Subject: LRO Mailing List DIGEST * * * * V1 #315

From: [email-masked] (LRO Mailing List DIGEST * * * *)
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 20:36:18 -0400

LRO Mailing List DIGEST * * * * Thursday, April 5 2001 Volume 01 : Number 315

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 13:18:21 -0700 
From: "Faure, Marin" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: Re: Power

Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 15:09:23 -0300
From: [email-masked] (John Cranfield)
Subject: Re: LRO: Power (was wasted youth)

>However to all those who  try to assure us that nuclear is non poluting
have you so soon forgotten Chernobyl.

The problem with using Chernobyl as an example of the nuclear power 
generation industry in action is that the Chernobyl plant was a shining 
example of how to do everything wrong in designing, operating, and 
maintaining a nuclear power plant.  If that type of plant was state-of-
the-art in nuclear power plants, then I would agree nuclear's not a good 
way to go.  But in fact, a nuclear plant can be designed, operated, and 
maintained to be as reliable and safe as any other form of power generation 
except possibly hydro.
___________________________
C. Marin Faure
  (original owner)
  1973 Land Rover Series III-88
  1991 Range Rover Vogue SE
  Seattle

_________________________________________
C. Marin Faure
Producer/Director, Boeing Video Services
telephone (425)393-7721
mobile (206)650-5622
fax: (425)393-7741
e-mail: [email-masked]

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

Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 15:20:02 -0500
From: Bill Adams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: RE: Engine Balancing

Balancing only means that the pistons, con rods and crankshaft will be
checked to see if they are within 1-2 grams of one another. The crank
gets spun and checked for harmonic imbalance.
All this is to help when she spins up to high rpms. At lower, like 3K
and below, the forces aren't all that great to necessitate the effort.

- -- 
Bill Adams
3D & Motion Graphics Design Director
International Broadcasting Bureau
Washington, D.C.
202-205-9638
[email-masked]

'66 Land Rover 109 SW Diesel
'81 GoldWing
'69 Le Sabre Convertible
'63 Pearson Vanguard
"Practicing the ancient art of ren-ching"

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 13:23:23 -0700 
From: "Faure, Marin" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: Re: Peter's accolade:

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 08:00:30 -0400
From: "Alan Richer/CAM/Lotus" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: Re: Peter's accolade:

>You really need to
come up and say hello before you move off to Northern California (too close
to Marin!).

No, don't worry.  It's too dark in California for anyone to find their 
way out, so I wouldn't expect to see anyone from that state up 
here in the foreseeable future (thank God...)
___________________________
C. Marin Faure
  (original owner)
  1973 Land Rover Series III-88
  1991 Range Rover Vogue SE
  Seattle

_________________________________________
C. Marin Faure
Producer/Director, Boeing Video Services
telephone (425)393-7721
mobile (206)650-5622
fax: (425)393-7741
e-mail: [email-masked]

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 13:26:14 -0700 
From: "Faure, Marin" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: Re: Youth

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 13:10:50 +0100
From: Ian Stuart <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: Re: Youth

> >Seattle, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Boston, Austin, Dallas,
> London, Birmingham, Manchester, Brussels, Paris, Frankfurt,
> Stuttgart, Leipzig, Oslo, Dubai, Tokyo, Taipei, Kuala Lumpur,
> Auckland, Santiago, Palma de Mallorca, Malta, Istanbul, Vienna,
> Zurich, Reunion Island, Spokane, Honolulu, Orlando, Miami, St.
> Louis, Atlanta, Washington DC, Hong Kong. Those are some of the
> bigger places....

>You notice none of these are in Scotland ;)

No.  Surprisingly all the folks we've met in Scotland (and 
Wales) regardless of age had their wits about them.  You 
should figure out why this is and export it.  Make a lot of 
money, I bet.  But don't take any Euros....
___________________________
C. Marin Faure
  (original owner)
  1973 Land Rover Series III-88
  1991 Range Rover Vogue SE
  Seattle

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

Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 16:29:09 -0400
From: "KURT W. KRAUSS" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: Newly-acquired NAS SIII

I took the plunge and purchased a 1973 NAS SIII to keep my Disco II
company.  I am having it shipped from Florida and it will eventually end
up in Manchester, Vermont. Anyone know good mechanics around there?
Also, I am trying to locate a mint condition set of delivery documents
like the owners manual, a dealer list, passport ot service, etc.  I have
the originals but they are tatty.
Kurt Krauss

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 13:32:27 -0700 
From: "Faure, Marin" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: Re: LRO Mailing List DIGEST * * * * V1 #312

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 05:41:41 -0700 (PDT)
From: Peter Halt <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: Re: LRO Mailing List DIGEST * * * * V1 #312

>You are right, Marin,
You're opinion doesn't matter a bit, except for the
enormous amount of bandwidth your absurd novellas take
up when you get on your soapbox.

