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: "The Becketts" <hillman@bigpond.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 23:05:45 +1100
Subject: Austin is dead, long live Rover!!

Frank wrote

Today's Sydney Morning Herald Drive (see on-line version at
www.smh.com.au/drive ) commented that BMW have asked the British Govt for
assistance as Rover is losing $1 billion per year.

At that rate, they won't live long!

Ron

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

From: "The Becketts" <hillman@bigpond.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 22:52:41 +1100
Subject: BBB List/ BBB?

<< I don't know too many BBB abbreviations... >>
anonymous Frank wrote:

>beautiful bouncy b*****
>(cold shower here I come)

Frank, watch the heart ! 8-)

Ron

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

From: Alan_Richer@motorcity2.lotus.com
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 07:32:17 -0500
Subject: Re: Overweight Rovers - was Re: Santanna 6 cyl engines

Re: Engine choices:

>Martin Walters did it because the 2-1/4L engine was all that was
>available.  I did it because it was what I had and I could not afford to
>purchase nor could I legally import a 110 two door with a bigger engine.

No argument on the latter - I lust for a 110 TDi myself. The former i have to
argue with, though. All of the Dormobiles i've ever seen have been equipped with
the 2.6 rather than the venerable 2.25. Seems to me that MW looked at it and
decided that a calendar rather than a speedometer was a bad idea...

>And for some reason Americans seem to think that an engine
>that Rover discontinued because it wasn't powerful enough is sacred.

Sacred, no. Indestructible, yes. The old engine Mr. C had (which still ran OK
even with an oil consumption of 50 miles to the quart) had piston-to-cylinder
gaps of over .060 - and still had 130 PSI compression!

I know of numerous stories of LR engines throwing rods, blowing holes in pistons
and the like and still running well enough to continue operating for weeks and
months after the catastrophic event. An Iron Duke would have a heart attack if
you blew a piston, cut the rod off and reinstalled it for restricting the oil
flow, and ran the engine - but an acquaintance of mine did just that with a 2.25
- for 6 months.

Swap engines if you like - but to me "expedition-equipped" means
field-repairable and able to survive the rigors of wherever I want it to take
me. I don't want some prima donna under my bonnet that's going to have a hissy
fit and seize because it ingests an ounce of water during wading.

>Maybe a more powerful engine is just one step in building a long range
>expedition out of a pre-'68 109.  I hope that you are not saying that old
>Land Rovers do not have what it takes to be converted into long range
>expedition vehicles.

Hardly going to hear a bad word from me about expedition Rovers, dear lady. I
just submit, and not for the first time, that the 2.25-equipped Rover may not be
the first choice if you have to have 4 tons of gear.

If there is gear that you have to have along that adds up significantly, then
weight needs to be pared elsewhere. Simple physics - if you have X horsepower
and want Y performance, then the weight has to be no more than Z.

How heavy IS a large-format camera anyway? <grin> From all of the ones I've ever
seen, I think the answer is probablyy "too heavy...".

As everyone's familiar with the Martin Walther conversions, allow me to
illustrate with those vehicles in mind.

First off, metal cabinetry? Way too damn heavy. There are composites available
now (honeycomb materials) that are half the weight for the strength and
fireproof, to boot. The gas bottle under the seat? Gone - a petrol-fired stove
with a hand pump to draw fuel from the auxiliary tank eliminates 50 pounds of
tank, mount and plumbing - and produces a hotter flame to boot.

Steel water cans? Compared to the weight of the liquid the steel can is minimal,
but I'd have fitted a polyurethane tank with spigot instead of their steel can.

That flip-up roof? Composites again, with a metal sub-structure. Fiberglass is
very heavy strength for strength - MW used it because it was easy to work and
cheap.

The MW Dormobile conversion is the better part of 500-1000 pounds overweight for
what it is and what it does. There are places steel and iron belong, but there
are places that it doesn't - and that place is on a vehicle that has a leisurely
pace to begin with.

Re: the 2DoorMobile:
>So I do what I can with what I have.

Neve hear me argue with that - I agree completely. I would have done some things
different, but the basic principle is sound. My only question on the design was,
again, the structural materials and setups that you used with the 2.25-powered
vehicle. i would have kept the basic design and used much lighter materials than
steel.

The swing-up table, though a delightful accessory and one whose design I noted,
would have been agreat place to save weight. A bit of square aluminium tubing
covwered with an aluminium sheet and Formica top would have done the job at half
the weight of the wood products that were there - and at little more cost - none
if you're as adept as scavenging as I.

It's like I used to do when i was designing and building autocross cars (and
driving them...) - don't try and get 100 pounds out of the car in one spot - get
one pound out of 100 places.

In short, reducing structural weight can make room for the gewgaws...

                    aj{Pardon the typos - wearing wrist braces today...8*("r

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

From: IBEdwardp@aol.com
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 07:35:51 EST
Subject: Re: Fuel Tank Positions

In a message dated 98-11-06 03:58:08 EST, you write:

<< I have two Jerry cans full of high octane fitted to my FRONT bumper.
 They're mounted so that the actually protrude beyond the bumper by at
 least a third of their length. >>

Hi Paul:

Are they mounted vertically - if so, what about parking/turning lights? -- or
horizonally? 

Ed Bailey
S2a 88
(Usually lost) Somewhere in East Tennessee

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

From: SPYDERS@aol.com
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 07:45:23 EST
Subject: Re: Santanna 6 cyl engines

In a message dated 11/6/98 1:53:12 AM, you wrote:

<<Personally, I like to go on long trips away from people into primitive 
areas. >>

Must be a long drive to New Guinea... or Colorado, they're pretty primitive
too.  ;-)

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

From: Lodelane@aol.com
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 07:52:19 EST
Subject: Re: Getting engine to mate up with transmission.

Peter,

Had this problem myself refitting a Turner not too long ago.  Had to take the
engine back out and chamfer the leading edge of the pilot bushing with a file
to the transmission input shaft would line up.  First time we tried, we
"bumped" up the edge of the bush with the input shaft and wouldn't line up for
nothing. (Right John and Ron???)

Larry Smith
Chester, VA

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

From: SPYDERS@aol.com
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 07:59:52 EST
Subject: Re:  Re: Overweight Rovers - was Re: Santanna 6 cyl engines

In a message dated 11/6/98 8:33:51 AM, you wrote:

<<Steel water cans? Compared to the weight of the liquid the steel can is
minimal,
but I'd have fitted a polyurethane tank with spigot instead of their steel
can.>>

You're right. Someone should develop a water that remains in a bubble-state so
it won't be so damn heavy (tritium?) and it'll make the burping easier too.
;-)

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

From: SPYDERS@aol.com
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 08:04:13 EST
Subject: Re:  Re: Overweight Rovers - was Re: Santanna 6 cyl engines

In a message dated 11/6/98 8:33:51 AM, you wrote:

<<It's like I used to do when i was designing and building autocross cars (and
driving them...) - don't try and get 100 pounds out of the car in one spot -
get
one pound out of 100 places.>>

Did that on sailbotes; cut of dangling threads from bolts, etc., then weighed
the lot afterwards. It was enough that we could bring two extra six-packs
(which ultimately get pi**ed overboard)  ;-)

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

From: "The Becketts" <hillman@bigpond.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 23:39:48 +1100
Subject: Any other vehicles which came with Lucas Dizzy?

Nate asks:
>About to go to the junkyard (auto recyclers) to look for a "new style"
Lucas 4
>cylinder distributor to get dizzy cap clips from.  Are there any other
makes
>that used this?  I assume later Triumphs and MG's did, true?  Any others?

Hillmans, Sunbeams, Singers, Commers, Humbers etc.

Ron Beckett

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

From: SPYDERS@aol.com
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 08:07:01 EST
Subject: Re:  Re: d.h.and 101

In a message dated 11/5/98 10:19:12 PM, you wrote:

<<Did you ever describe for the list your illfated trip in the dear 101?
I only heard the Storey second-hand, not the full version with all the juicy
details.>>

That's it, let's hear it. Out with it... no holding back... or we'll get the
2nd hand version suitably embellished...

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

From: "The Becketts" <hillman@bigpond.com>
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1998 00:09:15 +1100
Subject: Series III colors

Paul Oxley wrote:

>So not only are you Aussies upside-down, but also back-to-front...

Wait a minute - you South Africans are also upside down and also drive on
the correct side of the road!

Ron

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

From: "Dennis White" <dennisw@tiac.net>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 08:22:48 -0500
Subject: Freelander Pix

Recenty went to UK, to Land Rover Camel Trophy driving course at Eastnor
Castle and got to drive a Camel Trophy Freelander. I have pixs but no place
to post them. If any one wants some let me know

Dennis White
NAS 90
'74 Beetle (Orange & Cream -"The Creamsicle")
'75 & '77 Ford Broncos ("The Dynamic-Duo")

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

From: Paul Oxley <paul@adventures.co.za>
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1998 15:34:22 +0200
Subject: Re: Fuel Tank Positions

IBEdwardp@aol.com wrote:
> Hi Paul:
> Are they mounted vertically - if so, what about parking/turning lights? -- or
> horizonally?
> Ed Bailey
> S2a 88

Umm, vertically (although this depends on the orientation of the
vehicle:->)

It's on my S111 shorty (small gas tank) which is my runaround vehicle.
The two jerries are mounted either side of the radiator grille so as not
to impede airflow.
 
Regards

Paul Oxley
http://AfricanAdrenalin.co.za
http://Adventures.co.za

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

From: "HENRY STAGE"<henry.stage@smtp.cnet.navy.mil>
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1998 09:00:58 -0600
Subject: long range rovers

        I have to go with TeriAnn on this one.  Have you ever seen a IIA 
     ambulance? My kids dont call the "Hefelump" without reason. It is as 
     big a house.  Every day I am adding bits and pieces (NOT geegaws) to 
     make it a more usable long range traveler. The heaviest bits are the 
     camp box that can hold chow for me and my boys (read; hollow-legged 5 
     and 7 year old eating machines), and the TOOL BOX.  While it is 
     perfectly reasonable that you can fix the darn thing on the side of 
     the road with a swiss army knife, an adjustable wrench and a rice chex 
     box, it is much easier to do with the right tools. Nothing outragous, 
     just a good basic tool kit.
        That, and the 7 extra jerry cans of petrol (280 lbs, about the 
     weight of my buddy Loftus and TeriAnns dog, Lacy, sitting on the roof 
     makes it a pretty heavy beast.  My 2.25 runs great and with a grin on 
     my face, I shift down, down, down, and down some more, until it chugs 
     right along up the old hills. If I wanted to get there faster, I'd fly 
     and if i wanted to move more, I'd call United Van Lines.  Does not 
     mean I won't drop a Mercruiser in it when I win the lotto. But I am 
     not complaining much until I do. Guess that the slowness is part of 
     the charm and I probably actually see more of the country than the guy 
     in the lincoln 4x4 (forgot what they are called) going by me at 80, 
     sneering and talking on the cellphone.
     
