiff by putting all the ironmongery in
the doors and floors and that the SIPS bag is one way of gracefully 
overcoming a problem that has been caused in an otherwise fairly
safe family of vehicles.

Remember, this in only my opinion...

<<The Land Rover advantage is primarily its mass in a collision. With a 
wall, the chassis is not a very good crumple zone...>>

In a frontal, it could be quite good because the strength of the chassis
is in proportion to its weight.  The chassis *has* to crumple because
it is absorbing the energy from 1700kg (LWB) of Landrover.  Having
said that it would have to buckle in the right places, and I bet it
doesn't...  It would begin to buckle in the middle of a long rail or
something, 2/3 of the way down the back of the car!

One of the biggest advantages of a LR in a real smash next to its 
weight is its height.  In a frontal, vehicles with a high up
structural mass tend to ride over those with a lower one.  That 
means that you destroy the other guy's safety cage by parking your
front axle in his front seats, but you're OK Jack  :-(

<<I would think that on a vehicle this high, a sort of outer chassis frame 
rail along the passenger compartment (at 'car' height) would be the only 
practical side-impact protection without changing the doors completely 
(and the internal space).>>

God knows what would happen if a LR got hit from the side.  A stock
SIII would probably kill the driver as the impacting vehicle would 
crumple on the chassis and force the seatboxes up to the roof.  Squash.
That assumes it gets hit by a car... A truck would probably take the
body off the chassis!

You'd be best off with a deformable external safety cage (not as strong
as a roll-cage, probably)  attached to the chassis.  Poor pedestrians
:-(

Should go and do some work now, but this is sort-of work.

Sorry if any of the above is unclear but I am trying not to go on.
Flames and opinions (nicely worded of course!) invited.

All the best,

Andy
A.J.Grafton@lut.ac.uk
Illustrating how it is possible to get around Majordomo's snipping.

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

Date: Fri, 21 Jul 95 09:26:01 -0700
From: "TeriAnn Wakeman"  <twakeman@apple.com>
Subject: Re: save the D90!

So the bad news is that Rover will no longer be ordering parts from OEM 
suppliers for series Land Rovers and putting them into Land Rover boxes And 
Rover's North will no longer have a reason to charge so much for parts.

The good news is I can get just about any part for my Triumph TR3 mail order 
overnight

The bad news is that Rover still hasn't figured out how to be competitive in the
4X4 US Market and is discontinuing the D90 in the US.

The good news is that by the time people really can't find parts for the ancient
series III cars, they can move over to those old D90s sitting abandoned for 
years in some ex-yuppie's back yard because their local auto parts store does 
not carry parts for them.

Those of us with Triumphs know the GLORY still lives...even if Rover* doesn't

*  Rover owns the rights to the Triumph name.

BMW has at least one manufacturing plant in the US.  If they can't figure out 
how big the US 4X4 market is, and what its primary price range is and make 
competitive products (Sorry but $40K+ cars are not competitive with Wranglers)
its their pockets that will remain empty.

For those of us who have Land Rovers, well we already got ours and others come 
up for sale all the time.  You just have to look. Eventually 110 & 90 prices 
will go the way of the Sterling prices and they will become affordable to the 
masses.

Owning a TR3, MGBGT and a IIA 109, I have long since realized that the enjoyment
I derive from my cars, or the parts on them, do NOT come from factory support or
presence.

I have always thought that top British automotive execs have interbred entirely 
too closely for entirely too long.  But it is always sad to see the empirical 
evidence.

TeriAnn

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

Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 09:44:15 -0700 (PDT)
From: John Brabyn <brabyn@skivs.ski.org>
Subject: Re: Next question

On Fri, 21 Jul 1995, Easton Trevor wrote:

> Does anyone know of a self contained portable winch with an IC engine? 
> Something like a chain saw with wire instead of a chain. This could be a 
> valuable recovery tool attachable between and two objects that need to be 
> pulled together.

Rule makes such a winch -- a couple of variations are available. They do 
indeed look like truncated chainsaws. From memory, the capacity is lowish 
though.

