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: Peter Goundry <peterg@aircast.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 07:46:17 -0500
Subject: Nova Scotia

Hi All, 

	Looking to put on a club trip to Nova Scotia in the spring. Is
there anybody on the list I can contact to get a better idea of camp
sites, off-road sites, etc. Please contact me off line at
peterg@aircast.com <mailto:peterg@aircast.com>  Thanks in advance,

Peter Goundry
67 GS109 IIA, 73 Lightweight, 97D90 #127
R.O.V.E.R.S, WCRC 

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

From: Dan Prasada-Rao <prasadaraodp.NIMITZ@NAVAIR.NAVY.MIL>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 07:59:47 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Swivel Ball O-Haul

Which POR-15 paint did you use?  They have silver which contains metal
filler, then they have the other paints like grey, black(semi-gloss),
black(gloss), and clear. Black Semi-Gloss cost more, by the way, all
the rest are the same price. They advertise the silver as being good
"to fill small holes and pitted areas."

Just curious, 

Dan Rao

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

From: NADdMD@aol.com
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 08:30:18 EST
Subject: Re: put a fusible link in the line to the battery??????????

 Alan Richer discouragingly writes:

> So, if you were running it would be OK (and would still charge), but
wouldn't
>  start charging if shut off and restarted.

Al,  

I just assembled a cartridge fused link (50 amp) to connect A1, A and
alternator output...

Are you saying this ain't agonna work?

Nate

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

From: Alan_Richer@motorcity2.lotus.com
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 08:36:13 -0500
Subject: Re: put a fusible link in the line to the battery??????????

Re: Fusible link - A1, A, ALternator out:

Which side of it is the link on - the alternator to the A leads, or the A
leads/alternator to wiring harness?

                         ajr

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

From: NADdMD@aol.com
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 08:37:29 EST
Subject: AB gone Jeep??!! Not quite

Hi all,

Just spoke with AB, they are continuing with the LR and RR line of products,
but are expanding to add gear for J**p Cherokee and GC as well.

I think Greek Peak II sponsorship will be ok.

Nate

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

From: Norman Lewis <norm@kpco.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 06:54:13 -0700
Subject: Re: spring bushings

In all this discussion/debate about spring bushings and whether they
should be tight or not, there seems to be one fact overlooked.  Bushings
have inner and outer sleeves separated by a stiff rubber insert which is
intended to allow the inner sleeve to rotate somewhat while the outer
sleeve remains fixed.  Part of the suspension "equation", if you will,
is the torsion that develops in these bushes as the supension moves.  If
the shackles are not tightened to this inner sleeve, the rubber insert
is redundant and serves no purpose, as no torsion can develop.  That is
why the inner sleeve is slightly longer than the inner, so that the
shackle can be tightened against it and not the outer sleeve.  Also, if
the shackles are loose, the bushing will move independant of the shackle
and ultimately wear both the inner sleeve and the face of the shackle.

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

From: asfco <asfco@banet.net>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 09:22:53 -0500
Subject: Re: Swivel Ball O-Haul

Dan Prasada-Rao wrote:
> Which POR-15 paint did you use?  They have silver which contains metal
> filler, then they have the other paints like grey, black(semi-gloss),
> black(gloss), and clear. Black Semi-Gloss cost more, by the way, all
> the rest are the same price. They advertise the silver as being good
> "to fill small holes and pitted areas."
> Just curious,

	 [ truncated by list-digester (was 12 lines)]
> Dan Rao
>Dan;
  I used Gloss black POR 15  thats all I had on Hand. It gave a good
smooth result
Rgds
Steve Bradke

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

From: "Mark Talbot" <rangerover@top.monad.net>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 10:29:26 -0500
Subject: Importing into Canada

Is there anyone out there that has imported a Land Rover into Canada. Could
you please contact me  as I would like to find out about paperwork and costs
etc.

Thanks Mark

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

From: "Wise Owl Innovation Incorporated" <wiseowl@direct.ca>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 07:43:18 -0800
Subject: Re: Importing into Canada

Mark Ihave done this in the past.
You must meet both federal and provincial regulations.
Federal insists the truck be over 16 years old and you must be able to
prove the year of manufacture.
Here in BC provincial will require a safety inspection and if you live in
city an Air care certificate.
Otherwise little problem

Ray

----------
> From: Mark Talbot <rangerover@top.monad.net>
> To: lro@playground.sun.com
> Subject: Importing into Canada
> Date: Wednesday, November 18, 1998 7:29 AM
> Is there anyone out there that has imported a Land Rover into Canada.

Could
> you please contact me  as I would like to find out about paperwork and
costs

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

From: "Nick Fankhauser" <nickf@co.wayne.in.us>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 09:41:07 -0500
Subject: Thanks for the OD advice...

Thanks for all of the advice- especially from the folks who got away with
drilling new holes- I briefly considered this, but since the body is in
another garage, was afraid to do anything rash that might interfere with the
seats & floor. I'll go ahead & do it now and report back.

-Nick Fankhauser
County Business:             | Other Business:               |
nickf@co.wayne.in.us         | nickf@infocom.com             |
http://co.wayne.in.us        | http://www.infocom.com/~nickf |
765-973-9277 FAX 765-973-9490| 765-935-3387                  |
_____________________________|_______________________________|

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

From: "David R. Bobeck"<dbobeck@ushmm.org>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 98 10:03:13 -0500
Subject: Re[2]: OD interfering with hand brake 

  

   >Dave
  >Why not just drill new holes in the mounting bracket?  No need to remove and
>re-weld.  Are you one of those guys who loves to play with torches?