Don't read them.

>And what good does it do to see all these places if
you travel with your eyes closed?

Hard for me to travel to these places with my eyes closed 
seeing as how I'm directing a film crew when I'm there.

>I like young people, I like old people.  In some strange 
way, I am even starting to like you.  

I'd get that fixed right away, if possible.
___________________________
C. Marin Faure
  (original owner)
  1973 Land Rover Series III-88
  1991 Range Rover Vogue SE
  Seattle

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

Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 14:33:49 -0600
From: "Tim Czajka" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: Re: The Land-Rover Bodied Bastard (Long and Bitter)

Brian Willoughby wrote:
>These conversions have no future because they have no regard for the past.
>
Oh my.  I was able to eat lunch in the time it took to scroll
through your lengthy diatribe.  But your last sentence said it
all.  You are like the kid in high school, who could regurgitate
facts and figures, but couldn't form understanding.

Whether or not the Wilkes brothers wanted people to modify the
Series Land Rover, the fact is it happened.  It ended up being
one of the great strengths of the Series - the vehicle could be
modified in partnership with the owner.  Take away that and you
take away part of what is a Series Land Rover.  Any one of the
rag tag bunch of explorers and adventurers who have traveled
across Africa in modified Series vehicles over the years could
tell you that.  I am sure they had little worry about matching
spark plug numbers.

But go to your car shows.  Keep those part numbers matching.
Have "fun" buffing that paint job.  Gosh you really know what a
Series Land Rover is all about.

Tim Czajka
1972 Series III 88
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

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

Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 16:35:30 -0400
From: "RON WARD" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: Dynamat

No, no, I made a longer fuel line to hold an extra gallon of fuel, saves me a trip to the gas station.  

Ron "lazy bugger" Ward

>>> [email-masked] 04/05/01 02:21PM >>>
Hi Ron

>...fuel line (extra long, routed near the bulkhead)

Bad boy!  By having the fuel line routed properly, you have jeopardized your
lazy bugger membership.  The whole idea of the ally is that you compensate
for a sub-optimal fuel line routing.

If you have disturbed the fault equilibrium of your vehicle, you will be
sorry...

Clinton

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 13:40:47 -0700 
From: "Faure, Marin" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: Re: Marin;' off his meds.....

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 09:43:31 -0400
From: "Alan Richer/CAM/Lotus" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: Re: Marin;' off his meds.....

>If all of this is so horrid why do you hang about with us? Or is it so we
can share in your "wisdom"?

No, I don't care if you read or agree with me at all.  I write for a living.  
Writing is like any other skill- you have to practice it.  This group is 
a) entertaining, and b) provides an opportunity to write about things that 
I normally wouldn't have an opportunity to write about.  You'd be surprised 
(unless you write for a living, too) how many things that you try out in a 
casual forum like this prove helpful somewhere else.

I don't read half the stuff posted to this group because it doesn't 
interest me.  I would assume you have the same ability.  As 
to wasting bandwidth, my ISP doesn't charge me by the 
sentence I download or read. If yours does, then I apologize 
for running up your bill.
___________________________
C. Marin Faure
  (original owner)
  1973 Land Rover Series III-88
  1991 Range Rover Vogue SE
  Seattle

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 16:42:26 -0400
From: "Paul Gussack" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: RE: Wasted Yutes attn: Marin

Marin,
I usually find myself agreeing with you, and find you knowledge very useful.

I'll probably be flamed for this but I find your post ironic.  You lambaste
the "eco-freaks" as misinformed youths who protest and get results through
their actions.  This is something we, as any citizen, have the right in the
U. S. to do.  If you love toxic waste, dioxins, creosote and sulphur
dioxides then get out and speak up for their continued existence.  These
protests are not against the workers but the continued practice of ignoring
the consequences of our actions.  Many of the workers in theses plants are
exposed to dangerous products many times without their knowledge or consent.
A nuclear facility near where I currently live is under review for an
unusually high instance of certain cancers that many of it's past employees
are suffering from.