Cheers

John Brabyn
89 RR

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

Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 09:51:15 -0700 (PDT)
From: John Brabyn <brabyn@skivs.ski.org>
Subject: Re: RR Brake Squeal - SCREEEECH

On Fri, 21 Jul 1995 ScottFugate_Group8@ctdvns1.ctd.ornl.gov wrote:

> Anybody ever experience obnoxious brake noises after changing brake pads on a 
(RR)

Yes. Try champhering the edges of the pads, rough them up with 80 grit 
sandpaper, and use one of the available goos for sticking in between the 
pistons and the pads.
As a matter of interest, the "genuine" pads do contain asbestos

> 1970 IIA 88

Hey -- what about the RR -- doesn't it count?? (just kidding)

Cheers

John Brabyn

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

Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 09:54:53 -0700 (PDT)
From: John Brabyn <brabyn@skivs.ski.org>
Subject: Re: D90's in U.S. Business Perspective

Hear Hear -- very sound sentiments! Get out your check books everyone!
Seriously, P. Pierce Reid is correct, much though the facts distress us all.

Cheers

John Brabyn
89 RR

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

From: Russell Burns <burns@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: DuPont Registry
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 95 9:58:52 PDT

You must be talking canadian dollars. It cost a lot to support a queen....
Russ
> To change subscription write to: Majordomo@Land-Rover.Team.Net

	 [ truncated by lro-digester (was 17 lines)]
> What a joke.  I wonder if Taylor will buy it?  (Sorry Taylor, could not resist)
> RPR

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

From: Russell Burns <burns@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: RR Brake Squeal - SCREEEECH
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 95 10:05:57 PDT

 I use some Anti sqeel junk on all my disk pads, It is a blue
grease like substance which goes between the brake pad, and the
brake cylinder. It work on my rovers..
Russ
> To change subscription write to: Majordomo@Land-Rover.Team.Net

	 [ truncated by lro-digester (was 30 lines)]
> Screeeeech! WHAT? I can't hear you.
> Scott Fugate
> 1970 IIA 88

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

Subject: Re: D90's in U.S. Business Perspective 
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 11:25:20 -0700
From: Benjamin Allan Smith <bens@archimedes.vislab.navy.mil>

In message <199507211353.IAA16855@butler.uk.stratus.com>you wrote:

> A lot of excellent points have been made on keeping the D90 in the U.S., and 
> think we are all in agreement that LRNA should find a way to keep the D90 in 
> country...

	And lots of good points from you.

> If I remember my numbers right, Land Rover is only selling about 600- 700 D90
> each year in the U.S.  Not sure how many worldwide, but certainly a whole lot
> more than that.  With that limited volume in the U.S.,  it's very difficult t
> justify modifying vehicles for U.S. Spec. etc. 

	In 1994 Land Rover sales in North America was 12,045 vehicles of
which 4,082 were Rangies, 6,495 were Discos and 1,468 were D90s.  
(Numbers reported by Jim Pappas in the BSROA newsletter) In 1994 Land Rover 
world sales was 90,079 vehicles (of which 13,667 were Range Rovers, Mk I,
2,669 were Ranger Rover, Mk 2 (called 4.0 SE in US, I dunno the UK name),
52,652 were Discos, and 21,091 were Defenders of all sizes. (Numbers from
recent LRO issue).  So the United States Defender market is 7% of Defender sales
worldwide.

	As a separate note, in LRW (May 1995) on page 8 is an article that
quotes Land Rover officals as stating that the 1998 Defenders will meet US
Department of Trade regulations.   Is this plan still in the works?  I 
dunno.  Maybe it was in April, but scrapped in July.  Maybe its more
cost effective to skip the 1996 and 1997 model years and engineer the
1998 one.  

	Also remember that the US D110s were of limited numbers (500 US and
25 Canada)  The US D90s were also intended to be limited numbers (3000
if I recall correctly).  US D90s have a badge with a number and no upper 
limit, which tends to support this theory.  If sales in 1995 are similar to
1994, then 1400 +1400 = ~2800.