Enzo
did you read the first part of my message where I suggested exactly that? 
Are you one of those guys that just loves to read only the last line?

>The whole thing's just slicker'n shit!

hmmm....says it all...careful where you step, cowboy.   :)

later
daveb/greenHELL

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

From: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?Bj=F8rnung_Jensen?=" <bjjen13b@online.no>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 18:21:03 +0100
Subject: Re: spring bushings

Norman Lewis wrote:
>If
>the shackles are not tightened to this inner sleeve, the rubber insert
>is redundant and serves no purpose, as no torsion can develop

It will still function as a shock absorber, as it does in the coil sprung
vehicles.

Bjørnung Jensen
Norway

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

From: Chris Dillard <lvmyrvr@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 09:50:28 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Test (DIS_REGARD)

Just testing another mail box.
Sorry for the wasted bandwidth.
Christopher DIllard

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

From: "Peter Hope" <phope@hawaii.rr.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 08:45:33 -1000
Subject: Re: spring bushings (sorry for length)

This whole thing had me very confused now.  Then again so does the threaded
shackle it self.  I have owned 10 trucks over the past 10 years.
70 LR 88
73 LR 88
75 IH Scout
79 IH Scout
79 GMC Jimmy
80 IH Scout
84 Datsun PU
85 Jeep Cherokee
92 GMC PU
95 Jeep Cherokee
A couple did have coil fronts, but the rest have been all leafers.  Only two
of the eight had the threaded shackle and ooops, they were both Series
Rovers.
I have replaced/removed bushings and/or springs on all but the 2 90's
vehicles.  I thought/think that the bolt tightens up the shackle snug on to
the inner sleeve.  The inner sleeve is 'supposed' to rotate in the bushing.
The bushing is tight in the outer sleeve(Have seen some that appear to be
molded to the outer).  As the spring compresses, it extends and the shackle
rotates.  The reason bushings give out is that they rust to the inner
sleeve, creating one solid part.  When this happens the ride gets stiffer
and torsional forces get applied to the rubber bushing.  This will
eventually cause the bush to rupture.
Now the only long term experience I have is with one of the Scouts.  It came
with a box of new parts, including some Wild Country poly bushings.  The old
bushings were rubber.  The bolt,inner sleeve and rubber had fused over the
past 12 years (OE from the factory, I was second owner).  On two of the
front bushings there was a bit of rubber still clinging to both inner and
outer sleaves, but the rest had been worn away.  Used a whiz-wheel to cut
the heads and nuts of the bolts.  Pulled the shackles away and was able to
with draw the remainder of the bolt/sleeve/bush conglomeration, Then chisel
out the old outer sleeve.
When reassembling the new parts, the inner sleeve was coated inside and out
with Permatex anti-sieze.  The bolts were then torqued down onto the inner
sleaves (see diagram if not sure what I mean
http://www.wccafe.com/phope/images/shackle.jpg )This was done in late 92.
Last fall I blew the rear end up.  I replaced the rear right away with one I
had laying about.  I did not get around to swapping the front (different
ratio on the new axles) until this past summer just before I sold her.  So
in 5-1/2 years and almost 55 thousand miles (long highway, around town,
towing, and off road), everything popped apart as if they had just been put
together.  There was no visible deformation of the bushings.  No elongation
of the holes in the shackles, and no damage to the threads of the gr8 bolts
where they passed through the shackle.  And if you are familiar with the
condition of the roads in Tidewater, VA you could argue that most of the
miles were off road.
So:
Why the threaded shackle?
Is it really neccesary?
Is the operation of the LR suspension somehow different then what I have
above?
When I replaced the back 1/2 frame and rear springs on the 73 Rover I pretty
much used the same procedure on reassembly as the Scout.  But only had the
vehcile for another 8 months and have no idea the long term affects.
I have not yet removed the suspension from the projects frame so am not sure
what condition things are in.  I wanted to be able to roll the thing out of
the garage.  SO's birthday and XMas soon, need to be able to use the space
for some present building.
Also I want to make sure that I put it all back together correctly, plus I
am thinking of adding 2" of lift by extending the mounting points on the
frame and this info may effect the plan.

Hope I haven't got too much here, thought it would help explain my mental
image of it all.
Mahalo
Pete

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

From: Carl Petter Swensson <cepe@online.no>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 19:56:45 +0100
Subject: Re: TORO Overdrive diagram

I have a scanned installation manual for a _Fairey_ OD, which includes
an exploded view, if you are interested. I believe the TORO and Fairey
units are of the same general design. 

Mail me, and I can mail you the zipfile.
-- 
Carl P. Swensson	internet: cepe@online.no	
			telephone: +47-928 937 40
                        telefax:   +47-929 737 40
I speak for myself. I will tell you when I speak for someone else

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

From: Carl Petter Swensson <cepe@online.no>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 19:46:55 +0100
Subject: Re: Bushings 

> From: "David R. Bobeck"<dbobeck@ushmm.org>

> >>Gotta disagree on this one, and my info comes by way of Charlie Haigh at 
> dudes. get a grip.
> tighten the shackles the way it says in *the book*. drive around the lock to 
> settle the springs.
> tighten the bolts to the specified torque setting

	 [ truncated by list-digester (was 10 lines)]
> tighten the bolts to the specified torque setting
> tighten the nuts to the specified torque setting.