In most cases the protests are not blow up the plants and go back to sticks
and stones but to reevaluate how these operations are run.  Unfortunately,
it often takes very vocal and visible action by citizens to get notice.  You
just hope that they are proper and peaceful.

Make no mistake these youths will pay for our mistakes and don't want to
inherit a planet that is unlivable.  Look not at the future but at now. If
you were to have your blood tested you may be disturbed to find how many
toxins you carry in your body.  Believe me you'd feel better without them.

The bottom line is don't complain to the list about what you don't like,
write your government.  They will listen.  I honestly believe that.

If you can do no good at least do no harm.

Sorry for the rant

Paul G
SIII SWB "Grendal"

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 13:43:05 -0700 
From: "Faure, Marin" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: Re: Youth

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 10:17:06 -0400
From: "Lee Jones" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: LRO: Re: Youth

>One thing we have to remember - all these kids one day will be your age - or
worse, mine!

Yeah, but by then we'll be gone, so we won't have to pay the 
consequences.  It's better than a free lunch.  Heap a load 
of crap on the young guys and then split.
___________________________
C. Marin Faure
  (original owner)
  1973 Land Rover Series III-88
  1991 Range Rover Vogue SE
  Seattle

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 17:57:22 -0400 (EDT)
From: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: Real Rovers (was Parts availability....)

On Wed, 4 Apr 2001, David Scheidt wrote:

> Indeed.  It doesn't do much good against 110 percent humidity, though.

Oh yeah, I now remember all those summers in NYC...  

> Of course electric winches suck.  It's what they're for, right?

Exactly...

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 13:57:50 -0700 
From: "Faure, Marin" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: Re: Real Rovers

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 01 08:58:04 -0700
From: TeriAnn Wakeman <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: Real Rovers (was Parts availability....)

Marin wrote:
> >using a Land Rover as a starting point.  Kind of like the
> show everyone on this list seems to like so much, Junkyard 
>Wars.

>Almost but not quite.  I spent almost two years designing how I wanted 
the rear interior to be and where to put things before I took wrench to 
the car.  I spent almost a year looking at power plants and asking people 
about their experiences and running cost vs fuel savings numbers before 
settling on an engine.

Don't get the impression I was trying to compare your vehicle to the things 
created on Junkyard Wars.  You are correct, that is a two-day, 
throw-together-what-you-can affair, not a thought-out design process like the 
one you went through.  I was simply using the Junkyard Wars show as an 
illustration of my point that even though a vehicle may use components from 
a specific machine, the alterations, other parts, etc. that make up the final 
vehicle make it totally different from the vehicle it was derived from.  As such, 
it cannot be claimed to be an example of the original vehicle.

In other words, if I wanted to show someone (say a kid, God forbid) an example 
of a Land Rover, I would not use your vehicle for this purpose.  I would find someone 
with a stock (as far as body, drive train and engine go) vehicle.  If I wanted to show 
someone an example of a reliable, good-performing on and off-road vehicle, I might 
very well use your 109 hybrid as an example.
___________________________
C. Marin Faure
  (original owner)
  1973 Land Rover Series III-88
  1991 Range Rover Vogue SE
  Seattle

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 10:52:29 -1000
From: "Hope Peter" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: RE: RE: Engine Balancing

> However, Pete, only you can determine if the 'cost'of whatever
> you decide to
> do, be it in labor, parts or whatever cost, is acceptable to you.
>

John,
thank you for your input.

Boy I hope this doesn't comeout wrong, but cost isn't really the issue.
Counting the original purchase price of the Rover (which had Warn hubs,
weber 32ich, 8:1 head, Fairey OD, and Koenig winch), the cost of the steel
(for the frme, bumper, roll cage, bull bar, tire carrier), new tires (5@
33-1250x15), 8.5" rims, rebuilt front axle, tranny, custom drive shaft, 75
amp alt, 2bbl Weber and intake, pair of drive lights, pair of fog lights,
new wire harness, all new hydraulics, new clutch, and all the little bits
that went into the frame over, I stll haven't spent 5k.  And this has been
spread out over a 30 month period.

My frame is 250lbs heavier then stock, 150 for the bumper/bullbar, 150 for
roll bar, want to add in a second fuel tank, say 100 when full.