Ben

----------------
 Benjamin Smith      bens@vislab.navy.mil
 Science Applications International Corporation
 Naval Air Warfare Center, Weapons Division, China Lake
 1972 Land Rover Series III 88

3
2
1

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

Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 14:21:58 -0400
From: rvirzi@gte.com (Robert A. Virzi)
Subject: Dealer parts pricing  (Disco)

Hmmmm.  Lots of people on this list seem to find dealer pricing for newer
(Discovery or RR) parts excessive.  This hasn't been my experience (at a
Boston area dealer - LRMW).  For example, prices for a steering damper, oil
filter, and two keys (cut) were $79, $8 + change, and $12 respectively.
Being a BSROA member got me a %10 discount off these prices.  I've been
pricing bull bars and other stuff, and LRMW is always competitive with or
better than AB, RN, etc., especially with club discount/shipping additional
taken into account.  So, I don't get it.  I'd love to save some $$$ by
going elsewhere, but all the elsewhere's end up costing more.  What am I
missing?  Is there a secret password to mumble while speaking to RN or
something?
-Bob

p.s. - note to john friedman:  I hope you varied that engine speed on the 2
hour drive home.  I always heard the key when breaking in a new engine was
to avoid constant revs for any extended period of time.  I never did
understand why, though, so this may be folklore.

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

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

From: "Tom Rowe" <TROWE@AE.AGECON.WISC.EDU>
Date:          Fri, 21 Jul 1995 14:35:23 GMT -0600
Subject:       Re : Crash test dummies

A.J. writes:
 
> In a frontal, it could be quite good because the strength of the chassis
> is in proportion to its weight.  The chassis *has* to crumple because
	 [ truncated by lro-digester (was 6 lines)]
> doesn't...  It would begin to buckle in the middle of a long rail or
> something, 2/3 of the way down the back of the car!

I have two LR's with frontal impact experience, an 88 & a 109.
The 88, I did. While towing my dad's car through 3' snow, scraping ice off the 
inside of the winshield (no defogger) and trying to look back to see if it
had come unhooked, I rounded a curve imcompletely and impacted a tree. Now, I 
wasn't going real fast, but it was fast enough to bend the bumper against the 
front wheel and the front horn (portion of the frame between 2nd crossmember 
and bumper) crumpled. 
The 109 was crumpled when I got it. Apparently the previous owner ran into 
something and the frame from the bulkhead support outrigger to the front end 
of the frame was about 1" shorter on one side than the other. 
Don't know how they would perform in a high speed collision though, 
thankfully. On the road I generally drive as if the next person will do the  
absolutely stupidest thing and so far it's worked. No impact tests (yet).
Oh well, back to the PBS series and the Battle of Britain with the RAF on the 
brink of total collapse (good thing Hitler was so easily enraged).
Cheers,
Tom

Tom Rowe
UW-Madison Center for Dairy Research    
608-265-6194, Fax:608-262-1578        
trowe@ae.agecon.wisc.edu                

 Four wheel drive allows you to get
 stuck in places even more inaccessible.

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

From: "thomas r. coron" <tcoron@s850.mwc.edu>
Subject: Re: Independent Nation?
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 16:04:21 EDT

> 	BTW, as for independent country, picking a date for this 
> 	independence is tough.  Was it 1867 when the British North
> 	America act was passed, or 1932 with the Statutes of Westminster 
> 	which gave Canada the right to conduct external relations without
> 	Westminster's approval, or 1949 when court cases could not be

  Actually, Canada is generally considered (at least by most 'Murkins")
  to be the 51st state ;-).

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

Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 16:20:28 -0400 (EDT)
From: Dixon Kenner <dkenner@emr1.emr.ca>
Subject: Re: Independent Nation?

On Fri, 21 Jul 1995, thomas r. coron wrote:

>   Actually, Canada is generally considered (at least by most 'Murkins")
>   to be the 51st state ;-).

	You wish... :-)  Though you'd never take us.  Can't have any of
	that nasty universal Medicare, unemployment insurance, or welfare
	down there... :-)  Besides, look at our Senate.  Appointed.  
	Can't be removed, mostly geriatric, (hmmm, sounds like yours 
	actually :-)).  Besides, there are chunks of your northern
	lands that you swipped off of us that we would like back (some
	bits like Detroit you can keep) someday...  Hey, parts of the
	USA would make nice provinces someday, after they were merged into
	a respectible size (You can fit western Europe into Quebec).
	Now, if you want to join us, consider the benefits...  You can elect
	governments that are not prone to logrolling or paralysis,and 
	when you decide that they are as useless as the last lot, you can 
	toss em *all* out of office every four to five years... 