     BTW, why, oh why, would anybody put PETROL on the front bumper? Water 
     is okay, diesel even, but gas?  Sounds to me like another entry for 
     the the Darwin Awards (prize given to the individual who removes 
     themself from the collective gene pool in the most interesting 
     manner).
     
     see ya out there, I'll be that big blue beast your passing who is 
     grinning like a lunatic,
     
     cole

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

From: "Chris Dillard" <cdillard@Aholdusa.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 09:07:51 -0500
Subject: Re: long range rovers

If I remeber correctly after seeing Art Zipkins 109'', doesn't he travel
with Jerry Cans (petrol) on the fron two wings? I believe that they were
indeed fuel and not water. not clear on the exact conversation. Does seem
kind of dangerous. Maybe not if you out in the desert I guess?

Cheers,
Christopher Dillard Dba          Ahold USA (BI-LO Inc)
95 Discovery V8i (Rusty II)        cdillard@aholdusa.com
55 Series I    (???)                     Greenville, SC USA
55 Series I (The Green Hornet)
1989 Thoroughbred Racehorse (the other Rusty!!)
SoLaRos #136

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

From: SPYDERS@aol.com
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 09:07:51 EST
Subject: Re:  long range rovers

In a message dated 11/6/98 10:02:01 AM, you wrote:

<<Guess that the slowness is part of 
     the charm and I probably actually see more of the country than the guy 
     in the lincoln 4x4 (forgot what they are called)>>

Useless??

:-0

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

From: Paul Oxley <paul@adventures.co.za>
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1998 16:17:18 +0200
Subject: Re: long range rovers

HENRY STAGE wrote:
>      BTW, why, oh why, would anybody put PETROL on the front bumper? Water
>      is okay, diesel even, but gas?  Sounds to me like another entry for
>      the the Darwin Awards (prize given to the individual who removes
>      themself from the collective gene pool in the most interesting
>      manner).
>      cole

'Cos the military's been doing that for years without incident, and it's
convenient, and it scares the hell out of pedestrians and idiots who
overtake me and then slam on the brakes. Oh, and did I mention the
stainless steel tube grille (fishing rod holders not mortars) mounted in
front of the jerries?

Regards

Paul (Molotov Cocktail) Oxley
http://AfricanAdrenalin.co.za
http://Adventures.co.za

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

From: Paul Oxley <paul@adventures.co.za>
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1998 16:18:54 +0200
Subject: Re: Series III colors

The Becketts wrote:
> Wait a minute - you South Africans are also upside down and also drive on
> the correct side of the road!
> Ron

Well, since you put it that way, yes, I suppose so...
 
Regards

Paul Oxley
http://AfricanAdrenalin.co.za
http://Adventures.co.za

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

From: Art Bitterman <artbitt@rmi.net>
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1998 07:40:46 -0700
Subject: Composites and Primative Coloradans

Hi All!!

Alan Richter talked about the use of composites in a MW and how they
would save weight.

Yes they would. Today. But were they cheap enough to use back in the
60's? Or even Availiable to industries other than  Aircraft?

Secondly-a wise crack From SPYDER:

Must be a long drive to New Guinea... or Colorado, they're pretty
primitive
too.  ;-)

Yep-and we're damn proud of it!! At least we finally got a Pro-Gun
Governor!!

Art
1960 SII "Aardvark"

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

From: Alan_Richer@motorcity2.lotus.com
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 09:54:15 -0500
Subject: Re: Composites and Primative Coloradans

You ask on composites:

Yes they would. Today. But were they cheap enough to use back in the
60's? Or even Availiable to industries other than  Aircraft?

Wasn'ttalking about then - was saying what I'd do if building one now.

The techniques for light construction do date back that far - as do some (but
not all) of the materials that I've mentioned.

I will admit they weren't common then - whaich is why they went with the old
tried-and-true (but heavy) construction they had the tooling for.

Hefelump, the 2DoorMobile and the like are still works in progress - whicvh is
why I brought up the items I did.

                         ajr

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

From: "A. P. \"Sandy\" Grice" <rover@pinn.net>
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1998 10:03:30 -0500
Subject: Equipment

TeriAnn wrote:

>If you are in the field two or three weeks or months at a time, being 
>comfortable makes a big difference on morale and enjoyment.

>How you equip a LR depends upon how you use it.

Indeed.  Just got Tom Sheppard's book on vehicle-dependent expeditions
(sponsored by LR).  A superb reference book covering all aspects from
planning to logistics to navigation.  Cheers

  *----jeep may be famous, LAND-ROVER is Legendary----*
  |                                                   |
  |             A. P. ("Sandy") Grice                 |
  |    Rover Owners' Association of Virginia, Ltd.    |
  |     Association of North American Rover Clubs     |
  |    1633 Melrose Pkwy., Norfolk, VA 23508-1730     |
  |(O)757-622-7054, (H)757-423-4898, FAX 757-622-7056 |
  *----1972 Series III------1996 Discovery SE-7(m)----*

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

From: NADdMD@aol.com
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 10:43:32 EST
Subject: Dizzy short drive shaft question

Hi all,

Alright, I admit it.  I put in the short distributor drive shaft out of phase
and now I have to pull it out and realign it.  Can this be done with the wings
still on? (Oil filter housing has to come off, grub screw, etc,etc, etc...)

Thanks,

Nate

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

From: Alan_Richer@motorcity2.lotus.com
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 11:01:11 -0500
Subject: Re: Dizzy short drive shaft question

Re; Repositioning the shaft:

Yes, but it is a royal screaming bitch of a job.

I did it on Mr. C long ago by getting INTO the fender well and doing ther job
aroud the chassis crossmember.

Just turn the distributor and deal with it the next time you need to take the
wing off.

                    ajr

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

From: NADdMD@aol.com
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 11:09:52 EST
Subject: Re: Dizzy short drive shaft question

In a message dated 11/6/98 11:05:07 AM Eastern Standard Time,
Alan_Richer@motorcity2.lotus.com writes:

> Re; Repositioning the shaft:
>  Yes, but it is a royal screaming bitch of a job.

I'm gonna give it a try... Clean rebuilt block, and clean oil filter
housing...I'm hoping it won't be as bad.  Hate to start out driving it with a
major SPOT after doing it right up til now.

Nate

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

From: "Peter Hope" <phope@hawaii.rr.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 06:19:13 -1000
Subject: Re: Overweight Rovers - was Re: Santanna 6 cyl engines

>;>The 4-cylinder 109 was never meant to haul a 6000-pound vehicle
>I sure agree with that.  At 5400 pounds my car is seriously slow.

TeriAnn,
I have been following with interest your search for a more powerful engine
for the green rover.  I am wondering if you have considered the GMC Diesel?
I have seen adverts in LRW and LROI for the engine and conversion packs.
The engines them selves are very plentiful in this country.  The US military
GMC pickups and blazers all come with these engines and are a dime-a-dozen
through surplus centers.  I have seen rusted out versions that only have 40k
on the odometer go for $500-800.  Since the blazers have been beefed up for
the Gov with a Dana 60 front and a 12 Bolt rear (3/4 ton running gear) and
the PU's are on 1 ton gear, you can turn around and make a profit on the
axles alone.
If you have looked into the GMC and decided against it, I hope you do not
mind sharing why?
Hope this doesn't come off as demanding, I am just really interested in what
others have discovered about this set up not to like?
Aloha
Pete

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

From: "Peter Hope" <phope@hawaii.rr.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 06:49:47 -1000
Subject: Re: Composites and Primative Coloradans

>Secondly-a wise crack From SPYDER:
>Must be a long drive to New Guinea... or Colorado, they're pretty
>primitive
>too.  ;-)
>Yep-and we're damn proud of it!! At least we finally got a Pro-Gun
>Governor!!

	 [ truncated by list-digester (was 10 lines)]
>Yep-and we're damn proud of it!! At least we finally got a Pro-Gun
>Governor!!
Guess that's better then a pro-wrestler
Aloha Pete

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

From: Casey McMullen <st93wxta@drexel.edu>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 12:00:11 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Round Smith's Heater

> 'twas written: 
> uh, flip the blade around the other way (so's the concave blades
> face out) AND switch the cables around the other way?
> r"barely works anyhow..."d/nige

I think if you could see it, it would be obvious.
We're talking about a basket fan here, which is shaped like a basket, ie. 
solid bottom/hole in top.  The spinning blades in the sides of the 
basket create a slight positive pressure zone inside the blower housing 
and hose to heater core.  Because there is a hole in the top of the 
basket and the housing, fresh air rushes in from the atmosphere.  Flip 
the basket and you have the blades oriented in the right direction but 
the hole on the wrong side of the blower next to the motor, basket bottom 
is blocking the fresh air hole in housing.

Sorry about the bandwidth, shouldn't have brought it up <:0

C "may be way off base" M

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

From: Fred Dushin <fadushin@blackcat.cat.syr.edu>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 12:13:45 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Santanna 6 cyl engines

// I do drive to places other than Portland..at least when I have $$$ for 
// petrol :^(

That's part of the problem.  Look at the current market in automobiles
in America now: I think it's something like 48% of the cars [sic]
bought today are minivans or SUVs.  These are gas-guzzling, polluting,
and unsafe vehicles, especially when squared up against a teeny Honda
Civic or worse, one of those American ripoffs.  (Apparently, your state
-- CA -- is going to crack down on at least their emissions standards,
which are less strict that ordinary passenger cars.  They should also go
after them for fuel efficiency and safety.)  That's not to say that Rovers
are efficient, clean, or safe.  But at least there are far fewer of them
to make an appreciable impact, and hence less liklihood that some Soccer
Mom(t) will be driving one and, while juggling her latte and cell phone,
miss that red light and plow right through your passenger compartment.
Oh, that's right, that's why they make drink holders these days...

So while your overloaded Rover may be more functional and far more
likely than your average POS SUV to be used for that for which it was
originally designed (plus it looks a lot cooler), it's sadly closer in
spirit to said vehicles than a fully original Rover.