With the OD and tires I don't have any problems maintaining 65mph on the
highway.  The rpm's are lower then driving 35 in 3rd.  The only problem
comes when hitting the hills.  The H2 heads up through the central valley.
In a 2-3 mile stretch you are going from sea level to 1200 feet.  This isn't
much of a hill I know, but I have a hard time maintaining 45mph.
I want to increase the performance enough so that I can maintain speed on
hills such as this.
I have heard from some people that have gone with the ACR stage II kit and
are very impressed.  Also talked with people that have just used a 8:1 head,
2.5 cam, and 2bbl carb and had noticable improvements.
So my current plan is to use the ACR cam, head, a weber 2bbl and maybe bump
up the exhaust to 2".
>From ACR's web site, they have a standard 2.25 engine measuring 70bhp and
120 lbft of torque.
With their stage II head, su carb, free flow silencer on stock pipes, su
carb they are measuring 113 bhp (%50+ increase) and 150lbft torque.
This new torque figure is at 3400rpm, according to my conversations with ACR
this set up still puts out the same torque at 1500rpms as the stock engine.
The bhp increase is not as great with their Stage I head, but still
impressive, about 10bhp less.
The stage I is $290 with todays exchange rate, stage II is 456.  Cam is 220.
Core charge of 100 for the head and shipping of 120.  So $900 for the Stage
II, 740 for the stage I.  I picked up the Weber 32/34 dmtl and 2bbl intake
(all from a mid 80's D90) for 150.  I can fab my own exhaust pipes, new
muffler is less then 75.  Electronic ignition is 75.  The carb has an
adapter so I can still use the oil bath, but for road use I have found a
cone shaped K&N with the same diameter fitting.

So if balancing the crank and rods is a good idea I will do it.  And by good
idea I mean...since I am increasing the output of the engine, aren't I also
increasing the stresses upon it's components?  If so, will balancing help to
make the engine last longer?  I am looking at around a total investment of
1500$ for this upgrade.  Maybe 1-200 more depending on shop costs.  I still
consider this to be well within my budget.

This keeps the engine compartment relatively landrover, doesn't involve any
fabrication work/time (exhaust pipes can be bent in less then an hour).  If
I spend a couple hundred more dollars and it means I will get a couple extra
years out of the engine, then it's worth it to me.  If this also means more
power, bonus, but most important right now is durability.

Thanks
Pete

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 17:08:03 -0400
From: "Matthew Wilson" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: RE: Newly-acquired NAS SIII

Kurt,
  I dunno about Manchester, but there are a number of series owners in the
Albany area.  I'm probably about an hour from Manchester, have a heated
garage and a good supply of homebrew.  Oh, and a IIa in a lot of pieces.  Ya
know, most of the fun on these trucks is working on them yourself, try that
on your Disco II.
  Original docs, eBay and good luck...
Matthew

- -----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On
Behalf Of KURT W. KRAUSS
Sent: 05 April, 2001 16:29
To: [email-masked]
Subject: LRO: Newly-acquired NAS SIII

I took the plunge and purchased a 1973 NAS SIII to keep my Disco II
company.  I am having it shipped from Florida and it will eventually end
up in Manchester, Vermont. Anyone know good mechanics around there?
Also, I am trying to locate a mint condition set of delivery documents
like the owners manual, a dealer list, passport ot service, etc.  I have
the originals but they are tatty.
Kurt Krauss

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 18:14:22 -0400 (EDT)
From: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: Re: The Land-Rover Bodied Bastard (Long and Bitter)

On Thu, 5 Apr 2001, Tim Czajka wrote:

> But go to your car shows.  Keep those part numbers matching.

???  On my 1949, when the numbers were actually supposed to match, I sent
off a letter asking LR Tracability about the different chassis, front &
rear axle numbers.  THeir response was that the chassis had obviously been
shipped to Canada, while one axle to Tanganykia and the other to someplace
in Asia.  Eventually, the axles made their way to Canada as replacements
and ended up under this chassis.  This, rather than the more simple excuse
that they didn't match, despite their claims to the contrary...

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 14:13:23 -0700 
From: "Faure, Marin" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: Something nice about Land Rovers

Amid all the entertaining but messy mud slinging 
over what's a Land Rover, why is today's youth so 
worthless, and so on, I was reminded this morning 
of something GOOD about Land Rovers.  The driver's-side 
three-point seatbelt in my SIII, while original, 
has been slammed in the door a thousand-too-many 
times.  It's frayed and worn to the point where it 
would probably be considered unsafe.  So I called 
Rovers North to find out if these belts are even still 
available anymore.  I was told that they are, and 
they'll send me one.