OK. Then my question is, what does *the book* specify? Could anyone with
*the book* please specify?
> now you are done. don't worry. be happy...
> if you tighten them BEFORE you settle the springs then you will ruin either 
the 
> spring or the bushing. I am sure there is some movement of both parts here, 
but 
> the metal parts WILL wear if they move against each other...its the law...
> go ahead and ask charlie...

	 [ truncated by list-digester (was 11 lines)]
> later
> daveb

Otherwise I have mounted the 4 new springs on my 109"LR amd it is a new
vehicle. No more strange clunck noises when turning from a left hand to
a right hand turn or vice versa. On the other hand it seems if I need
new shock absorbers. The LR is jumping up and down of joy, I guess the
old springs were quite effective dampers in their own right.

I have tightend my nuts to approx. 90ft-lb as someone on this list
indicated, but I ma following this thread closely.

Regards,

Carl

Regards

-- 
Carl P. Swensson	internet: cepe@online.no	
			telephone: +47-928 937 40
                        telefax:   +47-929 737 40
I speak for myself. I will tell you when I speak for someone else

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

From: Joseph Broach <jbroach@selway.umt.edu>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 12:31:53 -0700
Subject: Re: spring bushings

Peter ponders:
<<This whole thing had me very confused now.  Then again so does the threaded
shackle it self.  I have owned 10 trucks over the past 10 years.
(snip)
Why the threaded shackle?
Is it really neccesary?
Is the operation of the LR suspension somehow different then what I have
above?>>

Interesting question, Peter. I hadn't thought of it this way. If you think
about it, the -only- purpose that the threaded shackle could serve is to
allow the pins to be held tight (by means of the locknut) while still
maintaining the "Grice gap" of 1/16" or so between bushing and shackle. So
why, you ask, does the inner sleeve of said bushing stand proud of the
frame? One possibility may be to give added support to the pin and thus
reduce torsional force on the pins?

-joseph and sidney
missoula, mt

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

From: Ian Harper/Donna-Claire McLeod <tantramar@golden.net>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 14:45:10 +0000
Subject: Propshaft Problem

Today's problem is....

a chattering noise seemingly coming from the transfer box/propshaft/rear
diff area.   Took the rear shaft off (it was misaligned-couldn't find
the alignment marks so I just made the two yokes parallel) and drove
with the front, no chatter.   Put the realigned (I hope) rear shaft on
and chatter's back!!!  I can feel it through the propshaft as I'm
driving. (Don't try this with loose clothing....) When I put the rear
wheels up and spin them by hand, there's no clunking or missing teeth
sound, and all seems OK, but under load, the chatter is there.

Any ideas about what it may be?   I assume since it works great with
just the front shaft on that the transfer box is OK, but the noise seems
to becoming from the area around the parking brake....

Any wisdom would be welcome......otherwise its switch the front/rear
shafts and see...

Cheers, Ian
-- 
Ian Harper/Donna Claire McLeod
http://www.golden.net/~tantramar
Tantramar House Bed and Breakfast
Stratford, Ontario
Phone(519) 273-7771  Fax (519) 273-3993

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

From: "David R. Bobeck"<dbobeck@ushmm.org>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 98 14:48:34 -0500
Subject: Re[2]: Bushings  

>OK. Then my question is, what does *the book* specify? Could anyone with 
>*the book* please specify?

buy the book. Its cheap, and useful. Just buy it. 

>I have tightend my nuts to approx. 90ft-lb as someone on this list 
>indicated, but I ma following this thread closely.

see? you really *do* need it...

dave/g.HELL

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

From: Paul Lonsdale <Lonsdale@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 14:50:11 -0500
Subject: Re: test please ignore

<<    +--+--+--+         
     I __|  [_]|_\___  
     I ____|"_|"__|_ | /     B791 PKV
     "(o)=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D(o)"    Bronze Green 110 CSW >><<     
     
 I dont know if you  will get this back as I am seeing it Frank, but 
your Land Rover`s wheels are coming out as "(0)=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D(0)"  
   
     
 Paul

 Wed, 18 Nov 1998 19:30

 Ex- H.M. Coastguard Series III 88 Inch
 "Dougal Mc Landie"  B 895 OJT  (1984)
 

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

From: Paul Quin <Paul_Quin@pml.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 11:54:36 -0800
Subject: RE: test please ignore

He must be using one of those AMD processors with "3DO" technology :-)

Paul in Victoria.

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

From: John Cranfield <john.cranfield@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 09:18:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Zenith starting trouble

Brett Storey wrote:

> Well, judging by a few of the replies to my Zenith starting problem, I'm not 
the
> only one with this ailment. I guess the only thing to do is as Jeremy suggests
> and check the float level. I'm also still using the oil bath filter so the
> problem that Steve Mace had with the K&N isn't causing me my grief. Just keep 
at
> it I guess.
> Thanks guys
> Brett
	 [ truncated by list-digester (was 10 lines)]
> Thanks guys
> Brett

This just a guess as it has been awhile since I ran a zenith. I suspect that you
might have O ring leakage as the symptoms indicate flooding. With the engine 
running
yoy wouldn't notice it but if the engine is stopped for a period then the 
leakage
could cause minor flooding which would  be an advantage in starting a cold 
engine
but hinder starting a warm one.
Comments anyone ?
      John and Muddy

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

From: Joseph Broach <jbroach@selway.umt.edu>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 13:17:48 -0700
Subject: Re: bushings

Carl writes:
<<OK. Then my question is, what does *the book* specify? Could anyone with
*the book* please specify?>>

Both the Green Bible and Haynes are very vague and generally of no use on
this one...