	Oh yeah, we also have a 15 year rule on importing Land Rovers... 
	:-)

	Rgds from the tundra,

	

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

Date: Fri, 21 Jul 95 15:37:09 -0500
From: "John B. Friedman" <johannes@scribes.english.uiuc.edu>
Subject: Discovery Oil Change #1

Anyone contemplating changing oil and filter on a Discovery might  
enjoy this account of my own experience. Changed oil today with 189  
miles and found no metal particles, very clean, virtually unused   
looking oil. This operation is a bit more time consuming and messy   
than on many such cars. Put a cover over your seat and wear old  
clothes as the strange black glurge sprayed all over the Discovery  
undercarriage will be transferred to your shirt, arms &c.

You will need the following
1 1/8  inch box end wrench, as a socket on a bar or ratchet  is too  
thick to fit between the drain plug and the catalytic converter pipe.  
You could use a crescent, but a good idea to 

spring for the box end wrench.
a small funnel to put the oil into the engine and filter
A pop can to make a child's potty seat pee diverter for the drain  
plug opening
A band or end cap type wrench to get your filter off
Lots of rags and some kitty litter for the oil spills

Put your oil pan under the drain plug. Having let the car warm up,  
break the plug loose. There seem to be two methods for getting the  
oil out. 1)One person suggests pop can cut away with scissors to fit  
around the pan and divert the oil which will spurt out horizontally  
in a long powerful gush on to your brakes downward towards your pan.  
The problem here is that getting the plug OUT the last few threads  
while holding the diverter up to the engine pan is very difficult  
compounded by very hot oil. 2)Another method is crack the plug and  
one thread at a time unthread it. Soon a drop becomes a trickle and  
then a steady stream downward to the drain pan, and no gush or oil on  
you. At this point go read the New York Times or a Toyota Land  
Cruiser brochure while the oil drains downward. Or, you can like me,  
lack patience and trying to get a little faster drainage, unscrewa  
few threads too many and manage to have the plug come out and spray  
hot oil everywhere.
When oil is drained, replace plug and tighten firmly but not with a  
breaker bar or anything extreme. Put six quarts of fresh oil in the  
engine. Then take a band wrench or end cap wrench and remove filter,  
sliding pan under it to catch its oil. 

Take new filter and fill full of fresh engine oil. 

I found the following to fit, Deutsch D-539 (Deutsch Precision, West  
Salem,Illinois 62476) This is a good quality clone of the Fram PH 8A  
which at least in this part of the country is now made by Allied  
Signal and looks very junky. Other clones are 

Purolator PER 1A
Chrysler J8990499
Motorcraft FLIA
Toyota l5600-41010

Screw on filter full of oil, and the rest follows as per the owner's  
manual. The Clones are about 3/4 inch longer than the English filter  
and whether they have more filter medium in them I cannot say. But 2  
for 5.00 beats 12.00 at the distant dealer and I change my oil often  
enough so that I feel comfortable using these filters.
Lie under car and watch it idle for 3 minutes and then shut off, top  
up sump and check for drips from filter and drain plug.

John Friedman

 

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

Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 13:58:57 +0100
From: cs@crl.com (Michael Carradine)
Subject: Re: Independent Nation?

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

	BTW, as for independent country, picking a date for this 
 	independence is tough.  Was it 1867 when the British North
 	America act was passed, or 1932 with the Statutes of Westminster 
 	which gave Canada the right to conduct external relations without
 	Westminster's approval, or 1949 when court cases could not be
 Actually, Canada is generally considered (at least by most 'Murkins")

 Thomas,

 Your message was clipped by the Major, and I can't wait for you to
 repost it.  I just know it's going to be something great....

 (You know that 'Domestic' --vs International-- to many 'Murkin
 companies means the United States AND Canada?)