Obviously, I could have had a replacement belt made if 
they weren't available.  But one thing that I've been 
impressed with ever since buying my SIII back in the "dark ages" of 
the early '70 is how easy parts are to get, and get fast.  
I get stuff for the SIII and Range Rover faster, often, than 
I get parts for my Ford pickup or BMW.  Part of this is 
due to the good support by the companies in the US that, 
over the last three decades, have elected to specialize in 
importing parts for a relatively rare type of vehicle. But 
I suspect the enthusiasm people have for keeping Series 
(and Range Rovers) running in the UK has done a lot 
to encourage the parts manufacturers to continue 
making things for vehicles long out of production.

While I have voiced my opinion that the Toyota FJ40 is superior 
to the Series, some of you have stated, I assume from 
experience, that parts for older FJ40s are getting very hard 
to get.  If that is true, then that's certainly a big plus in favor 
of the Land Rover, particularly for those of us who bought 
them with the intention of running them without modification 
as long as possible.
___________________________
C. Marin Faure
  (original owner)
  1973 Land Rover Series III-88
  1991 Range Rover Vogue SE
  Seattle

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

Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 18:24:07 -0300
From: [email-masked] (John Cranfield)
Subject: Re: LRO: Re: Power

It is also a shining example what can and will go wrong simply because
of lowest bidder building. It is all very well saying we have learned
our lesson but it will happen again.
The spent fuel is it's own very special form of pollution that the pro
neculear don't like to talk about but it will be polluting for the next
30,000 years All in all neculear has too many down sides.
The way of the future will be micro generation from natural scources
with hydrogen production to level out the peaks.
John and Muddy  

"Faure, Marin" wrote:
> 
> Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 15:09:23 -0300
> From: [email-masked] (John Cranfield)
> Subject: Re: LRO: Power (was wasted youth)
> 
> >However to all those who  try to assure us that nuclear is non poluting
> have you so soon forgotten Chernobyl.
> 
> The problem with using Chernobyl as an example of the nuclear power
> generation industry in action is that the Chernobyl plant was a shining
> example of how to do everything wrong in designing, operating, and
> maintaining a nuclear power plant.  If that type of plant was state-of-
> the-art in nuclear power plants, then I would agree nuclear's not a good
> way to go.  But in fact, a nuclear plant can be designed, operated, and
> maintained to be as reliable and safe as any other form of power generation
> except possibly hydro.
> ___________________________
> C. Marin Faure
>   (original owner)
>   1973 Land Rover Series III-88
>   1991 Range Rover Vogue SE
>   Seattle
> 
> _________________________________________
> C. Marin Faure
> Producer/Director, Boeing Video Services
> telephone (425)393-7721
> mobile (206)650-5622
> fax: (425)393-7741
> e-mail: [email-masked]

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

Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 18:26:25 -0300
From: [email-masked] (John Cranfield)
Subject: Re: LRO: Newly-acquired NAS SIII

Rovers North is on your door step.
John and Muddy

"KURT W. KRAUSS" wrote:
> 
> I took the plunge and purchased a 1973 NAS SIII to keep my Disco II
> company.  I am having it shipped from Florida and it will eventually end
> up in Manchester, Vermont. Anyone know good mechanics around there?
> Also, I am trying to locate a mint condition set of delivery documents
> like the owners manual, a dealer list, passport ot service, etc.  I have
> the originals but they are tatty.
> Kurt Krauss

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

Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 14:28:32 -0700
From: Mark Pilkington <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: Re: Real Rovers

Or you could show the "Kid" Terriann's Landrover and explain what has been done to it.
I was at a British Classic Car show a year or so ago and the most stunning MGB GT drove
in.  The engine purred and the paint glistened as if it were wet.  It had a comfortable
new interior in it and a lot of money had been spent on it.  Once it stopped in it's place
on the grass under the sun and the owner got out, a small crowd gathered with me amongst
them to behold this thing of beauty. The owner proudly popped open the hood and there lay
a Toyota V6 perfectly installed. As he turned to expound upon it, there was no-one there,
only the distant cry of a hawk and a tumbleweed... you get the picture!! I was amazed at
the reaction, but the others were purists who had painstakingly restored their cars back
to their original timelessness.  The GT was a very practical daily driver that could get
out there and wrestle with the best of them on the freeway. Each to their own I say.  It
will be interesting to see what happens when I turn up to a show with mud all over my 67
SWB and a Chevy V8 that has been reluctantly shoehorned under the hood. Rumbling  like an
AC Cobra because it only has two cherry bombs and no muffler!!!!!