"(1) Slacken the shackle pin securing the shackle plates to the chassis.
(2) Fit the road spring in position, secure 'U' bolts but do not fully
tighten the shackle pins at this stage. (3) Lower the vehicle to the ground
and move vehicle bodily backward and forward to settle the springs. Tighten
the shackle pins and locking nuts. If they are tightened prior to lowering
vehicle to the ground, premature failure of the bushes may occur."

-joseph and sidney
missoula, mt

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

From: "David R. Bobeck"<dbobeck@ushmm.org>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 98 15:21:28 -0500
Subject: Re[2]: spring bushings 

>Interesting question, Peter. I hadn't thought of it this way. If you think 
>about it, the -only- purpose that the threaded shackle could serve is to 
>allow the pins to be held tight (by means of the locknut) while still 
>maintaining the "Grice gap" of 1/16" or so between bushing and shackle. So 
>why, you ask, does the inner sleeve of said bushing stand proud of the 
>frame? One possibility may be to give added support to the pin and thus 
>reduce torsional force on the pins?

you guys are missing the point. what are you going to do? make your own 
unthreaed shackles? just use the ones god gave you and move on. they work FINE 
the way M.Wilks intended. just do it like the book says. the book is not wrong. 
at least not in this case anyway. the reason one shackle is threaded on the LR 
and not on your cheap piece of american crpa is that your LR was meant to drive 
40mph over washboard roads *every day*. Your bornco or socut was meant to take 
Billy Joe Jim Bob to the rifle range. Your unthreaed cheap american shackle 
didn't wear out or break because your scout wasn't abused the way LR's were 
meant to be.
I would say that is true even for most LR's in recreational use in the US. 

Does this make it any more clear?

Also according to "Grice's Law" the shackle bolt would be free to back off that 
1/16" that he claims is supposed to be the clearnce between shackle and bush 
inner. Doesn't sound like sensible design...

There is one way to do this job and that is the way it is supposed to be done. 
Do it any way you want, I hope you like changing bushings...

da"I don't"ve

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

From: "David R. Bobeck"<dbobeck@ushmm.org>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 98 15:12:11 -0500
Subject: Re: Propshaft Problem 

>Any ideas about what it may be?   I assume since it works great with 
>just the front shaft on that the transfer box is OK, but the noise 
>seems to becoming from the area around the parking brake....

try pullnig the handbrake drum to see if all is well. also I don't think you 
can switch front/rear propshafts

later
daveb

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

From: "Peter M. Kaskan" <pmk11@cornell.edu>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 15:51:43 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Propshaft Problem

>Took the rear shaft off (it was misaligned-couldn't find
>the alignment marks so I just made the two yokes parallel) and drove
>with the front, no chatter.   Put the realigned (I hope) rear shaft on
>and chatter's back!!!
Maybe its 180 off?  I take it your ujs are OK.

>I can feel it through the propshaft as I'm
>driving. (Don't try this with loose clothing....) When I put the rear
>wheels up and spin them by hand, there's no clunking or missing teeth
>sound, and all seems OK, but under load, the chatter is there.
>Any ideas about what it may be?   I assume since it works great with
>just the front shaft on that the transfer box is OK, but the noise seems
>to becoming from the area around the parking brake....

Did you pull the parking brake drum off and have a look?

G'Luck - Peter

Peter M. Kaskan				Uris Hall 231
Office / 607-255-3382			Dept. Of Psychology
Lab /  607-255-6396			Cornell University
e-mail / pmk11@cornell.edu		Ithaca NY 14853
http://comp9.psych.cornell.edu/graduates/people/PeterM.Kaskan.htm
http://comp9.psych.cornell.edu/psychology/finlay/finlaylab.html

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

From: "David R. Bobeck"<dbobeck@ushmm.org>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 98 15:49:38 -0500
Subject: Re[2]: bushings 

>Both the Green Bible and Haynes are very vague and generally of no use on 
>this one...

vague? I think not.
>"(1) Slacken the shackle pin securing the shackle plates to the chassis. 
>this one...

this assures that the rubber part of the bushing will not be loaded 
rotationally in either direction when you fit the spring
>(2) Fit the road spring in position, secure 'U' bolts but do not fully 
>tighten the shackle pins at this stage. 
>.

ok, makes sense. right?
>(3) Lower the vehicle to the ground and move vehicle bodily backward and 
>forward to settle the springs.
>.

I prefer to drive it around the block. Either way, it makes sure that the 
spring is in its "settled" position, i.e. the center (approximatley, this 
ain't rocket science) of its up and down movement. Coincidentally, the 
shackle will be in the middle of its rotational movement.

> Tighten the shackle pins and locking nuts.
Tighten the shackle pins and then the locking nuts. Torque specs are there I 
believe. If not they are in the section titled "Torque Specs".
 