--
Fred Dushin
"Oliver" '64 IIA Regular

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

From: Zaxcoinc@aol.com
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 12:34:56 EST
Subject: Re: Re Alternative plumbing

Hah, Ground the plastic, AS IF!    all Rover owners know that if you need to
ground a plastic object, you need to first baste it with the approved anti-
seize (copper based) or perhaps, in the field, wrap it with tinfoil.  Havent'
you watched Macgyver?  of course, some of the electron pushers (and you know
who you are),  are probably out doping up the ABS fittings as we speak.

Zack
gleeful chortles

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

From: Jpslotus27@aol.com
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 12:42:17 EST
Subject: Overdrive update

    Well, the overdrive installation was a success.  It's still a little bit
sticky getting it out of OD, but nothing I cannot live with.  I'm taking it
downstate this weekend to do some pheasant hunting and visiting with my
Brother and Sister in Law.  One of my other sister in laws will be riding the
3.5 hours down with me in the Rover.  I hope she doesn't mind that I'm not
driving the Mercedes!  (I'll bring her a pair of ear plugs, just in case)

Enzo  ( mmmmm..... pheeaaaasant )

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

From: Zaxcoinc@aol.com
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 12:49:07 EST
Subject: Re: Getting engine to mate up with transmission.

Pete,  I haven't had your exact problem with storage compounds, but while
working with a machinist friend, he was re-building a motor for an application
where it would not be run for a year or more after the transaction was
complete.  The purchaser and my machinist  went through a lot of instruction
as to turning the engine over before actually attempting to start so as to get
rid of the potential loss of asembly lubrication while in storage.  The usual
thing aboput adding a bit of motor oil to the cylinders before turning over,
etc.  Personally, I'm a big fan of Marvel Mystery oil for this type of thing.

Zack Arbios

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

From: "Kent J. Shih" <calypso@tankong.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1998 09:59:34 -0800
Subject: Cannot stop rolling backwards on a hill!!

Those of you with 109" SW, can you easily stop your truck on a moderate
slope facing uphill?  My truck wants to roll backwards no matter how
hard I step on the brakes.  Is it just that I have bad set of drum
brakes or that the brakes are inadequate on all 109" SW?  Luckily when
that happened to me, no car was behind me.

Another thing I have noticed with my brakes is that I need to pump my
brakes once so that they can have more stopping power.  I haven't own
this truck very long, and would like to know if this kind of braking
problem happens to other 109" owners.

Thank you for your feedback.

-Kent

-- 
Kent J. Shih  \_____              D±±±±±±±¬   1982 Stage 1
calypso@tankong.com \__       _==/_|_|_|_]|
TEL: (425) 672-0281    \___  | _ | | / _'||]
FAX: (425) 640-6607________\_¯(©)¯¯¯¯¯(©)¯____.__\|/__._.___\|/_.__

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

From: Alan_Richer@motorcity2.lotus.com
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 13:27:40 -0500
Subject: Re: Cannot stop rolling backwards on a hill!!

ADJUST YOUR BRAKES!

Seriously, what you describe is brakes in need of bleeding or adjustment.

The brakes on Land-Rover products do not have automatic adjusters, as such they
need to be reset occasionally as the linings wear.

Take a look in the owner's manual - the procedure for adjusting them is in
there. I guarantee that you'll find them much better once you do.

                    Al Richer

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

From: NADdMD@aol.com
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 13:40:41 EST
Subject: Re: Cannot stop rolling backwards on a hill!!

In a message dated 11/6/98 1:16:11 PM Eastern Standard Time,
calypso@tankong.com writes:

>  My truck wants to roll backwards no matter how
>  hard I step on the brakes. 

YOW!!!

I think I'd wouldn't drive where there are other things to hit until you check
the brakes.  I'd personally start by looking at the inside of the wheels for
oil (leaky hubs) followed by adjusting the brakes (snail cam thing) and
bleeding the brakes.

If this didn't fix the problem, I'd pull the drums and see what gives in the
wheel cylinders and shoe lining department.

There's only 2 things on the rover I insist work at their peak before I'm
comfortable driving it.  Brakes is #1 with Steering (steering box to swivels)
a close #2. 

Nate

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

From: Paul Quin <Paul_Quin@pml.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 10:53:20 -0800 
Subject: RE: Cannot stop rolling backwards on a hill!!

My '61 88" had weak brakes.  I found that most of the problem was from weak
flex hoses that were ballooning when I applied the brakes, thus not much
pressure was getting to the wheel cylinders...  =8-0

Paul in Victoria.

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

From: "Dr. Russ" <rgdushin@blackcat.cat.syr.edu>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 14:07:27 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Round Smith's Heater

***
& 'twas written: uh, flip the blade around the other way (so's the
 concave blades face out) AND switch the cables around the other way?
&
I think if you could see it, it would be obvious. We're talking about a
basket fan here, which is shaped like a basket, ie. solid bottom/hole in
top.  The spinning blades in the sides of the basket create a slight
positive pressure zone inside the blower housing and hose to heater core.  
***

interesting.  Mine has a more regular type of fan blade.  I don't
even think they're concave/convex.  Twisted, yes..only works properly
when on in the proper orientation...yes, I've put it on backwards
before....

Is this blade the one that came with your replacement motor (brand
Brit XX, from what we don't know) or was it on your original (?)
Smith's?  Me wonders if mine is original or not, and whether other
Smith's have this basket type you describe...they do sound like
they might be more efficient.  I'll check me neib's Healeys out
tonight to see what they've got.

rd/nige

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

From: "Kenner, Dixon" <Dixon.Kenner@ms.rc.x400.gc.ca>
Date: 6 Nov 1998 14:07:00 -0500
Subject: FW: so far, it isn't working....

Er, TerriAnn, have you not addressed the question about engine swaps
already?  I think that you may need to revisit your 2.25l and see how many
horsepower you can get out of it.  You already have decided that it is the
engine of choice!  So, no more of this engine swap stuff...  Let's see
missives on 2.25l mods...  Or go for the 3l 6 cylinder...

d"don't you hate people with archives?"k

-----
Path: fourfold!news
From: "TeriAnn Wakeman" <twakeman@apple.com>
Newsgroups: fourfold.lro
Subject: Re: Merseyside
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1993 13:19:06 -0500
In message <1wFBDc2w165w@fourfold.ocunix.on.ca> Dale Desprey writes:
> William Caloccia <caloccia@sw.stratus.com> writes:
> > Any thoughts on replace the 4 banger with a straight 6 chevy engine?
> > I seem to recall that Teriann mentioned something about that a while

ago...

Lots of flames removed, asbestos gloves on, flame suit on; fire hoses on....

Here is the scoop.

The Chevey 6 engine is the most popular of the non- Land Rover engine swapsin
the US. It is my understanding that a Ford V6 is for the UK.  Anyway, youneed
an adaptor kit got the Chevy engine.  If You Land Rover originally camewith a
LR 6 cyl engine, you do not need to make any bulkhead mods.  If it did not,the
bulkhead needs to be modified. Like anything else, the end results dependsupon
the care & skill in doing it.  I also believe the radiator  needs to be moved 
forward 7 a couple of other things done.

The iron Chevy 4 cylinder engine is an easy swap requiring only the adaptorkit.
The engine fits into the bay with no modifications, uses the same enginemounts,
hoses and accelerator linkage.  It is lighter than the LR 4, more powerfuland
has better economy.

The primary disadvantage is as Dale and Dixon so well pointed out, Land Rover 
chalvanists  it is gennerally accepted that you can do just about anythingyou
want to your Land Rover as long as you use Land Rover parts, boards, carpetor
other non-car parts.  If you modify your Land Rover using non-Land Rover car
parts you are ostricised in any Land Rover gathering.

You can drop a Rover V8 into a series II and gop to a Land Rover gatheringand
people would find it interesting.

Drop a chevy 6 into a series II and go to the same meeting and you are a
candatate for ether a public lynching or a house for the mentaly dearranged.

I go to too many LR events so I opted for a rebuilt LR 4 cylinder so people
would be friendly to me.

TeriAnn

TeriAnn Wakeman             One of these days, I'll be old enough that
twakeman@apple.com          people will stop calling me crazy and start
LINK: TWAKEMAN              calling me eccentric.
408-974-2344        TR3A - TS75519L, MGBGT - GHD4U149572G, 109 - 164000561

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

From: "Wilson, Scott" <wilsons@msmail.vislab.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1998 13:23 -0500
Subject: RE: Cannot stop rolling backwards on a hill!!

You should try adjusting them. Everyonce in a while, I have to
pump twice to get a good solid pedal, but that is usually remedied
by lifting up the wheels and turning the adjuster cams until the
pads are just touching the drum. even if one is off, I have found that
it's enough to have to pump twice...

This is if it takes twice to get a good solid pedal... if it takes a
couple and then you still feel the pedal slipping, you will need
more than just adjusting the pads.

 -Scott

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

From: slade@DreamLab.cc (Michael Slade)
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 11:15:44 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: Overweight Rovers - was Re: Santanna 6 cyl engines

Alan begs...

>How heavy IS a large-format camera anyway?>

It depends on the format.  :)

My 4x5 weighs 3.8 lbs

My 8x10 weighs 15 lbs

My prof. in college had a 12x20 that weighed 30 lbs.

My answer for a long range vehicle?  Why the Range Rover of course.
Granted, I'm not as self sufficient as the Green Rover, but I don'y want to
process E-6 transparencies in the field either. (plus it was cheap)

I would wholeheartedly agree with this comment.

"How you equip a LR depends upon how you use it."

And I have certainly wondered this question before as well.

"Why is it that in North America the 2-1/4L engine considered to be the
heart and soul of a LR?"

Sorry, the camera comment drug me in....

Later,

Michael Slade
Portland, Oregon
www.DreamLab.cc

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

From: "Tackley, John" <jtackley.dit@state.va.us>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 14:20:44 -0500 
Subject: RE: Diesels for overweight Rovers

I have often thought that the Mercedes Benz 300D would be a great engine for
the LR.  Someone in Scandinavia has advertised adapters in LRO(I), for this
engine.  (The TD would probably be a bit torquey for the standard LR axles,
but for TA's Salisbury would be OK).  Being a 5 cylinder it is shorter than
most 6s and has great reliability, longevity and availability in the US.
Potomac German Auto in MD is the largest breaker of MBs in the US; (they
have a web site and an 800 #).  They have many on the shelf from @ 800$ to
2000$.  As plentiful as these cars are on the west coast, TA should have no
problem finding one locally.  I recently purchased a complete, driveable but
minor wrecked '82 300D (w/TD engine) locally for a grand, just to get the
complete motor/AT. (for transplant to a 300SD, not a LR....sigh....).