"Faure, Marin" wrote:

> Date: Thu, 5 Apr 01 08:58:04 -0700
> From: TeriAnn Wakeman <[email-masked]>
> Subject: Re: LRO: Real Rovers (was Parts availability....)
>
> Marin wrote:
> > >using a Land Rover as a starting point.  Kind of like the
> > show everyone on this list seems to like so much, Junkyard
> >Wars.
>
> >Almost but not quite.  I spent almost two years designing how I wanted
> the rear interior to be and where to put things before I took wrench to
> the car.  I spent almost a year looking at power plants and asking people
> about their experiences and running cost vs fuel savings numbers before
> settling on an engine.
>
> Don't get the impression I was trying to compare your vehicle to the things
> created on Junkyard Wars.  You are correct, that is a two-day,
> throw-together-what-you-can affair, not a thought-out design process like the
> one you went through.  I was simply using the Junkyard Wars show as an
> illustration of my point that even though a vehicle may use components from
> a specific machine, the alterations, other parts, etc. that make up the final
> vehicle make it totally different from the vehicle it was derived from.  As such,
> it cannot be claimed to be an example of the original vehicle.
>
> In other words, if I wanted to show someone (say a kid, God forbid) an example
> of a Land Rover, I would not use your vehicle for this purpose.  I would find someone
> with a stock (as far as body, drive train and engine go) vehicle.  If I wanted to show
> someone an example of a reliable, good-performing on and off-road vehicle, I might
> very well use your 109 hybrid as an example.
> ___________________________
> C. Marin Faure
>   (original owner)
>   1973 Land Rover Series III-88
>   1991 Range Rover Vogue SE
>   Seattle

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 17:55:47 -0400
From: "Rolston" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: Re: RE: Power (was wasted youth)

That way you could drive your land rover through the wasted industrial
wasteland instead of wilderness.......

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Easton Trevor A" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2001 1:41 PM
Subject: LRO: RE: Power (was wasted youth)

> > Pacific pulp and paper plant in Bellingham, WA shut down.  The mill,
which
> > has
> > been in operation for decades, has also been hit with astronomical power
> > costs as
> > the result of insufficient generating capacity in this state, due in
part
> > to the successful
> > blocking of new plants by the environmental movement.  They tried to
keep
> > the plant going
> > by renting 40 diesel generators, but the environmentalists got that
> > stopped, too.  So the
> > plant closed last week, putting over 400 people out of work in a
> > relatively small town.
> >
> They should have installed a nuclear cogeneration plant, kept open,
> sold power to the state and the depleted uranuim might have come in handy
> for the environmentalists.
>
>

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 18:00:44 -0400
From: "Rolston" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: Re: Re: Power

If you are willing to ignore the un-solved problem of spent fuel with
half-lifes of thousands of years.  And don;t fool yourself, the only way
nuclear power ever made it in the states is that the plants did not have to
get insurance for the possibility of an accident.  If they had to operate in
a free market, they never would have happened.

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Faure, Marin" <[email-masked]>
To: "'Land Rover Mail Group'" <[email-masked]>
Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2001 4:18 PM
Subject: LRO: Re: Power

> Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 15:09:23 -0300
> From: [email-masked] (John Cranfield)
> Subject: Re: LRO: Power (was wasted youth)
>
> >However to all those who  try to assure us that nuclear is non poluting
> have you so soon forgotten Chernobyl.
>
> The problem with using Chernobyl as an example of the nuclear power
> generation industry in action is that the Chernobyl plant was a shining
> example of how to do everything wrong in designing, operating, and
> maintaining a nuclear power plant.  If that type of plant was state-of-
> the-art in nuclear power plants, then I would agree nuclear's not a good
> way to go.  But in fact, a nuclear plant can be designed, operated, and
> maintained to be as reliable and safe as any other form of power
generation
> except possibly hydro.
> ___________________________
> C. Marin Faure
>   (original owner)
>   1973 Land Rover Series III-88
>   1991 Range Rover Vogue SE
>   Seattle
>
> _________________________________________
> C. Marin Faure
> Producer/Director, Boeing Video Services
> telephone (425)393-7721
> mobile (206)650-5622
> fax: (425)393-7741
> e-mail: [email-masked]
>
>

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

Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 19:10:56 -0300
From: [email-masked] (John Cranfield)
Subject: LRO: Enviro issues

there is well thought out article here.
<http://www.worldoffroad.com/editor/apr01andy.asp>
John and Muddy

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

Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 15:30:24 -0700
From: Mark Pilkington <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: Re: Re: Power