> If they are tightened prior to lowering vehicle to the ground, premature 
>failure of the bushes may occur."
for example:
If the shackle is tightened (essentially "mating" it to the bush inner sleeve) 
while the wheel is in the air, the spring will be at the lower end of its up 
and down travel, and the shackle will be at the end of its rotational travel. 
so when you lower the vehicle to the ground, the bushing rubber rotates with 
the shackle, until the spring prevents the the truck from lowering anymore. The 
bushing rubber is now in a loaded condition. Since the spring (and hence the 
shackle) will be spending the majority of its time in this position, the 
bushing will be *constantly* under load, and will soon fail. If the spring is 
settled properly and the shackle bolts are tightened in the proper settled 
position, then the rubber is only under load when the spring is bouncing. So 
therefore the bushing rubber spends most of its time in a relaxed state (kind 
of like a gov't worker) and also doesn't have to move as much to reach full 
articulation as it would if tightened while the spring was in a compressed or 
extended state.

does this help?

-joseph and sidney
missoula, mt

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

From: Sski3@aol.com
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 17:03:19 EST
Subject: Tire Chains

Hi all; I had chains once and they were a pain in the Uknow for the amount of
time they are on the truck. You cant run them all the time so you have to
install and take off after each use,"too much work".  I've had a few 4x4s and
have never gotten stuck in snow,that I couldn't get out of, just becarefull of
the situation you ar going into, you'll be fine. 
  I pulled a Semi out off a snowbank once, he couldn't belieave it,either
could I.
Remember; Its a Rover
Steve F
New Hampshire
69SIIA 88
65SIIA 88 lawn ornament

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

From: "Peter M. Kaskan" <pmk11@cornell.edu>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 17:14:26 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Tire Chains

>I pulled a Semi out off a snowbank once, he couldn't belieave it,either
>could I.
Did you have the chains on for this?!!

Peter

Peter M. Kaskan				Uris Hall 231
Office / 607-255-3382			Dept. Of Psychology
Lab /  607-255-6396			Cornell University
e-mail / pmk11@cornell.edu		Ithaca NY 14853
http://comp9.psych.cornell.edu/graduates/people/PeterM.Kaskan.htm
http://comp9.psych.cornell.edu/psychology/finlay/finlaylab.html

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

From: John Cranfield <john.cranfield@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 18:40:41 -0400
Subject: Re: spring bushings

"David R. Bobeck" wrote:

> >Interesting question, Peter. I hadn't thought of it this way. If you think
> >about it, the -only- purpose that the threaded shackle could serve is to
>          [ truncated by lro-lite (was 7 lines)]
> >frame? One possibility may be to give added support to the pin and thus
> >reduce torsional force on the pins?
> you guys are missing the point. what are you going to do? make your own
> unthreaed shackles? just use the ones god gave you and move on. they work FINE
	 [ truncated by list-digester (was 25 lines)]
> There is one way to do this job and that is the way it is supposed to be done.
> Do it any way you want, I hope you like changing bushings.

Amen.   Sorry Sandy but I won't be doing it "your way"
 John and Muddy

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

From: James Wolf <J.Wolf@worldnet.att.net>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 18:43:06
Subject: O.D. Vent

On the question of the vent to equalize pressure in the trans, overdrive
and transfer box. Has anyone tried using the hollow bolt and banjo thing
off of a CB type master cylinder? I am changing to the CV type master
cylinder and was just musing about doing just that. I would think that the
brake line sized dia. would be large enough to vent these. Anyone with any
suggestions or maybe experience?

Jim Wolf

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

From: jimfoo@uswest.net
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 16:10:35 -0800
Subject: Re: O.D. Vent

If you have a bunch laying around, I don't see why you couldn't use a
banjo fitting. However I think that a 1/4" barbed hose fitting is
cheaper and less prone to leaking. That is what I used on my overdrive
and x-fer case/tranny. I ran one line from the od, put a tee in for the
x-fer/tranny, and ran the tube to the bulkhead in the engine
compartment, where it has a small fuel filter to keep dust out of the
line. Works great.

Jim Hall
Elephant Chaser 1966 88" truck cab sporting a Beaver

James Wolf wrote:
 
 On the question of the vent to equalize pressure in the trans,
overdrive
 and transfer box. Has anyone tried using the hollow bolt and banjo
thing
 off of a CB type master cylinder? I am changing to the CV type master
 cylinder and was just musing about doing just that. I would think that
the
 brake line sized dia. would be large enough to vent these. Anyone with
any
 suggestions or maybe experience?

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

From: Joseph Broach <jbroach@selway.umt.edu>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 16:38:53 -0700
Subject: Re: spring bushings (final word?)

I feel at least partly responsible for the escalation of this spring
bushing thread. I didn't mean for it to become a flamefest, especially not
toward Sandy, who was only giving his opinion and experience as per my
request. Surely by now we all know that seldom is there only -one- right
way to do something on a Series Rover. Just remember the oil/grease, tire
pressure, and many other threads. People who are old hands at Series
maintenance have found the way that works best for them. People who are new
to this (myself included) are just interested in weighing different ideas.
I don't think anything is accomplished by bashing other's ideas without
trying them first. For what it's worth,  neither the Green Bible nor Haynes
tells precisely how to tighten the shackle pins; they don't give a torque
setting either. So, I guess even Rover left how one "tightens" them to
self-discretion. I think both arguments are sound and interesting. I don't
even remember the original post, but I've learned a lot from the responses,
and that, after all, is what I'm here for. Thanks!