Also have seen the LR 2.5 diesel simply bolted into a petrol Series LR.
Drain the fuel tank, fill 'er up w/ diesel fuel, some very minor wiring (and
change 1 motor mount as I recall) and it was done.

If anyone knows who makes the adapter for the MB 300D motor, please share.

John Tackley
Richmond, VA

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

From: Alan_Richer@motorcity2.lotus.com
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 14:23:59 -0500
Subject: Re: Overweight Rovers - was Re: Santanna 6 cyl engines

"Why is it that in North America the 2-1/4L engine considered to be the
heart and soul of a LR?"

Simple - it's cheap to fix, indestructible, can be repaired in the jungle with a
crescent wrench (sound familiar?) and parts are available from Auckland to
Zanzibar.

What else could you want?

Slap a bigger carb on it and put in a Diesel 2.25 cam - that will boost the HP
to an acceptable level.

                         aj"Engine bigot"r

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

From: Casey McMullen <st93wxta@drexel.edu>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 14:25:37 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Round Smith's Heater

According to Dr. Russ:
> interesting.  Mine has a more regular type of fan blade.  I don't
> even think they're concave/convex.  Twisted, yes..only works properly
> when on in the proper orientation...yes, I've put it on backwards
> before....
> Is this blade the one that came with your replacement motor (brand
> Brit XX, from what we don't know) or was it on your original (?)
> Smith's?  Me wonders if mine is original or not, and whether other
	 [ truncated by list-digester (was 11 lines)]
> they might be more efficient.  I'll check me neib's Healeys out
> tonight to see what they've got.

The old fan was a Smith's, it was white molded plastic that 
degraded with age to a pitted brittle surface.  I don't know if it was 
original on the truck ('72 SIII).  When I got it the outer rim was broken 
off for about a 45deg arc with missing pieces of blade.  Being 
unbalanced it wobbled during use and mangled the felt bushing at the 
output of the shaft from motor.

While sorting through odd Smith's motors I saw several that weren't quite 
the right size, and some with a metal fan w/angled flat blades.  The one I 
settled on had a black plastic fan with molded curved blades just like my 
old one, only backwards (molded with "Smith's" and an arrow for 
rotation direction).  Maybe it's for S. hemisphere markets? ;)
If you have a metal fan it might be original.

Casey M

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

From: "Dr. Russ" <rgdushin@blackcat.cat.syr.edu>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 15:20:16 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Round Smith's one more time

Casey McMullen wrote:

***
The old fan was a Smith's, it was white molded plastic that degraded
with
age to a pitted brittle surface.  I don't know if it was original on the
truck ('72 SIII).  When I got it the outer rim was broken off for about a
45deg arc with missing pieces of blade.  Being unbalanced it wobbled
during use and mangled the felt bushing at the output of the shaft from
motor. While sorting through odd Smith's motors I saw several that weren't
quite the right size, and some with a metal fan w/angled flat blades.  
The one I settled on had a black plastic fan with molded curved blades
just like my old one, only backwards (molded with "Smith's" and an arrow
for rotation direction).  Maybe it's for S. hemisphere markets? ;)
If you have a metal fan it might be original.
***

uh, no offense, mate, but if you've got a SIII, your *plastic*
fan blade could well be original, too...look on the bright
side, though...it probably weighs 0.02 oz less so it's better
to use in an expedition equipped vehicle...

Really, though..do this..go back to where you got it and trade
the blade for one of their flat blades.  Just make sure it fits
the shaft first.

rd/nige

ps I was under the impression these round Smith's went out of
style in '61 with the passing of SIIs to SIIas.  Guess only
stateside (??).  Explains why SIIa bulkheads still had the holes for
them.

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

From: "Scheidt, David, NPG" <dscheidt@att.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 16:11:34 -0500 
Subject: round smiths heaters...

Mr. Sinclair, my 1964ish Series IIA, came with a round smiths heater.  It
was also a basic 88", -- soft top, no trim, no nothing, and delivered to AZ.
So the other smith's heater may have been an option that everyone took.

David/mr sinclair (now sporting a *real* heater)
-- 
David Scheidt, IMO Customer Care dscheidt@att.com
480 Red Hill Rd 1k217, Middletown NJ 07748
(v) +1 (732) 615-2888 (f) +1 (732) 615-2597

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

From: TeriAnn Wakeman <twakeman@cruzers.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 98 13:13:36 -0800
Subject: GM diesels into series

>TeriAnn,
>I have been following with interest your search for a more powerful engine
;>for the green rover.  I am wondering if you have considered the GMC 
Diesel?

;>If you have looked into the GMC and decided against it, I hope you do 
not
;>mind sharing why?

Hi Pete.  I have briefly looked at the GM 6.2 & 6.5 diesels and have 
decided not to go with them for a few reasons. Mind you these are my own 
presonal observastions and conclusions.  Your may vary.

One is that they are big engines and will require a bit more cutting and 
work to fit into a series engine bay than I want to do.

Two is that they have an electronic fuel distribution system.  I am 
looking for a rugged engine that is easy to troubleshoot and repair in 
the field. I also want to be able to wade the car.  Many electronic 
engine sensors do not seem to like being submerged.  Rumor has it that 
the little brain boxes are postivly hydrophobic.

Here are the criteria I am currently using when looking at diesels:

- mechanical fuel distribution system and no "electronics"
- Max HP around 4000 RPM
- Max torque around 1500 - 2000 RPM with a fairly flat torque curve
- "Easy" fit into a series LR bay with minimal cutting.
- Quiet, smoke free and smooth running  are highly desirable.

A 200 tdi is very high on my list, but I would like to see a few more HP 
out of it.  A turbocharged LD28 is high on my list but I wish it were 
just a little shorter.  I wish I know more about the Nissan 3.3L engine.  
The Santana 6 cylinder engine with a turbo might be ideal except that no 
one on the lists seems to know much about them.  To me this is a strong 
hint that special parts may be very difficult to locate.

Take care

TeriAnn Wakeman               If you send me direct mail, please
Santa Cruz, California        start the subject line with TW - 
twakeman@cruzers.com           I will be sure to read the message

http://www.cruzers.com/~twakeman   

"How can life grant us the boon of living..unless we dare"
Amelia Earhart 1898-1937

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

From: TeriAnn Wakeman <twakeman@cruzers.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 98 13:14:20 -0800
Subject: Re: Overweight Rovers - was Re: Santanna 6 cyl engines

>Re: Engine choices:
;
;>>Martin Walters did it because the 2-1/4L engine was all that was
;>>available.  I did it because it was what I had and I could not afford 
to
;>>purchase nor could I legally import a 110 two door with a bigger 
engine.

;>No argument on the latter - I lust for a 110 TDi myself. The former i 
have to
;>argue with, though. All of the Dormobiles i've ever seen have been 
;>equipped with the 2.6 rather than the venerable 2.25. Seems to me 
;>that MW looked at it and decided that a calendar rather than a
;> speedometer was a bad idea...

Martin Walters built Land Rover based Dormobiles from 1960 to the early 
seventies. Best educated guesses are that around 500 to 700 LR based 
Dormobiles were built during that time.  Martin Walters did not keep good 
records and a lot were lost.

Six cylinder Land Rovers started becoming available in 1967.  All LR 
Dormobiles build prior to then had ether 2-1/4L petrol or diesel engines. 
 1967 and later models could be ordered with either 4 cyl or the six cyl.

1967 was the last year 109s were imported into the US and the first year 
that a 6 cyl Dormobile could be ordered.  I personally know and have seen 
16 factory Dormobiles inside the US.  Of those 16, John Hess has a six 
cylinder RHD imported from the UK, David Reha has one that was originally 
imported to the US with a 6 cylinder engine (it currently has a Chevy 6), 
there is a US import 6 cylinder in the Portland area that recently 
changed hands and is undergoing a restoration.  Doug Shippman has one 
that currently has an American V8.  I do not know which engine came from 
the factory in this car.

So out of a sample of 16 Factory Dormobiles in the US, 3 came from Martin 
Walters with a 6 cylinder engine.  Of the three, John's is a relatively 
recent import.  All the rest with the possible exceptions of Doug's, came 
from the factory with a four cylinder petrol or diesel 2-1/4L engine.

;>Swap engines if you like - but to me "expedition-equipped" means
;;>field-repairable and able to survive the rigors of wherever I want it 
to take
;>me. I don't want some prima donna under my bonnet that's going to have 
a 
;>hissy fit and seize because it ingests an ounce of water during wading.

I fully agree with this.  It is why I would not consider building an 
expedition vehicle out of a newish US spec Rover.  It is one of the 
reasons I have been looking hard at a variety of engines.  It is why I do 
not want one with electronic fuel injection, or little brain boxes.  If I 
decide to go diesel to obtain the high fuel mileage, I will choose one 
with a mechanical fuel distribution system such as the 200 tdi or LD28.

If I go petrol I will choose something with a carburetor and no 
electronics.  The 3.9 L Rover engine didn't even get considered because 
of that.

Rugged simplicity is very important to me.

;> I just submit, and not for the first time, that the 2.25-equipped 
Rover may 
; >not be the first choice if you have to have 4 tons of gear.

I agree there too and I only have 2.7 tons fully loaded.  But with 
considering the years that 109s were exported to the states and that the 
6 cylinder was only available in '67 four door 109s, along with the US 
vehicle import regulations, I didn't have a whole lot of choice.  I did 
what I could with what I had.

;>As everyone's familiar with the Martin Walther conversions, allow me to
;>illustrate with those vehicles in mind.

;>First off, metal cabinetry? Way too damn heavy. There are composites 
;>available now (honeycomb materials) that are half the weight for the 
strength and
;>fireproof, to boot. 

Worse yet.  The Martin Walters cabinets are made out of heavy sheet 
steel.  The additional cabinets I fabricated are made from sheet aluminum 
to minimize weight while retaining the MW cabinet look.  I could have 
gone hi-tech with composites and all.  But I decided not to because I 
wanted to retain the sixties Land Rover look and feel, clunky and heavy 
as it is.  One important design goal was to keep the car as Land Rover as 
possible (I considered Martin Walters as honorary Land Rover).

;>The gas bottle under the seat? Gone - a petrol-fired stove

I don't know why, I just don't trust petrol based stoves or heaters.  I'm 
sure that they are safe but I just don't feel comfortable with them.  I 
also don't like having to worry that if I heat water to bathe I might not 
have enough petrol to make it back to a filling station.  While propane 
may not have the efficiency that you are referring too, I like the idea 
of bathing, and cooking not affecting my car's range.