If Chernobyl were to happen in Southern England, the area that would have been
affected was larger than England, Scotland, Ireland and Wales together.  All
sterile. Nothing can be grown there. the meat could not be eaten, thousands have
cancer.  Why risk it!??
Mark

Rolston wrote:

> If you are willing to ignore the un-solved problem of spent fuel with
> half-lifes of thousands of years.  And don;t fool yourself, the only way
> nuclear power ever made it in the states is that the plants did not have to
> get insurance for the possibility of an accident.  If they had to operate in
> a free market, they never would have happened.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Faure, Marin" <[email-masked]>
> To: "'Land Rover Mail Group'" <[email-masked]>
> Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2001 4:18 PM
> Subject: LRO: Re: Power
>
> > Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 15:09:23 -0300
> > From: [email-masked] (John Cranfield)
> > Subject: Re: LRO: Power (was wasted youth)
> >
> > >However to all those who  try to assure us that nuclear is non poluting
> > have you so soon forgotten Chernobyl.
> >
> > The problem with using Chernobyl as an example of the nuclear power
> > generation industry in action is that the Chernobyl plant was a shining
> > example of how to do everything wrong in designing, operating, and
> > maintaining a nuclear power plant.  If that type of plant was state-of-
> > the-art in nuclear power plants, then I would agree nuclear's not a good
> > way to go.  But in fact, a nuclear plant can be designed, operated, and
> > maintained to be as reliable and safe as any other form of power
> generation
> > except possibly hydro.
> > ___________________________
> > C. Marin Faure
> >   (original owner)
> >   1973 Land Rover Series III-88
> >   1991 Range Rover Vogue SE
> >   Seattle
> >
> > _________________________________________
> > C. Marin Faure
> > Producer/Director, Boeing Video Services
> > telephone (425)393-7721
> > mobile (206)650-5622
> > fax: (425)393-7741
> > e-mail: [email-masked]
> >
> >

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 17:29:58 -0500 (CDT)
From: David Scheidt <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: An actual Land-Rover question about 109 brakes

On Thu, 5 Apr 2001, Alan Richer/CAM/Lotus wrote:

:
:Front brakes are the same - dual-expanding shoes each with its own
:adjuster. Rear shoes are like an 88 - sided.
:
:Look for the pin placements to figure who goes where. If you get them on
:and the adjusters can't be locked they're wrong...or did I not need to tell
:you this? 8*)

That much I figured out.  What I didn't figure out was to order a
replacement pipe thingy.  Gah.  Now I've got wait for UPS to deliver them.
And it's going to be a great weekend, much to nice to spend working on the
truck.

David

- -- 
[email-masked]
Bipedalism is only a fad.

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

Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 12:32:42 -1000
From: "Peter Ogilvie" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: Re: Re: Power

The spent fuel problem has been solved.  It can be buried in a number of 
geologically safe areas where it could be left to decay into anonimity.

Insurance is just a gold mine for contingency fee attorneys.  If there is 
one single cause for the demise of the US, its going to be these slime 
balls.  They have demonized everything under the sun and EXTORTED huge sums 
based on junk science or no science at all.  I'd volunteer to have a nuclear 
plant in my back yard if I could change US tort laws.

Did you hear that follow on studies of the Love Canal residents has found 
they are living longer, healthier lives than the population as a whole.

Aloha
Peter

>From: "Rolston" <[email-masked]>
>If you are willing to ignore the un-solved problem of spent fuel with
>half-lifes of thousands of years.  And don;t fool yourself, the only way 
> >nuclear power ever made it in the states is that the plants did not have 
>to >get insurance for the possibility of an accident.  If they had to 
>operate in a free market, they never would have happened.

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 18:56:06 -0400
From: "Rolston" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: Re: Re: Power

Volunteer your back yard, there are NO avaiable spent fuel sites.