-joseph and sidney
missoula, mt

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

From: "Faure, Marin" <Marin.Faure@PSS.Boeing.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 15:45:07 -0800
Subject: Re: OD interfering with hand brake

From: "Nick Fankhauser" <nickf@co.wayne.in.us>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1998 09:43:58 -0500
Subject: OD interfering with hand brake

>I'm trying to fit a Fairey overdrive on my 88" IIa, but the rod that the
hand brake lever connects to is in the way. The rod that I'm referring to is
the one that pivots in two brackets which are each mounted on a side frame
rail. The rod thus goes between the two frame rails. The hand lever attaches
near the middle, and a shorter lever goes to the driveshaft brake via a
linkage on the right side. It looks like the OD should fit below this rod,
but it (the brake rod) is about 1/2 inch too low. I'm in the midst of a
frame-up restoration, so the tranny & engine mounts are new. The OD was
bought used from a list member, so I don't have the original installation
manual, and only presume that I have all of the parts. If I remove the brake
pivot rod, the OD slips in nicely, with everything lined up as I expect, so
I'm at a loss...

>Has anybody out there encountered this? If you having a working Fairey
overdrive, what is your clearance between these parts? Is there a different
set of brackets for the brake rod that I need to get? frustrated minds want
to know...

This won't help you much I guess, but I can tell you that when I installed a
Fairey overdrive in my Series III shortly after I bought it new in 1973,
there were no interference problems of any kind during the installation.
I've since had the unit out when it sheared its input gear back in the
mid-'80s, and then had the whole transmission out for gasket replacement and
a new overdrive.  There were no interference problems during the
re-installation of the transmission/transfer case/overdrive.  My Land Rover
is completely stock except for the instrument panel, so there are no special
brackets for the parking brake pivot rod.  The rod crosses just over the top
of the overdrive, and I would say there are at least a couple of inches of
clearance.  I know I can wrap my hand and a rag around the rod which I do
periodically to wipe it down of dirt and oil, and I have no trouble removing
the cover plate of the overdrive, which I believe lies partially under the
brake pivot rod.

I wonder if your transmission mounts are too high (long), raising the
transmission/transfer case high enough to bring the overdrive into contact
with the brake rod.  Or perhaps if you are using an aftermarket frame, the
transmission mount brackets were welded on slightly higher than on the
factory original frame.  Or the attachment points for the brake pivot rod
could be slightly lower than on the factory original frame.

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

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

From: jimfoo@uswest.net
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 16:39:41 -0800
Subject: Re: O.D. Vent

jimfoo@pop.dnvr.uswest.net wrote:
 
 If you have a bunch laying around, I don't see why you couldn't use a
 banjo fitting. However I think that a 1/4" barbed hose fitting is
 cheaper and less prone to leaking. That is what I used on my overdrive
 and x-fer case/tranny. I ran one line from the od, put a tee in for the
 x-fer/tranny, and ran the tube to the bulkhead in the engine
 compartment, where it has a small fuel filter to keep dust out of the
 line. Works great.
 
 Jim Hall
 Elephant Chaser 1966 88" truck cab sporting a Beaver
 
 James Wolf wrote:
 
  On the question of the vent to equalize pressure in the trans,
overdrive
  and transfer box. Has anyone tried using the hollow bolt and banjo
thing
  off of a CB type master cylinder? I am changing to the CV type master
  cylinder and was just musing about doing just that. I would think that
the
  brake line sized dia. would be large enough to vent these. Anyone with
any
  suggestions or maybe experience?

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

From: Joseph Broach <jbroach@selway.umt.edu>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 16:56:28 -0700
Subject: Lower gears

I know Ray at Wise Owl had mentioned this before, but I just did a little
research and am interested in hearing opinions/experience. I was spoiled to
the low-low gears with my old 15" tires. When I went to 235/85/16's ground
clearance has been improved, but 1st low is now a little high for my
liking. Now (as Ray has mentioned), the suffix B x-fer case has a bigger
step down (2.888:1 vs 2.350:1) than C and later cases. To make up for this
the Suffix C+ gearboxes have lower gearing (3.60:1 vs 2.99:1 1st gears for
example). So, theoretically, mating a B x-fer case to a C+ gearbox=lower
low range gearing w/o sacrificing high range. The only difference between
the cases are the low gear wheel and the intermediate gear wheel, so, swap
those two and (in theory) you're good to go. The low range would be changed
as follows:

1st (40.61 vs 48.86) 2nd (25.04 vs 30.13) 3rd (17.06 vs 20.36) 4th (11.28
vs 13.57)

Now those are really useful differences! In fact plugging it in to an RPM
calculator shows that with 235/85's low range gearing would be even a touch
lower than with the all-helical box and 9.00 x 16's (like the 1-ton and
FC's). Anyone have experience with this? Comments?

-joseph and sidney
missoula, mt

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

From: "Peter Hope" <phope@hawaii.rr.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 14:16:23 -1000
Subject: Re: Re[2]: spring bushings 

I am sorry if people have taken my questions the wrong way.  I was not
trying to start any flames or question whom is 'right'.  I just wanted to
know more about the topic and come to some understanding in my head of why.

>just do it like the book says. the book is not wrong.
Both 'books' I have are kinda vague.  The mail list has presented a couple
of different ideas.