 Michael Carradine   Carradine Studios                          cs@crl.com
 Architect           Architecture Development Planning    Pgr 510-945-5000
 NCARB RIBA          PO Box 99, Orinda, CA 94563 USA   Ph/Fax 510-988-0900

 Mercedes-Benz Unimog 4x4 WWW page at:  http://www.crl.com/~cs/unimog.html

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

Date: Fri, 21 Jul 95 16:55:44 EDT
From: jib@big.att.com (Jan Ben)
Subject: Looking for my first LR

Hello, world.
I am looking for a project series II/III SW/Doormobile that I can
buy/use/import into US.
I live in NJ, and have not seen many of them around here.

I understand that I may be better off importing from UK or Canada,
(or Spain's Santana - any thoughts??).
I am willing to undertake a junker, as now I have a running 4WD, albeit
a Ford.

If you have recently bought/imported/seen or heard of a 109" SW,
please  let me know.

I am willing to spend $3,k US for a running copy, and 1k for something
I would have to hide from my wife.

Thanks
Jan
jib@big.att.com (908) 872-9641

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

Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 14:11:24 +0100
From: cs@crl.com (Michael Carradine)
Subject: Re: Dealer parts pricing  (Disco)

>Is there a secret password to mumble while speaking to RN or
>something?

 Gotta admit, RN does have a nice Series catalog though!

>I always heard the key when breaking in a new engine was
>to avoid constant revs for any extended period of time.  I never did
>understand why, though, so this may be folklore.

 I heard the same thing, it's definetly folklore!  Or... maybe it
 has to do with wearing parts in one position, sort of like a lathe
 with sand paper in one position --better to move it around a little.
 Try this for further folklore, for the same reasons I heard it's
 better to have a car with many drivers and driving styles (except
 for a guy like me who drives hard through the entire range of speeds).

 Michael Carradine   Carradine Studios                          cs@crl.com
 Architect           Architecture Development Planning    Pgr 510-945-5000
 NCARB RIBA          PO Box 99, Orinda, CA 94563 USA   Ph/Fax 510-988-0900

 Mercedes-Benz Unimog 4x4 WWW page at:  http://www.crl.com/~cs/unimog.html

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

Date: Fri, 21 Jul 95 17:21:02 -0500
From: "John B. Friedman" <johannes@scribes.english.uiuc.edu>
Subject: Discovery exhaust bolts

In looking at the engine in my car I see that the bolts which hold  
the cast iron manifolds to the heads have lock tab washers behind  
them. Are these the guys which have been loosening? Or are we talking  
about the 4 or five boltsand nuts which attach the flange of the  
catalytic converter pipe on each side to the flanges of the exhanust  
manifolds. These bolts don't look long enough to put double nuts on  
and the heat would probably be too much for Lock Tite. Has anyone  
experienced these flange bolts loosening or has it been the bolts  
holding the manifolds to the heads? Thanks, John Friedman 

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

Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 17:43:28 -0500 (CDT)
From: David John Place <umplace@cc.UManitoba.CA>
Subject: Re: Defender 90 winch

Doesn't putting a winch into the receiver type holder and pulling 
anything like 6000 pounts bend the --- out of the holder, the vehicle 
frame and the winch?  I have an 8000 lb winch mounted right to the frame 
and bumper and this is the only way I would ever put a full load on it 
especially if you use a snatch block.  Dave VE4PN

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

Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 17:59:04 -0500 (CDT)
From: David John Place <umplace@cc.UManitoba.CA>
Subject: Re: Crash test dummies

Re side impact in a LR.
I have always feared wearing my seat belt in my 88 because the tie down 
point for the factory belt on the front seats are on the outer body 
area.  If you are hit from the side and the body is crushed, you will be 
cut in two by the belt being pulled tight over your chest and legs.  I 
try to drive with the belt off as much as possible and only if I am doing 
off road stuff with no other vehicles likely to hit me from the side will 
I wear my belt. The problem with the LR series vehicles for mounting the 
belts is that the fram is too far inboard of the side panels to tie the 
belt to the frame so you are stuck with this dangerous situation of 
tieing it to the door sill. Dave VE4PN

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

Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 18:02:09 -0500 (CDT)
From: David John Place <umplace@cc.UManitoba.CA>
Subject: Re: Next question

On Fri, 21 Jul 1995, Easton Trevor wrote:

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

	 [ truncated by lro-digester (was 13 lines)]
> pulled together.
> Trevor Easton
Yes, there is such a unit made by I think Honda which has a gas engine 
about the size of a chainsaw motor.  In fact it even has the same bale 
type handle as a chainsaw motor and has a drum mounted about where the 
chain bar would go.  It has a flat base and can be attached to a ball of 
a car hitch with a hole in the plate that is keyhole shaped.  Dave VE4PN

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

From: jory@figment.mit.edu (Jory Bell (prichard))
Subject: tools/5-speeds/etc
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 19:21:13 -0400 (EDT)

[note: I am cc'ing this to the "main" list despite local content, because I
am searching more widespread feedback on 5-speed gearbox conversions for the
series vehicles.. see #2 below]

1. I am ready to buy new tools, to replace my stolen set. I am looking
to buy a fairly complete 3/8" drive socket set, a fairly complete
wrench set, a new vice grip set, some adjustable spanners, a chunky
hammer, multimeter, feeler gauges, etc.

Does anyone have suggestions on SF area locations to obtain these items. 
I am leaning towards getting something like SK tools (I don't like the
feel of craftsman) but am open to suggestions. I currently possess a
rental mode of transport (I needed it for work) so I can actually get around a
bit (I started looking around a couple of weeks ago, but it was terribly 
difficult to get much done whilst using public transportation.)

2. I called Mike Hoskins (Mid Atlantic Rover) about a 5-speed convernsion
(LT77). My notes from a comversation I'd had with him a couple years ago
indicated that the only difficulty in fitting this was in the transmission
tunnel (it needed modifying) and that it was a tight fit. According to my 
more recent inquiries, it's not that simple. Apparently you have to move
the 2.25 liter engine and radiator up 4" to fit the transmission (plus there
is a weird linkage to get the shifter near the "normal" position).

Mike was championing the hispeed transfer case (changes just the high
ratio), but I was unexcited about actually increasing my gear spread
(in hi ratio) considering that I was actually splitting gears with the OD
during the cross country drive (I just don't like the OD... noisy and
inelegant... even when compared to the rest of a series vehicle ;)

Anyways, I would appreciate any info on clean 5-speed conversions, if such a
thing exists. Thanks...

-jory

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jul 1993 21:38:02 -0500
From: kgb@uic.edu (Ken Berliner)
Subject: Haynes Manual for RR

I have a question about the 89 RR engine.  According to the Haynes Manual,
LR didn't put the 3.95 L V8 into RR's until the 1990 model.  I have the 89
model (actually built in 10/88) and it comes with the 3.95 L V8.  Exactly
which features does my RR have?  There is a page on the net that tells you
what you have based on the VIN#, but my VIN isn't included.

I also understand that the 3.95 L V8 is actually a Buick engine.  Anyone
know which one it is?

kgb
'89 RR

*********************************************************
Reachable at
E-mail: kgb@uic.edu
WWW: http://www.uic.edu/~kgb/     <- Rate Page Works!!!!
*********************************************************

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

Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 19:51:48 -0700 (PDT)
From: John Brabyn <brabyn@skivs.ski.org>
Subject: Re: Discovery exhaust bolts

On Fri, 21 Jul 1995, John B. Friedman wrote:

> them. Are these the guys which have been loosening? Or are we talking  
> about the 4 or five boltsand nuts which attach the flange of the  
> catalytic converter pipe on each side to the flanges of the exhanust  
> manifolds. These bolts don't look long enough to put double nuts on  

Yes the ones that traditionally come loose are the latter; 3 bolts on 
each side on the 3.9 engine. They can also be loose if the dealer didn't 
tighten them properly after servicing the transmission which at least on 
RRs requires loosening the exhaust system. 