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Ogilvie" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2001 6:32 PM
Subject: Re: LRO: Re: Re: Power

> The spent fuel problem has been solved.  It can be buried in a number of
> geologically safe areas where it could be left to decay into anonimity.
>
> Insurance is just a gold mine for contingency fee attorneys.  If there is
> one single cause for the demise of the US, its going to be these slime
> balls.  They have demonized everything under the sun and EXTORTED huge
sums
> based on junk science or no science at all.  I'd volunteer to have a
nuclear
> plant in my back yard if I could change US tort laws.
>
> Did you hear that follow on studies of the Love Canal residents has found
> they are living longer, healthier lives than the population as a whole.
>
> Aloha
> Peter
>
>
> >From: "Rolston" <[email-masked]>
> >If you are willing to ignore the un-solved problem of spent fuel with
> >half-lifes of thousands of years.  And don;t fool yourself, the only way
> > >nuclear power ever made it in the states is that the plants did not
have
> >to >get insurance for the possibility of an accident.  If they had to
> >operate in a free market, they never would have happened.
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
>
>

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 16:14:00 -0700
From: SJH <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: re:  power

So nukes, Love Canal and personal injury lawyers have what to do with   
Land Rovers?  And no, I am not a PI lawyer, I actually spend my time   
defending personal injury claims brought by Ambulance chasers... (But if   
I or a family member werereally injured (as opposed to most of the soft   
tissue injury crap I see), I'd want to be able to bring a claim for   
it...)

And yeah, I do know how to use my delete button, but the non LR stuff is   
getting a tad thick lately dontchy'all think?

Simon

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:  This message and any attachments to it are   
intended for use only by the addressee(s), and may contain privileged or   
confidential information.  If you are not the intended recipient, please   
kill yourself and permanently delete the original and any copy of this   
message.

Simon J. Harding
Attorney at Law
Schulte Anderson Downes Aronson & Bittner, P.C.
503.223.4131
[email-masked]

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 12:25:53 -0600 
From: "Coates, Clinton" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: MG Midget Dizzy

David and Al have helped me muchly.  Thank you.

So, to get him running, I might be able to swap in a spare landy dizzy.
Better yet, though, is to see if I can convert the existing body to p&c.
Though, for the price, if that pertronix works....  I have emailed my local
LR/MG/Triumph/Whatever guru to see what he can do to help as far as bits go.

Clinton "or swop in an HEI..." Coates

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

Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 10:12:40 +1000
From: David Pillekers <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: Dynamat/sound proofing...

G'day All,

Recent discussions on sounds proofing caught my eye...

Dynamat -- not sure if we get it here, but its sounds effective. What
have people tried as sounds proofing material. Obviously we cant make
these vehicles whispers quiet, but it would be nice to at least be able
to hear your navigator.

Currently I'm playing around with sleeping mat foam, and a roll of
rubber carpet underlay that fell of the back of a truck. Any other
suggestions...

The way I see it, the main issue appears to be achieved decent sound
damping but without putting down a non removable layer that will absorb
water contribute to rust etc. I'm trying to figuire out how to make mine
easily removeable. Also, If you want to be able to remove it, then it
needs to be reasonable durable. I dont think the carpet underly
qualifies here. What I'd love would be some really think rubber...

Thoughts anyone???

Regards,

David. Melb, Australia (Who hasnt met a Kiwi yet I havent liked)

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 20:33:44 -0400
From: "Larry Smith" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: Re: Re: LRs in WWII movies

No, actually a Wright Whirlwind radial.  Quite reliable actually.
Non-synchro transmission.

The M-2 Stuart used two V-8s from the Packard, one for each track.  Friend
still has a '48 Packard and most of his spares come in Mil-Standard (U.S.
Army surplus) vapor barrier paper with Army stock numbers.

As to flammability, that's why after the '73 Yom Kippur War, we (the U.S.)
went to low flash cherry juice (hydraulic fluid).  The Israelis were getting
hit and while the round was survivable, the cherry juice cooked off and
incinerated the crew.  No matter what they tell you, diesel will flash also!

But I would ask you to talk to a former Eastern Front Panzer driver about
which tank he would have preferred.  Have done so and most would have the
T-34.  Simple, low tech.  Best part, it STARTS in cold weather, where diesel
waxes and there's little "technology" to freeze.  The gunner spins the
turret with a crank versus an electric motor.

The M-1A1 Abrams is a work of art.  First round kills at infinity!  But to
change an engine pack in a hurry (until the turbine and its shields cool) is
a BITCH!!!  Nothing like the diesels of the M-60 series!!!

Larry Smith
(while listening to the 1812 Overture)
Chester, VA
- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Dick Love" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: 04 April, 2001 03:29 PM
Subject: LRO: Re: LRs in WWII movies

> Yes, the Shermans were easily field serviceable. I think it was a Cadillac
> drive train. Unfortunately the were petrol powered (hence the nickname
> "Ronsons") and ignited very easily. Tigers were diesel and a lot harder to
> touch off. Not many Shermans were rebuildable after a battle.
>

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

End of LRO Mailing List DIGEST * * * * V1 #315
**********************************************