>not on your cheap piece of american crpa is that your LR was meant to drive
>40mph over washboard roads *every day*. Your bornco or socut was meant to
take
>Billy Joe Jim Bob to the rifle range. Your unthreaed cheap american shackle
>didn't wear out or break because your scout wasn't abused the way LR's were
>meant to be.
You missed my point entirely.  The vehicle was abused, the bushings failed,
I replaced them, abused the truck some more and they didn't fail.
I didn't ask for your opinion on other vehicles I have owned nor how I drive
them.
I was trying to find out HOW TO PUT THE VEHICLE IN QUESTION BACK TOGETHER!!
>Does this make it any more clear?
>didn't wear out or break because your scout wasn't abused the way LR's were
>meant to be.

Uhh, suure.  Just blindly accept what you have to say whether it makes sense
to me or not.  No problem.
>There is one way to do this job and that is the way it is supposed to be
>didn't wear out or break because your scout wasn't abused the way LR's were
done.
>Do it any way you want, I hope you like changing bushings...
>didn't wear out or break because your scout wasn't abused the way LR's were
No I dont, which is why I asked my questions to begin with.

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

From: William Leacock <wleacock@pipeline.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 20:28:28 -0500
Subject: Shackle bolts

As an extra to Peter's advise re shackle bolts, tighten them up when the
spring is in it's normal operating position ( vehicle wheels on the ground )
. Otherwise if they are tightened whilst the spring is not compresssed to
it's normal operating position the rubber can be torn due to the amount of
twist.
Bill Leacock  ( Limey in exile ) NY USA.
 88 and 109 LR's and 89 RR 

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

From: DNDANGER@aol.com
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 23:00:53 EST
Subject: Re: bushings

In a message dated 98-11-18 15:19:32 EST, you write:

<< Tighten
 the shackle pins and locking nuts. If they are tightened prior to lowering
 vehicle to the ground, premature failure of the bushes may occur."
 >>

This sentence would seem to imply that the bushings are intended to be held
solidly by the shackles.

Bill Lawrence
Albq, NM

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

From: David Cockey <dcockey@tir.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 23:00:16 -0500
Subject: Re: MiddleStatesLandRoverOwnersClub?

They were going to have a swap meet 11/7-8, but were concerned about
turnout so decided to postpone it to the spring. That's the extent of my
knowledge of the MSLROC.

Regards,
David Cockey

> Whatever happened to the
>                 "Middle States Land Rover Owners Club"?
> It seems to have ...errr ...vanished.

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

From: DNDANGER@aol.com
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 23:30:51 EST
Subject: Re: Re[2]: spring bushings

I think some clarification is in order. Unfortunately since there is evidently
no-one around who can supply it I feel the need to prattle a bit. There are
two different types of bushings supplied in leaf type springs, the first is
the solid bushing in which a solid metallic bushing in the spring eye moves in
relation to the pin iwhich is located in the center of the bushing. The
relative motion requires these bushings to be lubricated in order to avoid
excess wear. The second is the rubber or "silent-bloc" type bushing. In this
bushing the rubber encased between the two steel tubes is intended to
compensate for the relative motion in the joint.  Just the fact that there is
no method supplied for lubricating the joint indicates to me that it would be
incorrect to allow the relative motion to occur between the pin and the
central tube which are both steel and which would cause rapid and excessive
wear on the pin and the tube. 

Next guess?

Bill Lawrence
Albq, NM

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

From: James Wolf <J.Wolf@worldnet.att.net>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 00:16:37
Subject: RE: HD chassis

>is there anyone out there who can tell me how to recognize a SIII
>heavy duty chassis. Since they were offered in th LRO the should 
>exist, i'm currently working on an ex military SIII from 1975, ex 
>belgium army an I just wondered if they might be fitted out with one 
>of the legendary "Heavy duty" chassis.  The rear beam is square as is 
>the case on the lightweight, for the rest they look all original. 

I have a HD one ton 109 frame (chassis) on my sw resto.
   1/ the front hornes are much heavier and they have longer spring
supports ie two holes instead one (:,.).
   2/ rear spring hangers are the same.
   3/ rear cross member is squared off and much heavier in construction.
   4/ there will be a thick seam down the center of the longitudinals.
   5/ in genaralthese HD chassis just look heavier and tougher than the
standard ones.

I hope this helps, if not maybe I can find more differences for you.

Jim Wolf

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

From: "Andy Grafton" <andyg@sherco.co.za>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 08:37:34 +0200
Subject: Re: spring bushings

joseph wrote;

> Interesting question, Peter. I hadn't thought of it this way. If you think
> about it, the -only- purpose that the threaded shackle could serve is to
> allow the pins to be held tight (by means of the locknut) while still

Joseph, the purpose of having a threaded shackle is so 
cheapskates like me can do the whole job (including locknut) with 
only one adjustable wrench and a crowbar rather than having to go 
out and splurge on a second mechanism big enough to hold one 
end of the bolt I am trying to tighten.

Not that I would know...

All the best,

Andy
andyg@sherco.co.za, '79RR

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

From: "Andy Grafton" <andyg@sherco.co.za>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 08:32:40 +0200
Subject: Re: spring bushings

> Norman wrote:
>If
>the shackles are not tightened to this inner sleeve, the rubber insert is
>redundant and serves no purpose, as no torsion can develop

<<<this is *not* a comment on whether or not to clamp the inner 
tube>>>

The rubber's main functions (I think) are to reduce vertical shock 
loads and allow the springs to twist relative to the chassis whilst 
avoiding point loads - if you look at an articulated Land Rover Rover 
axle, the inner metal bush/bolt is at an angle relative to the outer 
bush/frame because the spring gets twisted by the axle.  If you 
look at an articulated truck axle (usually with lubed, non-rubber 
supports), the securing bolts bear on the edge of the support, 
which can't be great for them.  When I pass busses and trucks on 
corrugated dirt roads I am always shocked by the sight and noise 
of the spring mounts rattling around and bashing hell out of the 
mountings.  A rubber bush would help reduce those effects whether 
or not it were clamped.