Cheers

John Brabyn
89 RR

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jul 1993 21:49:49 -0500
From: kgb@uic.edu (Ken Berliner)
Subject: Haynes Manual for RR part 2

I want to make a clarification of my question.
What's the difference between an 89 RR and an 88 or 90 RR.
Do I have the viscous coupling transfer case?

thanks
kgb
89 RR

*********************************************************
Reachable at
E-mail: kgb@uic.edu
WWW: http://www.uic.edu/~kgb/     <- Rate Page Works!!!!
*********************************************************

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

Date: Wed, 21 Jul 1993 21:49:54 -0500
From: kgb@uic.edu (Ken Berliner)
Subject: Temp sender 89 RR

I'm here in Chicago.  It's hot!  My coolant temp gauge does not work.  I
was told not to worry 'cause if the engine overheats, the EFI light will go
on.  Well, I don't want to wait for the EFI light any more.  I check the
wiring schematic and it says the coolant temperature sender is connected to
the gauge.  The Haynes manual shows the location of a temp sender.  OK,
sounds easy enough.  I went to a Lucas part distributor and tried to get an
Coolant temp sender and they asked if I want an engine temp sender or
coolant temp sender.  Big price difference. Oh yeah, this is where the
previous post comes in.  I also need to know if I have an 89 or earlier RR
or a 90 and later one.  If I have the 3.95 L then I must be in the 90 or
later catagory, but it was built in the 89 model year.  UUUUhg!

Anyone with help?

kgb

*********************************************************
Reachable at
E-mail: kgb@uic.edu
WWW: http://www.uic.edu/~kgb/     <- Rate Page Works!!!!
*********************************************************

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

Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 20:16:20 -0700 (PDT)
From: John Brabyn <brabyn@skivs.ski.org>
Subject: Re: Haynes Manual for RR

On Wed, 21 Jul 1993, Ken Berliner wrote:

> I have a question about the 89 RR engine.  According to the Haynes Manual,
> LR didn't put the 3.95 L V8 into RR's until the 1990 model.  I have the 89
> model (actually built in 10/88) and it comes with the 3.95 L V8.  Exactly
> which features does my RR have?  There is a page on the net that tells you
> what you have based on the VIN#, but my VIN isn't included.

Ken, chuck the Haynes manual and get the real one! Fear not, your RR is a 
real 3.9 (I assume it was made for the North American market). The early 
ones, of which mine is one too, didn't have "3.9" emblazoned on the 
intake manifold, but they were the same otherwise. Later 89's had the 
door hinges concealed, and the County model came out in the US later that 
year with additional trim.

> I also understand that the 3.95 L V8 is actually a Buick engine.  Anyone
> know which one it is?
> model (actually built in 10/88) and it comes with the 3.95 L V8.  Exactly
> which features does my RR have?  There is a page on the net that tells you

It was bought from Buick in I think the 60's -- was it the 205 or 210 or 
something -- probably thought too small for American cars at that time!

Cheers

John Brabyn
89 RR

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

Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 20:28:48 -0700 (PDT)
From: John Brabyn <brabyn@skivs.ski.org>
Subject: Re: Temp sender 89 RR

Fear not, for I bring you glad tidings. I had exactly the same problem on 
my 89 which was made in 9/88. What you want is the temp sender. Carefully 
match the part to the VIN because on mine it took the earlier sender 
(which looks identical but the thread is very slightly different). 
Unfortunately the older sender is more expensive than the new one, about 
$50!!! I've seen it advertized by Atlantic British for about $30, so you 
might try them.

This temp sender is not to be confused with the coolant temperature 
sensor (with 2 leads as opposed to 1) which is connected to the ECU 
rather than the gauge. It's true that abnormal temperatures sensed by the 
latter unit will trigger the EFI light on the instrument binnacle, but I 
too would prefer not to use that in lieu of a gauge! Besides, most other 
things that trigger that light are not so critical to the engine's survival.

Hope this helps

Cheers

John Brabyn
Mill Valley, Ca
89 RR

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

Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 20:29:54 -0700
From: Roger Sinasohn <sinasohn@crl.com>
Subject: Re: Cooling Down a LR

> Any LROs in Arizona that want to start a list of LROs let me know.  So far
> I've gleaned about 8 from reading the Digest.  Should we form a group? or a
> pride? or a gaggle? or a society?  

What do you call a group of LRO's?  A puddle!

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

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

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

Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 20:34:57 -0700
From: Roger Sinasohn <sinasohn@crl.com>
Subject: Re: A/C for Series Land Rovers

On the subject of cooling...  