;>Steel water cans? Compared to the weight of the liquid the steel can is 
;>minimal,but I'd have fitted a polyurethane tank with spigot instead 
;>of their steel can.

Martin Walters used a pair of plastic water containers, one with a 
spigot.  

I wanted my water tank to fit under the side bench between the rear wheel 
and front aux. fuel tank.  This is otherwise wasted space low on the car  
The tank needed to be a special size and shape to fit there and have the 
maximum capacity the space would allow.  There is nothing commercially 
available that would fit into the space that I had available.  I could 
have had a polyurethane tank constructed out of flat pieces to fit.  The 
cost would have been very high.  I ended up going with sheet stainless 
steel.  The finished weight was comparable to that of a thick sided 
polyurethane tank and because of the thin wall construction the capacity 
was greater.

;>That flip-up roof? Composites again, with a metal sub-structure. 
;>Fiberglass is very heavy strength for strength - MW used it because 
;>it was easy to work and cheap.

I think the key words "easy to work" and "cheap" were key design criteria 
for everything Martin Walters did.  Yes the top is heavy and composites 
could provide a VERY EXPENSIVE AND TIME CONSUMING alternative that is a 
lot stronger and a lot lighter.  But once again I was after the '60s Land 
Rover look and feel while gaining a ceiling over 7 feet tall and two 
places to sleep at the roof line.  I also wanted to keep the LR as LR as 
possible.  Mind you I didn't pay attention as to which LR parts book the 
parts came from and I considered Martin Walters to be honorary Land Rover.

;>The MW Dormobile conversion is the better part of 500-1000 pounds 
;>overweight for what it is and what it does. There are places
;> steel and iron belong, but there are places that it doesn't - 
;>and that place is on a vehicle that has a leisurely pace to begin with.

I have no argument there.  But retaining the '60's Land Rover look and 
feel and keeping my Land Rover as Land Rover as possible were important 
(to me) design considerations.  If I wanted a highly efficient high tech 
solution I would have started with an efficient high tech car, not a 1960 
Land Rover.  People have accused me of making my Land Rover into 
something else, but if you looked through my car you would see that all 
the parts are Rover, Martin Walter, Land Rover specific after market or 
home made.  Where it has been bastardized is that it used parts ranging 
from series II through Defender, civilian, military and Camel Trophy.

That is exactly why I'm agonizing so much over a power plant upgrade.  I 
have to compensate for the weight penalty that I have put on myself by 
using low tech heavy LR and Martin Walters parts and I want to retain the 
'60's LR look and feel but with a little more hill climbing speed and 
highway safety.  An engine that is rugged and simple is very important to 
me.  I do not want to modify my car as much as a Rover V8 would require.  
I don't want to do something that I will be sorry for.  So I am just 
asking questions about possibilities and collecting information.  I hope 
that it doesn't bother you too much.

TeriAnn

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

From: TeriAnn Wakeman <twakeman@cruzers.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 98 13:14:33 -0800
Subject: Expedition LRs/design criteria (was overweight & santana 6)

I put a lot of thought and research into deciding what I wanted and how I 
wanted to do it before lifting a wrench to modify my 109 into a long 
range expedition car.

I started off with a 1960 109 two door that I have owned since 1978.

I decided that I wanted a expedition car with the following 
specifications:

- Able to travel around 600 miles without stopping for refueling
- Able to carry water and provisions for a week without refilling
- as strong or stronger than stock & design must have minimal negative 
impact on off roadability.
- Able to sit two up front, sit two in back and sleep two.
- The rear bed must stay open enough to comfortably fit an Irish Wolf 
hound.
- The car needed to be configurable to comfortable camping in adverse 
weather, in snow and mud.
- I wanted the car to be as Land Rover as possible and retain as much of 
the Land Rover look and feel as I could.
- Simplicity and the ability to be easily repaired in the field is 
important.

I spent almost two years looking at Land Rovers, RVs, boats, and anything 
else that housed people away from home to get ideas.  I'm doing the same 
thing now with engines.

I decided to go with a Martin Walters Dormobile conversion for several 
reasons.  With the top up you have over seven feet of head room so you do 
not feel cramped.  You can sleep two people at the roof line inside the 
car.  It comes with a two burner stove and broiler, a sink, rear jump 
seat and wardrobe.  Yes the cabinets are steel and heavy.  Yes the top is 
heavy but it looks and feels Land Rover.  So I decided to trade weight 
for rugged simplicity and to maintain a LR look and feel.

I added a single rear fold up jump seat to provide a second rear seat.  I 
went with a Norcold chest type refrigerator so I could keep refrigerated 
foods indefinitely.  I decided to install a second sink.  When you clean 
dishes you usually wash and rinse them.  Having a sink for wash water and 
a sink for rinse water minimizes water use.  I built a pedestal for the 
refrigerator, a sink stand and a second wardrobe for storage out of 
aluminum to keep the weight down.  I added a prota-pottie for 
convenience.  There frequently isn't a toilet where I camp and leaving 
defecation behind does not fit into tread lightly camping guidelines.

For water I had a 15 gallon stainless steel water tank built up to fit at 
frame level below the rear body.  I wanted to keep the weight as low as 
possible.  

For fuel, I added a second front tank and a rear tank for a total of 42 
Gallons of fuel.  By installing fuel tanks at frame level I keep the 
centre of gravity as low as possible and kept fuel tanks off the bumpers.

So yes the car is heavy.  Fully loaded, she weighs just over 5400 pounds 
on a scale.  That includes me, my wolf hound, 294 pounds of fuel, 120 
pounds of water, lots of dog food, people food, recovery gear, spare 
parts, tools and camping gear.  But that 5400 pounds allows me to go just 
about anywhere up to about 600 miles and be out a week without any 
support.  And it allows me to do it in relative comfort in just about any 
weather.

Except for weight, the car is more off road capable than she came from 
the factory.

I could have gone hi tech but I wanted to preserve the characteristic 
Land Rover simplicity and I wanted to retain the series Land Rover look 
and feel.  Field repairability is important to me.  

I could have used space age ultralight materials but decided that it 
would compromise the classic Land Rover look and feel.  It is a clunky 
low tech car that works well because it is a clunky low tech car.

I have made a lot of design compromises to end up with a long range 
expedition Land Rover that retains the '60's LR look and feel. While the 
solution is not ideal it works and is reasonably comfortable to live in 
for months at a time (Yes I have done that).

TeriAnn Wakeman               If you send me direct mail, please
Santa Cruz, California        start the subject line with TW - 
twakeman@cruzers.com           I will be sure to read the message

http://www.cruzers.com/~twakeman   

"How can life grant us the boon of living..unless we dare"
Amelia Earhart 1898-1937

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

From: Zaxcoinc@aol.com
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 16:35:59 EST
Subject: Re: Overweight Rovers - was Re: Santanna 6 cyl engines

In a message dated 11/6/98 1:16:15 PM Pacific Standard Time,
twakeman@cruzers.com writes:

<<   I could have 
 gone hi-tech with composites and all.  >>

While you guys are on this thread, I was talking to a client of mine who is a
composites manufacturer.  A quick comparison of the two technologies is as
follows,

Kevlar composites at Roughly $75 per sq yd per .001 thickness
Fiberglass materials at roughly $ 3  per sq yd per .01 thickness

Standard fiberglass  could be fabbed for "X" lbs per s.f. (chopped like MW
did)
Vacuum bagged for a 30% weight saving
Autoclave and pressure molding at an added 20% weight savings.

So the technology is there, it is the economics for manufacture(again) which
shoot the belt off of the HighTech Dormobile wannabees.

How far could you go to save the equivalent fuel costs of the nwe Kevlar roof
based on cost of materials alone ?

Zack Arbios

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

From: TeriAnn Wakeman <twakeman@cruzers.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 98 13:48:57 -0800
Subject: Re: Santanna 6 cyl engines

>So while your overloaded Rover may be more functional and far more
>likely than your average POS SUV to be used for that for which it was
;>originally designed (plus it looks a lot cooler), it's sadly closer in
;>spirit to said vehicles than a fully original Rover.

Please
Can you expand on this conclusion of yours (off line if you would like)

I worked very hard to maintain the '60's Land Rover look and feel. I 
considered this to be an important design criteria that strongly 
infulanced how I made my conversion.  I would like your opinion on 
specific areas where I failed.  

One of the main reasons I went with the low tech heavy Martin Walters 
Dormobile conversion was to keep the series Land Rover look and feel.  If 
you examine my car from bumper to bumperette you would see that almost 
every part is Land Rover, Land Rover specific Aftermarket, Martin Walters 
or home made trying to emulate a LR or Martin Walter's look.  The 
exceptions are the '60's Smiths fuel gauges, Smith tach, plastic 
aftermarket cup holder and  NorCold refrigerator.  I wanted a highly 
effecient refrigerator to keep battery drainage to a minimum.  I added a 
Delco Alternator too.

I purposly went "low tech" and clunky to retain the '60's Land ROver look 
and feel.

SO please expand your thought and let me know WHY you think my car has 
more in common with a new SUV than a series Land Rover.  I would like to 
know where my design failed in the look and feel dept.  I know it works 
quite well on expedition.

If you don't mind, I would like to know how experienced you are in long 
range LR overlanding?  For instance, during the previous 2 years how many 
times have you been camping in your Land Rover for longer than three 
weeks at a time?  You can tootle around home or go out for 3 or 4 days in 
just about anything.  You learn a lot when you spend several weeks at a 
time overlanding and living in your Land Rover.

TeriAnn

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

From: Allen Northwood <nella@enternet.com.au>
Date: Sat, 07 Nov 1998 08:47:26 +1100
Subject: Solution: threaded alloy plug

Hi everyone.

After a number of recommendations, the solution I used for this repair was
to re-tap the thread with a 1" tap and fit a replacement plug. Due to
damage to the threads I got a drop or two of water out and had to coat the
thread of the plug with silicone sealant to stop this. I remember that
silicone has a mixed following on the list but once I was sure the plug
would go in far enough to hold I needed something to stop drips out through
the thread, especially where it was damaged and plumbers tape didn't work.

So far so good.

Interestingly, LR dealers in Sydney no longer stock series parts but
specialist series retailers/mechanics do. The series parts shop told me
that Garthons (Sydneys oldest LR dealer) had the 1" tap and they would
probably lend it to me if I asked politely. I did and they did. 
Admittedly I did buy a Discovery and get it serviced there, but the service
manager never mentioned doing a favour for a customer or anything, so, just
for peoples interest, especially those who have never had a good experience
from a LR dealer, I thought I'd mention this occurrence.