All the best,

Andy
andyg@sherco.co.za, '79RR

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

From: "Andy Grafton" <andyg@sherco.co.za>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 08:17:35 +0200
Subject: Re: bushings

> "(1) Slacken the shackle pin securing the shackle plates to the chassis.
<snip>
> lowering vehicle to the ground, premature failure of the bushes may
> occur."

That's what I remembered, Joseph; thanks for actually writing it 
down!

I remember asking and old Land Rover mechanic why this was so 
when I first read it. He told me that because the inner metal tube is 
clamped firmly between the shackes, if you tighten it first and then 
let the car down there is a permanent stress on the rubber of the 
bush.  Full upward axle articulation can cause the inner metal tube 
to rotate further than it is meant to, whereupon it separates from 
the rubber, which hastens bush destruction.

I haven't had a problem with this idea, and took it as read that the 
inner tube was supposed to be clamped by the shackles.  When I 
removed a 15 year old bolt from the rear shackle of our family SIII 
LWB, it was obvious that the thing was not clamping the inner 
bush tube tightly because there was a half millimetre step worn 
into the bolt.  Didn't detect much of a ride difference, and it didn't 
squeak...

All the best,

Andy
andyg@sherco.co.za, '79RR

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

From: Mick Forster <cmtmgf@mail.soc.staffs.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 09:32:18 +0000
Subject: Re: bushings

Joseph Broach wrote:

> Both the Green Bible and Haynes are very vague and generally of no use on
> this one...
> "(1) Slacken the shackle pin securing the shackle plates to the chassis.
> (2) Fit the road spring in position, secure 'U' bolts but do not fully
> tighten the shackle pins at this stage. (3) Lower the vehicle to the ground
> and move vehicle bodily backward and forward to settle the springs. Tighten
> the shackle pins and locking nuts. If they are tightened prior to lowering
	 [ truncated by list-digester (was 10 lines)]
> the shackle pins and locking nuts. If they are tightened prior to lowering
> vehicle to the ground, premature failure of the bushes may occur."

There is another book, I presume the Green Bible is the Series III
manual, then the White Bible is the two volume Series II/IIa manual.
In one of them the 'correct' method is to compress the spring by loading
the chassis and then tighten the pins or the use a trolley jack with a
chain going round the chassis and the jack: see
http://gawain.soc.staffs.ac.uk/~mick/LWBrst/lwbrs2170b.jpg
the book gives measurements for different springs on the different
models.
All the books state that the shackle pins should be tight on the bush
and give torque settings for this so this means that the rotational
movement of the inner sleeve of the bush is taken up by the flexing of
the rubber. 
When I removed the old rear springs off the 109" the bushes were all ok,
and tight on the inner tube, I had done over 55000 miles in 10 years on
them, I don't know about the PO, but the front springs I had changed
about 5 years ago by a dealer and most of those bushes had rubber coming
apart, but the inner sleeves were tight on the shackles. I think one of
their apprentices did them!

Mick Forster
1972 109" Safari 2.25 petrol
1962 88" 2.25 petrol
http://gawain.soc.staffs.ac.uk/~mick/LWBrst/LWBrst.html
http://members.aol.com/Tony4star/

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

From: "Huub Pennings" <hps@fs1-kfih.azr.nl>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 10:40:18 +0100
Subject: RE: HD chassis

Hello Jim, 

As yet, I have never seen a '88, heavy duty or otherwise with 
a thick seam down the center of the longitudinals.

Anyone else??

Regards,

Huub Pennings
(private e-mail to jpennings@worldonline.nl

e-mail adress
Pennings@kfih.azr.nl

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

From: Mick Forster <cmtmgf@mail.soc.staffs.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 10:04:17 +0000
Subject: Re: HD chassis

Huub Pennings wrote:

> As yet, I have never seen a '88, heavy duty or otherwise with
> a thick seam down the center of the longitudinals.

The 88" landys I know of have no seam but my old 109" chassis had:

http://gawain.soc.staffs.ac.uk/~mick/LWBrst/lndy2a.jpg

I assume this is what you mean?

Mick Forster
1972 109" Safari 2.25 petrol
1962 88" 2.25 petrol
http://gawain.soc.staffs.ac.uk/~mick/LWBrst/LWBrst.html
http://members.aol.com/Tony4star/

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

From: Alan_Richer@motorcity2.lotus.com
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 06:43:34 -0500
Subject: Re: Lower gears

The low transfer case is nice - I have one on Mr. C., courtesy of a Series II
military that lost its frame...

I'd worry about groundspeed in high range (though it shouldn't be a nightmare)
but if you want to swap me a higher-range one you can have the one in Mr.
C.....but you swap it...8*)

                    ajr

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

  END OF * LIST DIGEST 
 Input:  messages 50 lines 2199 [forwarded 193 whitespace 0]
 Output: lines 1558 [content 1271  forwarded 163 (cut  30) 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>