When I was in Ottawa for Canada Day, I took a quick look at some of the cars 
participating in the Great North American Ottawa-Mexico City classic car race 
(or something like that).  All entries have to be WWII era cars or earlier 
(hence no LR's), and most were restored to top notch condition.  One, however, 
stood out.  It had not been restored, other than (I assume) making sure 
essential running gear and engine stuff worked.  Kinda LR-ish, actually.  The 
guy driving it was sort of a hippy-type, and was traveling with his dog.

(Here's the cooling part)  Mounted on the rear passenger door window was a 
*very* interesting device.  It was some sort of air-conditioner (or sorts).  
It was basically a tube about 8" or so in diameter and maybe 1.5' long, with a 
part that went through the window.  So looking head on from the front, it 
looked like this:

           ____________
          /
     ____|_,
    /   ,--,
   (    )|
    \__/ |
         
     ^   ^
    /     \
Device   Window rolled up on it to hold it in place.

On the front, there was an air inlet to let moving air in.  I'd guess that 
inside was some sort of cooling unit (powered by an air-powered generator? 
since I saw no outside power or other connections).   As the car moves, air 
comes in the front inlet, turns the generator inside, then exits out the side 
into the car, right onto the dog.  

Now this wouldn't necessarily work with series door tops, but if you got 110 
doors on your 109" like Steve Denis...

But, the same principal could be used on one built for the Rover's vertical 
window openings...  Or even better, for the front vents, eh?  Hmmmm....

Unfortunately, I didn't take too close a look at it or note the vendor, as I 
was on my way to make the most of Canada day (before getting completely wasted 
that evening.)

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

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

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

Date: Fri, 21 Jul 1995 20:43:18 -0700 (PDT)
From: John Brabyn <brabyn@skivs.ski.org>
Subject: Re: Haynes Manual for RR part 2

On Wed, 21 Jul 1993, Ken Berliner wrote:

> I want to make a clarification of my question. > What's the difference
between an 89 RR and an 88 or 90 RR. > Do I have the viscous coupling
transfer case? 

Ken, to summarize, 89 models have the new chain-driven Borg Warner
transfer case with the viscous diff lock and the 3.9 engine -- earlier
years have the gear driven LT320 transfer case with manual diff lock and
the 3.5 engine. If you look at your transfer case shifter you will see it
has only 3 positions, H-N-L, with no sideways movement possible. The
manual locking version (still used on Discos and Defenders) has a sideways
movement of the lever to lock the center differential.  These gear-driven
cases are a lot noisier, which you will notice if you go for a drive in an
older RR for example. 

Other obvious differences are in the interior door panel redesign, and the
exhaust outlet points down instead of sideways (an easy way to distinguish
them from outside). 

1990 models are basically identical to 89 with the addition of antilock 
brakes and are externally recognizable by the fatter plastic trim panel 
along the bottom of the vehicle's sides.

Cheers

John Brabyn
89 RR

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

From: a-robw@microsoft.com
Subject: Re: Defender 90 winch
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 95 18:18:00 PDT

If you can believe what you read, the Disco is rated to pull 7700 pounds, so 
I would assume that the rear receiver would be able to handle the pull of an 
8000#'er since winch ratings tend to be on the optimistic side anyway when 
you figure resistence losses in the power cables, and battery voltage drop 
from your alternator trying vainly to feed the 400 amp winch motor load 
etc..

But I've wondered what would happen if the pull (i.e. the cable) got the 
least bit off center (I've never found an anchor point right dead in front 
of my Jeep when I've needed the winch :-) Having bent parts of the jeep 
during (improper) winching, that receiver mount would give me cause for 
concern in a similar situation.

I'd think that the receiver mount is strictly for occasional and emergency 
use only.

 -- Bob W.
Soon to be a "former" Jeep owner
 ----------
From: LRO-Owner
Subject: Re: Defender 90 winch
Date: Friday, July 21, 1995 5:43PM

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

Doesn't putting a winch into the receiver type holder and pulling
anything like 6000 pounts bend the --- out of the holder, the vehicle
frame and the winch?  I have an 8000 lb winch mounted right to the frame
and bumper and this is the only way I would ever put a full load on it

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

  END OF LAND ROVER OWNER DIGEST 
 Input:  messages 53 lines 2467 [forwarded 192 whitespace 646]
 Output: lines 2011 [content 1168  forwarded 132 (cut  60) whitespace 607]



    
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.