Thanks very much to everyone who gave me advice for this problem.

cheers
Allen
1969 IIa 109
Sydney, Aust.

 

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

From: "Peter & Julie Rosvall" <rosvall@nbnet.nb.ca>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 18:03:09 -0400
Subject: Koenig Winch For Sale

To all who may be interested....

I have a Koenig PTO winch for sale. It is the model that runs from the
crankshaft. I have all the attachments for it including the mounting plate,
the winch itself (of course!), the PTO shaft and the drive plate plate that
bolts into the crankshaft. Unlike the other Koenig model that runs from a
unit in the PTO hole of the tranny, this winch allows the use of an
overdrive. The winch was taken apart and cleaned and rebuilt using new
gaskets. The winch also has 175 feet of new 7x19 5/16" cable. My asking
price is $600.00 US and the Buyer pays shipping (although if the buyer is in
upper New England delivery might be able to be arranged.

If anyone is interested please reply so I can forward any more information
that may be required......

Peter Rosvall
rosvall@nbnet.nb.ca
Saint John, NB Canada

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

From: SPYDERS@aol.com
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 17:13:38 EST
Subject: Re:  Re: Overweight Rovers - was Re: Santanna 6 cyl engines

In a message dated 11/6/98 5:16:15 PM, you wrote:

<<If I go petrol I will choose something with a carburetor and no 
electronics.  The 3.9 L Rover engine didn't even get considered because 
of that.>>

Why not? Put on an Edelbrock intake manifold and a Holley carb. I've see it
done on a 4.2 (RR block) in an 88 leafer. Not a lot of cutting, but the
radiator was moved forward as in the stage ones.

.02

--pat.

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

From: TeriAnn Wakeman <twakeman@cruzers.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 98 14:30:38 -0800
Subject: Re: FW: so far, it isn't working....

>Er, TerriAnn, have you not addressed the question about engine swaps
>already?  I think that you may need to revisit your 2.25l and see how many
;>horsepower you can get out of it.  You already have decided that it is 
the
;>engine of choice!  So, no more of this engine swap stuff...  Let's see
;>missives on 2.25l mods...  Or go for the 3l 6 cylinder...
;>
;>d"don't you hate people with archives?"k

:*>   :*>   :*>   :*>  :*>   :*>

No I love it.  Thanks!!

<Snip - stuff about different Chevy engines>

;>The primary disadvantage is as Dale and Dixon so well pointed out, 
;> Land Rover chalvanists.  It is generally accepted that you can do
;> just about anything you want to your Land Rover as long as you use
;> Land Rover parts, boards, carpet or other non-car parts.  
;>If you modify your Land Rover using non-Land Rover car parts you 
;>are ostracized in any Land Rover gathering.

;> You can drop a Rover V8 into a series II and go to a Land Rover 
gathering,
;> people would find it interesting.

;>Drop a chevy 6 into a series II, go to the same meeting
;> and you are a candidate for ether a public lynching or a house
;> for the mentally deranged.

;>I go to too many LR events so I opted for a rebuilt LR 4 cylinder
;> so people would be friendly to me.

:>TeriAnn

Dixon I think the current threads are proving my point.  I have been 
talking about replacing my Rover engine with a different engine and a lot 
of people are thinking that I am deranged and there is some mild flaming 
(stove on simmer?) going on about my possible conversion.

I stayed with the LR engine back then because I did not want to cause 
waves and I wanted everyone to be my friend.  NOT because I thought that 
it was the best engine.  Consider it a low self esteem thing.

I have been flame broiled a lot since those days and the car has taken on 
a Dormobile kit plus additional fluid tanks.  So maybe my need to be 
accepted and liked by everyone has decreased a little and my desire not 
to be rammed from the rear has increased?

Time will tell what I will end up doing.  Maybe I still have problems 
with this self esteem thing and will opt for hot rodding the 2-1/4 or 
going to the 200 tdi (real high on my current list).  Or maybe I'll 
decide that I can live my life independent of other people's approval and 
install the engine that I really think is best for my application (200 
tdi is still real high on this list).

Hot rodding the 2-1/4 is a possibility.  But anytime you hot rod an 
engine you pay in the currencies of reliability and flexibility.  

There is always that 9:1 ported head, 1-2/4" SU on a special intake 
manifold, special cam, headers and larger diameter exhaust pipes.  I have 
already polished the valve cover ;*)  People are talking 90+ BHP with 
this kind of setup.  Eric Mills has this set up on his Dormobile.  It 
seems a little faster than John Hess's 2.6L European spec LR 6 cyl. 

Maybe a 5 main bearing 2.5L petrol engine with an intercooled turbo?

I don't know I'm still collecting data.

TeriAnn Wakeman               If you send me direct mail, please
Santa Cruz, California        start the subject line with TW - 
twakeman@cruzers.com           I will be sure to read the message

http://www.cruzers.com/~twakeman   

"How can life grant us the boon of living..unless we dare"
Amelia Earhart 1898-1937

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

From: Faye and Peter Ogilvie <ogilvi@hgea.org>
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1998 12:42:11
Subject: Re: Now the Starter motor won't mate up.

	Think it would be easy to swap in a 5 main engine.  Nearing completion 
of
my swap but can't get starter motor in.  Seems to be an 1/8th of an inch
from being able to slip on the studs because of interference with the fly
wheel.  The starter slips right on the 3 main without a problem.  Does the
5 main engine use a different starter or is mine just being malevolent????  
	Another problem is the 5 main engine is metric and the metric nuts
supplied are larger diameter than the SAE nuts that were original on the 3
main engine.  Can't get a socket on them and no room to work with an open
end wrench.  Think I may have solved the problem by filing the starter case
down a bit but can't know for sure until I get the damn starter in
position.  Any solution other than grinding a socket down for this problem
if the case filing doesn't work.
Aloha Peter

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

From: TeriAnn Wakeman <twakeman@cruzers.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 98 14:43:53 -0800
Subject: Re:  Re: Overweight Rovers - was Re: Santanna 6 cyl engines

>>If I go petrol I will choose something with a carburetor and no 
>>electronics.  The 3.9 L Rover engine didn't even get considered because 
>>of that.
;
;>Why not? Put on an Edelbrock intake manifold and a Holley carb. I've 
see it
;>done on a 4.2 (RR block) in an 88 leafer. Not a lot of cutting, but the
;>radiator was moved forward as in the stage ones.

One reason is that it is against California state laws and I live in 
California.

TeriAnn Wakeman               If you send me direct mail, please
Santa Cruz, California        start the subject line with TW - 
twakeman@cruzers.com           I will be sure to read the message

http://www.cruzers.com/~twakeman   

"How can life grant us the boon of living..unless we dare"
Amelia Earhart 1898-1937

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

From: "Faure, Marin" <Marin.Faure@PSS.Boeing.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 15:15:53 -0800 
Subject: The 2.25 diesel

From: M.J.Rooth@lboro.ac.uk (Mike Rooth)
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 10:18:46 +0000
Subject: Re: Overweight Rovers - was Re: Santanna 6 cyl engines

>I recall a certain young gentleman,now reappearing on this list,who took
two 2 1/4 diesel 109"'s from England to S.A.I've *seen* him pull out
of a carpark here with a ton aboard (most of it on the roof,if memory
serves) bound for London.The roll factor was awe-inspiring,and that was
in bottom gear! However,the 109" cruised at fifty *and* returned a better
fuel consumption than the petrol would have done.Moral of story,dont
criticise the 2 1/4 diesel until you've had one awhile.

I knew a few people back in the 1970s who had Land Rovers with the 2.25
diesel.  I also had the chance to drive a Model 88 which had a diesel in
place of its original petrol engine.  For anyone who doesn't know, Rover
designed the 2.25 diesel first, having been unsuccessful in their search for
a satisfactory diesel engine for the Land Rover in the late 1950s or early
'60s.  They decided they could design a better engine than what was
available off the shelf at the time.  Meanwhile, the petrol Land Rovers were
using a 4-cyl. engine that Rover designed originally for their cars.

Not long after the new diesel design went into production, Rover ceased
making the car that was the primary user of the petrol engine that was being
shared with the Land Rover, or they went to a different engine for the car,
I can't remember which.  In any event, it meant that Rover was now running
two engine assembly lines to support only the Land Rover.

This was a financial detriment, so they made the necessary design
modifications to build a petrol version of the 2.25 diesel.  So in place of
the diesel's distributor pump there is an electrical distributor, and so
forth.  Now they had only one assembly line which could turn out engines for
both the petrol and diesel Land Rovers.  The petrol engine was the real
beneficiary because it inherited the diesel's robust design features, like
roller followers on the camshaft and so on.

As to the 2.25 diesel itself, the experience of my friends who had them was
that it was a very good "working" engine.  It had lots of low-end torque and
was great for pulling heavy loads, crawling around over rough terrain, and
so forth.  Better than the petrol version.  The performance on the road was
not as good as the petrol version's, but it wasn't that much worse.  The
horsepower rating of a diesel engine can be a bit deceptive because it
doesn't account for the torque of the diesel.  So a diesel engine of 100 hp
can actually do the "work" of a gasoline engine of somewhat greater
horsepower.  An overly simple generality is that a diesel does the work
using torque while the gasoline engine does it using rpm.

I found driving the diesel not a great deal different than driving my own
petrol Series III.. I recall the greatest difference was in the acceleration
rates in the higher gears.  The diesel was definitely more sluggish than the
petrol engine.  The diesel also had a narrower power band: its response
dropped off rapidly at low rpms in too high a gear, and it ran out of "rev
acceleration" sooner than the petrol version.  So while the actual road
speeds of the diesel and petrol Land Rovers is really not much different,
the diesel feels slower and underpowered because it just can't match the
acceleration of the petrol version in the higher gears, and you have to
shift down sooner when going up a hill to keep the engine in its optimum rpm
band.

The downside of the 2.25 diesel is not so much its performance but its
longevity.  Compared to the petrol version, the 2.25 diesel simply doesn't
run as long before needing relatively major work.  If I remember the figures
correctly, where a 2.25 petrol engine might go 100,000 plus miles before
needing internal work (valves, rings, bearings, etc.), the diesel would
generally need internal work by about 80,000 miles.  I'm sure there are
exceptions of very long-lived diesels out there, but as an average, the
petrol engine will outlast the diesel.  My own 2.25 petrol engine went about
125,000 miles before it finally burned a couple of exhaust valves.  One of
my friends with a diesel had to do something major to it at about 75,000
miles.

On the other hand, both engines are very simple, so assuming you can get the
parts for the diesel today, overhauling one is not a huge deal.  If you're
looking for a Series for hard work where road speed and performance is not a
consideration, the 2.25 diesel is a good choice.  I don't believe that many
factory original diesel Land Rovers were imported to the US, but I think a
fair number of US owners swapped diesels for their petrol engines in the
mid-1970s.  For awhile back then, it was kind of an "in thing" to do.  Like
all diesel engines, the key to maximizing the 2.25 diesel's life is squeaky
clean fuel, clean air filter(s), and clean lube oil.

__________________
C. Marin Faure
faurecm@halcyon.com
marin.faure@boeing.com
  (original owner)
  1973 Land Rover Series III-88
  1991 Range Rover Vogue SE

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

From: "\"Mr. Mike\" Passaretti" <passaretti@sol.med.ge.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 17:43:50 -0600
Subject: Re:  Re: Overweight Rovers - was Re: Santanna 6 cyl engines

>>>>> "TeriAnn" == TeriAnn Wakeman <twakeman@cruzers.com> writes:

    TeriAnn> One reason is that it is against California state
    TeriAnn> laws and I live in California.

Well, there's always the TR-8 spec carbed 3.5 ltr Rover V-8,
non?  And didn't the 3500's come with carbs for a while?

							-MM

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

From: john cranfield <john.cranfield@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1998 20:08:37 -0400
Subject: Re: FW: so far, it isn't working....

TeriAnn Wakeman wrote:
> >Er, TerriAnn, have you not addressed the question about engine swaps
> >already?  I think that you may need to revisit your 2.25l and see how many
> ;>horsepower you can get out of it.  You already have decided that it is
> the
> ;>engine of choice!  So, no more of this engine swap stuff...  Let's see
> ;>missives on 2.25l mods...  Or go for the 3l 6 cylinder...
> ;>
	 [ truncated by list-digester (was 67 lines)]
> Maybe a 5 main bearing 2.5L petrol engine with an intercooled turbo?
> I don't know I'm still collecting data.
 Teriann, If you like it do it and to hell with the nay sayers.

 Old Muddy isn't everyone's cup of tea but I like it and there have been
many stuck vehicle owners who have been pleased to see it and the
recovery gear that I carry and don't let anyone make you believe that
tall skinny tires will go more places than tall fat ones. It simply aint
so.
To borrow an expression " go girl"
  John and Muddy

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

From: "Chris Dillard" <cdillard@Aholdusa.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 19:12:31 -0500
Subject: Re: FW: so far, it isn't working....

PREACH ON BROTHER!!!!!

Christopher Dillard Dba          Ahold USA (BI-LO Inc)
95 Discovery V8i (Rusty II)        cdillard@aholdusa.com
55 Series I    (???)                     Greenville, SC USA
55 Series I (The Green Hornet)
1989 Thoroughbred Racehorse (the other Rusty!!)
SoLaRos #136

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

From: "d.h.lowe" <dhlowe@idirect.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1998 07:59:13 -0500
Subject: Re: d.h.and 101

NAW. .......Too embarassed.........Dixon is after me and is threatening to write
his own version if I don`t ante up. By the way how bad is your rear
body......oops! sorry ....how bad is the rear body on the 88.......I still have
that rear body that Simon abandoned years ago.Last time I looked at it it wasn`t
too shagged. I have started to assemble parts for the V8 rebuild........Crane
cam from Canadian tire,$153.00.....Timing chain and gears, same place   $34.00
but I have to pick up that Rangie I bought in Vermont so the piggy bank is
looking very emaciated.at the moment Iwill have to let it rcover over the winter

john taylor wrote:

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

From: DNDANGER@aol.com
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 20:00:00 EST
Subject: Re: Overweight Rovers - was Re: Santanna 6 cyl engines

This is incorrect. The 6.2 and 6.5 liter diesel engines as fitted to the
M-1008 (CUCV) and M998 (HMMWV) series of vehicles use a simple mechanical
swage plate (distributor type) injection pump with a mechanical diaphragm
pump feeding it for volume.  The only electrical component involved with the
fuel system is a fuel shut-off solenoid. The electronic components you are
referring to are probably the glow plug circuits which are electronically
controlled. These engines when used and cared for properly are the epitome of
reliability in the field and are easily serviced under any circumstances with
minimal training. Because of their 90 degree power pulse they run as  or more
smoothly than their four or six cylinder competition. It is true that they are
wider than the sixes but they are shorter than most of them and they are
lighter than some of the most popular replacements. These engines provide
excellent performance and a distinct advantage in fuel economy over the petrol
V8. The only problem I've heard is that the Rover trans. is not strong enough
to absorb all of the aditional torque.

Bill Lawrence
Albq, NM

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

From: DNDANGER@aol.com
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 20:01:43 EST
Subject: Re: Overweight Rovers - was Re: Santanna 6 cyl engines

Sorry, that last reply was to the GMC diesel message.

Bill Lawrence

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

From: "d.h.lowe" <dhlowe@idirect.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1998 08:37:14 -0500
Subject: Re: more gearbox problems

Peter ..there was no real reason to alter the setting of the reverse stop. One
thing at a time..........adjust the stop back to where it was then report
back.Did you have the selectors out of the box, you might have put thr selector
fork back but not in the reverse gear groove on the gear.

Peter Thorén wrote:

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

From: "d.h.lowe" <dhlowe@idirect.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1998 08:50:52 -0500
Subject: Re: d.h.and 101

> That's it, let's hear it. Out with it... no holding back... or we'll get the
> 2nd hand version suitably embellished...

  Aw right ,Aw right already. I give in. First Dixon leaves a message on my
machine threatening to out me if I don`t fess up.then John blows my cover.Dixon
I promise to give you the truth the whole truth and nothing but the
truth..........soon.Don` t worry Al Richer I will have it back in action in time
for the drive I promised you.

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

From: "d.h.lowe" <dhlowe@idirect.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1998 09:07:03 -0500
Subject: Re: Now the Starter motor won't mate up.

>         Think it would be easy to swap in a 5 main engine.  Nearing 
completion of
> my swap but can't get starter motor in.  Seems to be an 1/8th of an inch
> from being able to slip on the studs because of interference with the fly
> wheel.  The starter slips right on the 3 main without a problem.  Does the
> 5 main engine use a different starter or is mine just being malevolent????
>         Another problem is the 5 main engine is metric and the metric nuts
> supplied are larger diameter than the SAE nuts that were original on the 3
	 [ truncated by list-digester (was 12 lines)]
> position.  Any solution other than grinding a socket down for this problem
> if the case filing doesn't work.

I just rebuilt two 5 brg. engines and fitted the old series 3 three bearing 
engine
starter motors with no problem. Crow foot wrenches on a 3/8 drive ratchet will 
look
after the nuts.

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

From: SPYDERS@aol.com
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 21:26:24 EST
Subject: Re:  Re:  Re: Overweight Rovers - was Re: Santanna 6 cyl engines

In a message dated 11/6/98 7:48:22 PM, you wrote:

<<>>>>> "TeriAnn" == TeriAnn Wakeman <twakeman@cruzers.com> writes:
    TeriAnn> One reason is that it is against California state
    TeriAnn> laws and I live in California.

Well, there's always the TR-8 spec carbed 3.5 ltr Rover V-8,
non?  And didn't the 3500's come with carbs for a while?>>

87 RR's?

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

[digester: Removing section of:  Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
boundary="------------AA6B742CBC158DB8D4CA73D1" ]
From: "d.h.lowe" <dhlowe@idirect.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1998 09:32:35 -0500
Subject: Re: Dizzy short drive shaft question

The distributor drive gear does not have to be a nightmare. Slide the gear into
place so that the "master " spline ,as the book calls it, is at the correct 
angle
(its different on petrol and diesel engines) 20 degree up on petrol and 20 
degree
down on diesel. With the grub screw out, insert  and hold a  small screwdriver
into the hole until it lightly touches the bronze bush. With a pair of "outside"
ring circlip pliers (when you squeeze the handle the points open outwards)insert
these down into the drive gear and grip the gear. You will now be able to move 
the
gear up and down without lifting it out of engagement with the cam gear. As you
move it up and down the bush will rotate and with the small screwdriver just
gently touching the bush you will feel when the hole for the grub screw arrives,
Move the screwdriver in a circular motion and the hole is aligned. Remember that
the drive gear has to be lifted slightly for it to align so don`t let it drop 
down
that 1/8". When you insert the grub screw put some lock tight on it and DON`T
overtighten it or you will get accelerated wear on the bush and that will ruin
your oil pressure since the oil gallery is directly below.
I have no shame in admitting that Brett Storey and myself are the greatest, the
coolest, the most awesome practictioners of distributor drive gear installers on
this planet. Bar none . It`s just too hard to be modest when we are so Kewl.

> Hi all,
> Alright, I admit it.  I put in the short distributor drive shaft out of phase
> and now I have to pull it out and realign it.  Can this be done with the wings
> still on? (Oil filter housing has to come off, grub screw, etc,etc, etc...)

	[ Original post was HTML ]
[digester: Removing section of:  Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii ]

	[Attachment  removed, was 40 lines.]	

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

From: SPYDERS@aol.com
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 21:31:04 EST
Subject: Re:  Re: d.h.and 101

In a message dated 11/6/98 9:50:36 PM, you wrote:

<<I promise to give you the truth the whole truth and nothing but the
truth..........soon.>>

dhlowe and hitchcock, masters of suspense ;-) This ain't no Grand Jury, we
just want the lurid details...

--pat.

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

From: NADdMD@aol.com
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 21:38:19 EST
Subject: Re: Dizzy short drive shaft question[multipart mime alternative 5 
lines delet...

In a message dated 11/6/98 9:30:49 PM Eastern Standard Time,
dhlowe@idirect.com writes:

<< When you insert the grub screw put some lock tight on it and DON`T
 overtighten it or you will get accelerated wear on the bush and that will
ruin
 your oil pressure since the oil gallery is directly below. >>

I just tightened it down snug, no lock tight.  I figure the gasket will keep
the grub in far enough since it has ~ 1/8 inch still sticking out from the
housing when the grub first engages the hole.

BTW, by trial and error, I came up with the exact same method.  Turns out a
litttle trial and error will figure out the amount to rotate to get the master
spline to rotate to the right spot. (about 90 degrees counterclockwise
rotation)

Thanks for the help

Nate

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

[digester: Removing section of:  Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
boundary="------------95375801EE2E62F43261409B" ]
From: "d.h.lowe" <dhlowe@idirect.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1998 09:53:32 -0500
Subject: Re: d.h.and 101

I will have to ask for permission from Dixon since he has copyrights for the
newsletter and seeing as how they are about to award idiot of the year awards
at the Christmas party and I dont want to upset him. Actually the story of Tom
T and his 101 in the river in the Rockies is much more interesting, maybe I
should spill the beans on that episode.After all this is the third time Thomas
the water baby has provided us with a good story.

	[ Original post was HTML ]
[digester: Removing section of:  Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii ]

	[Attachment  removed, was 17 lines.]	

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

From: "d.h.lowe" <dhlowe@idirect.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1998 09:57:55 -0500
Subject: Re: Dizzy short drive shaft question[multipart mime alternative 5 
lines delet...

The grub screw should be slightly recessed from the face of the engine block. 
Did
I misunderstand you that it is sticking out by an 1/8"! !

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

From: Brett Storey <brstore@ibm.net>
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1998 22:18:12 -0500
Subject: Re: d.h.and 101

Diff-lock Dave wrote:

..."I promise to give you the truth the whole truth and nothing but the
truth..........soon"....

Just remember Dave, there are a couple guys in witness protection that are 
ready to
pounce if you omit any of the gory details. They say the saw everything.

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

From: Brett Storey <brstore@ibm.net>
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1998 22:41:05 -0500
Subject: Re: Dizzy short drive shaft question

And how did we get to be so awesome Dave? Is it because we have to install the 
drive
gear two and three times each time we do an engine.... the last attempt always 
being
after the engine is in the vehicle, but won't start? Practice makes perfect, as 
they
say.

Which reminds me. I'll be over Sunday to double check the drive gear in the lump
sitting on our garage floor before I install it.

d.h.lowe wrote:
...I have no shame in admitting that Brett Storey and myself are the greatest, 
the
coolest, the most awesome practictioners of distributor drive gear installers on
this planet. Bar none . It`s just too hard to be modest when we are so
Kewl.

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

From: Paul Oxley <paul@adventures.co.za>
Date: Sat, 07 Nov 1998 06:29:35 +0200
Subject: Re: The 2.25 diesel

"Faure, Marin" wrote:
> diesel.  I also had the chance to drive a Model 88 which had a diesel in
> place of its original petrol engine.  For anyone who doesn't know, Rover
> designed the 2.25 diesel first, having been unsuccessful in their search for

Umm, I don't think this is strictly correct.

As I understand the sequence of events L-R were looking to upgrade the
1600 petrol engine in the S1 for the launch of the 80 inch model in
1952, so they borrowed the sub-assembly from the 2 litre diesel (the
diesel was a nominal 2 litre right up until 1962), which they
subsequently (in 1958, for the S2 88) upgraded to 2.286. As i've already
mentioned the diesel engine had to wait till 1962 to receive the upgrade
to 2.286.

So in spirit the diesel came first, but it wasn't a two-and-a-quarter
until some time after the petrol.

Regards

Paul Oxley
http://AfricanAdrenalin.co.za
http://Adventures.co.za

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

From: Jim Fraser <fraserj@webhart.net>
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1998 23:38:49 -0500
Subject: RE: Diesels for overweight Rovers

At 02:20 PM 11/6/98 -0500, you wrote:
>I have often thought that the Mercedes Benz 300D would be a great engine for
>the LR.  
>John Tackley
>Richmond, VA

John, 

Any idea what the torque/horsepower ratings are for this M-B engine?  What
rpm is the engine good for?  I always thought the VW TDI diesel would be a
good engine for a SWB, 95 hp, 110 ft/lbs of torque and a high rpm limit.
(my pre TDI diesel 'redlines' at about 5700 rpm supposedly)

Jim Fraser

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

From: TeriAnn Wakeman <twakeman@cruzers.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 98 20:55:49 -0800
Subject: Re: Overweight Rovers - was Re: Santanna 6 cyl engines

>This is incorrect. The 6.2 and 6.5 liter diesel engines as fitted to the
>M-1008 (CUCV) and M998 (HMMWV) series of vehicles use a simple mechanical
>swage plate (distributor type) injection pump 

Sorry, the only ones I have seen are in GM pickups.  They appeared to 
have all kinds of electronc stuff & tubing on them.

TeriAnn Wakeman               If you send me direct mail, please
Santa Cruz, California        start the subject line with TW - 
twakeman@cruzers.com           I will be sure to read the message

http://www.cruzers.com/~twakeman   

"How can life grant us the boon of living..unless we dare"
Amelia Earhart 1898-1937

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

From: Paul Oxley <paul@adventures.co.za>
Date: Sat, 07 Nov 1998 07:12:50 +0200
Subject: I know I've been here before, but...

This latest bout of transplant posting catches me smack in the middle of
a couple of transplants that I'm actually busy - in silence up till now
'cos last time I mentioned it I almost got roasted by the flames of
scorn and viturperation emanating from this list. I've now donned my
asbestos jock-strap, so blast away...

I've got a couple of 4.1 (the 3.8 works just as well) Chev straight
sixes that are destined for my R6 (SA S111 Stage 1) and my S11a. After
exhaustive studies I have determined these Chev engines to be the most
reliable, easy and cheap to maintain\repair, suitably powerful options.
Further they are "true" L-R engines: simple and solid, unlike the Buick
V8 or the original R6's straight six which must have been L-R South
Africa's idea of a sick joke (Bitter? Me? Never!). Coupled with Range
Rover crown wheel and pinion sets (3.54:1), these engines give great gas
mileage, yards of torque, and plenty of highway speed at low revs to
ensure minimum stress on the moving parts.

The transplants themselves are simple and uncomplicated (adapter plates
are available off the shelf), and the only things I need to fabricate
are the engine mounting brackets. The engines themselves are common as
muck throughout Southern Africa so parts aren't any kind of a problem. 

Right guys, flames on! 
 
Regards

Paul Oxley
http://AfricanAdrenalin.co.za
http://Adventures.co.za

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

From: "Peter Hope" <phope@hawaii.rr.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 19:23:27 -1000
Subject: Re: Overweight Rovers - was Re: Santanna 6 cyl engines

>>This is incorrect. The 6.2 and 6.5 liter diesel engines as fitted to the
>>M-1008 (CUCV) and M998 (HMMWV) series of vehicles use a simple mechanical
>>swage plate (distributor type) injection pump
>Sorry, the only ones I have seen are in GM pickups.  They appeared to
>have all kinds of electronc stuff & tubing on them.

Ahhh, that's why I mentioned surplus vehicles earlier.  I know nothing about
current civilian models.  BUT, the military ones are stone simple, and
readily available.

As far as the engine bay modifications, I understand your concerns.  I have
NO idea if the 6.2 will fit the Rover.
Aloha
Pete

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

From: "Peter Hope" <phope@hawaii.rr.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 19:43:38 -1000
Subject: Re: I know I've been here before, but...

>I've got a couple of 4.1 (the 3.8 works just as well) Chev straight
>sixes
It was still in a chevy, but I had 230,000 original miles on my s6 when I
sold the vehicle a few years back.
>The transplants themselves are simple and uncomplicated (adapter plates
>are available off the shelf),

Uhh, whose self?  Anyone know if these are available in the states?

Paul, any cutting of the bulkhead?
Pete

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

From: "Peter Hope" <phope@hawaii.rr.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 19:44:42 -1000
Subject: Re: FW: so far, it isn't working....

> Old Muddy isn't everyone's cup of tea but I like it and there have been
>many stuck vehicle owners who have been pleased to see it and the
>recovery gear that I carry and don't let anyone make you believe that
>tall skinny tires will go more places than tall fat ones. It simply aint
>so.

John, any pictures of 'Muddy" on the net?  Or would you mind sharing what
you have done to the vehicle?
Mahalo
Pete

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

From: "Franklin H. Yap" <FHYap@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 1998 22:42:52 -0800
Subject: Re: I know I've been here before, but...

Paul Oxley wrote:

> ... I've got a couple of 4.1 (the 3.8 works just as well) Chev straight
> sixes that are destined for my R6 (SA S111 Stage 1) and my S11a. After
> exhaustive studies I have determined these Chev engines to be the most
> reliable, easy and cheap to maintain\repair, suitably powerful options.

Is this the same 6 that's in the FJ60s Landcruisers?

Frank

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

From: Paul Oxley <paul@adventures.co.za>
Date: Sat, 07 Nov 1998 08:29:55 +0200
Subject: Re: I know I've been here before, but...

Peter Hope wrote:
> Uhh, whose self?  Anyone know if these are available in the states?

Gila Engineering (in South Africa) makes a range of adapter plates (also
twin choke carb inlet mainfolds for the two and a quarter BTW) and other
goodies. They're made of ally so can't weigh that much if you're
thinking of ordering some - I'll find out for you if you like.
 
> Paul, any cutting of the bulkhead?

Nope, none at all. Mind you the R6 has the grille right at the front of
the wings ala 110 and the 2a is a current 6 cyl so has the 6 cyl
firewall/bulhead/whatever.
 
Regards

Paul Oxley
http://AfricanAdrenalin.co.za
http://Adventures.co.za

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

From: john cranfield <john.cranfield@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sat, 07 Nov 1998 07:41:23 -0400
Subject: Re: FW: so far, it isn't working....

Peter Hope wrote:
> > Old Muddy isn't everyone's cup of tea but I like it and there have been
> >many stuck vehicle owners who have been pleased to see it and the
>          [ truncated by lro-lite (was 6 lines)]
> >tall skinny tires will go more places than tall fat ones. It simply aint
> >so.
> John, any pictures of 'Muddy" on the net?  Or would you mind sharing what
> you have done to the vehicle

I,ll send some pic by E mail off the list as soon as I get them scanned
   John

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

  END OF * LIST DIGEST 
 Input:  messages 83 lines 3804 [forwarded 304 whitespace 0]
 Output: lines 2668 [content 2328  forwarded 236 (cut  68) whitespace 0]

Digest Messages Copyright 1990-1999 by the original poster or/and Empire Rover Owners Society, All rights reserved. Photos & text Copyright 1990-1999 Bill Caloccia, All rights reserved. Empire/LRO List of charges for Empire/LRO Policies against the distribution of unsolicited commercial e-mail (aka SPAM). Empire/LRO fees for the distribution of unsolicited commercial e-mail (aka SPAM). Frequently Asked Questions
<--Back	HOME	TOP	Forward -->	height=31 width=88 alt="Made with Macintosh" border=0>