Subject: LRO Mailing List DIGEST * * * * V1 #314

From: [email-masked] (LRO Mailing List DIGEST * * * *)
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 15:14:53 -0400

LRO Mailing List DIGEST * * * * Thursday, April 5 2001 Volume 01 : Number 314

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 10:00:23 -0700 
From: "Faure, Marin" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: Power (was wasted youth)

Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2001 20:35:13 -1000
From: "Peter Ogilvie" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: Re: Wasted youth (was parts availability, etc.)

>The eco freaks have shut down the Nuclear power industry in the US.  
Interesting how the same people that rail against coal fired power plants 
also, violently oppose the only non polluting and virtually limitless power 
source that we have.

This is a very good observation.  Nuclear power is a technology, and like 
any other technology, if you design, use, and maintain it intelligently, 
it will work just fine.  The French have been using nuclear power as their 
primary source of electricity for decades.  I don't live there, so I'm certainly 
not aware of what goes on in that country on a day to day basis. But so far 
as I can tell, their nuclear power plants are humming along just fine, and they 
don't have a power shortage.  But the French tend to take a 
more rational and logical view of things, anyway, where Americans get 
hysterical at the drop of a hat.  The French developed trains that 
move people efficiently at almost 200 mph.  We have.... Amtrak.  
The French have been more innovative in aviation than the US, although 
they have not capitalized on aviation as successfully (so far) as the US.

There is no reason nuclear power cannot be as reliable and safe a generating 
method as coal, oil, or natural gas.  But Americans have this "Oh my God, it's going 
to explode" hysteria over nuclear power, so the lights go out in California.  It's 
interesting that most of the protesters against power plants, be they coal, gas, or 
nuclear, are young people.  Or as the lawyer said in the movie My Brother Vinnie,  
"yutes."  I wonder where these kids think the power to run their DVD players is going 
to come from when they grow up?

The radical side of the environmental movement just succeeded in getting the Georgia 
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.

Looking at it in black and white, diesel generators do pollute.  Power plants can pollute, 
too, if they aren't designed and managed properly.  The mill, which had done a great deal 
over the last few years to clean up its operation, still polluted some.  So the 
environmentalists can truthfully say they have successfully shut down a source of pollution.  
But what about the 400-plus people who are out of work?  Every job at that mill supported 
seven jobs in the community (these are government statistics, not mine).  So it's not 
just the mill workers that are losing their jobs, but waiters, bookstore owners, supermarket 
clerks, real estate agents, etc., etc., etc.  It won't be long before one of the protesters 
complains because his or her favorite little restaurant has closed, or the auto parts 
store has closed, or the funky used bookstore went out of business.  But they won't 
see the connection between those things and their all-or-nothing protest campaign.

And THAT's my single biggest complaint about "youth."  They don't have the experience 
or knowledge to see that everything is connected.  In the past, it didn't matter so much 
because youth was over-ridden by more experienced reason.  But now in our 
"minority rules" society, the one-sided yammerings of special-interest groups 
are given far too much say in matters that ultimately affect the lives of hundreds, 
if not thousands of people.

I am very pro-environment.  I care more about animals than I do about people, 
in large part because I can't think of any problem on this planet that has been 
caused by animals, but I can think of a lot of problems that have been caused by people.  
So people gotta go, at least a hell of a lot of them.  But until that happens (and it 
will, although I have no idea how), there has to be a balance between what's good 
for the environment and what's 
necessary to continue our attempt at surviving, and one would hope, improving.  
But the kids refuse to see that, and it's clearly a waste of time to try to help them 
see it.  So I don't hate "yutes."  I just don't care about them anymore.  I've got 
better things to do with my time.

Tropical roofs DO work, metal grills ARE cooler looking, and drum winches 
ARE wussy.  And ELECTRIC drum winches are simply disgusting.  Life may be 
nothing but grey areas, but the rules about Land Rovers are black and white :-).

___________________________
C. Marin Faure
  (original owner)
  1973 Land Rover Series III-88
  1991 Range Rover Vogue SE
  Seattle

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 19:09:32 +0200
From: Luca Ingianni <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: Ghost Driver?

- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Am Donnerstag,  5. April 2001 17:43 schrieben Sie:
> At 17:14 05/04/01 +0200, Luca Ingianni, wrote
>
> >  "drivers beware there is a ghost driver on highway so-and-so"
>
> This sounds intriguing --- what is a "ghost driver"

Uh oh. I was afraid this would happen. I looked the term up in a 
dictionary (so much for that) but somehow it didn't sound right to me. 
Probably doesn't exist.
"Ghost driver" would be a direct translation from German (which I felt was 
a bit odd -- it should sound different in English). In German this is the 
term for people driving on the wrong side of the road (which is especially 
bad on highways as there are barriers between the two directions so even 
if you realize your mistake you can't go over to the right side. Either 
reverse right on the highway or go all the way to the next exit).

have fun,
	Luca
- - -- 
There are very few personal problems that cannot be solved through a
suitable application of high explosives.

- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iEYEARECAAYFAjrMptAACgkQ7uxRR5vRvyvW8wCePvh25HncqGSScvHpdR2pfQGu
WXIAn2UKWy+pzVr0sHbczmwvoSCggjb1
=7A6u
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 13:15:51 EDT
From: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: LRO: Clinton's Midget

- --part1_12.b199d75.27fe0247_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Gotta say,

When I first saw this subject I was afraid we were gonna start talking about 
the former President's *ahem* accoutrements.

Nate

- --part1_12.b199d75.27fe0247_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>Gotta say,
<BR>
<BR>When I first saw this subject I was afraid we were gonna start talking about 
<BR>the former President's *ahem* accoutrements.
<BR>
<BR>Nate</FONT></HTML>

- --part1_12.b199d75.27fe0247_boundary--

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 13:26:57 -0400
From: "Alan Richer/CAM/Lotus" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: Clinton's Midget

I think you can convert the electronic 45d4 to points by replacing the
baseplate, as well.

Errrr.one problem - the vacuum capsule mount is different, as the VC mounts
to the electronic module.

If you wanted to I'm sure it could be done, but you'd end up leaving the
Emodule on it...

                         ajr

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 07:26:56 -1000
From: "Hope Peter" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: LRO: Weber 34 ICH

Bryan,
I have discovered that the port sat the bottom provides vacuum to the
power-vavle.  This is the spring loaded diaphram located above the float
chamber in the top half of the body.  Vacuum cause the valve to open and
lean out the mixture.  At full throttle, vacuum is supposed to drop and the
valve closes.  Enriching the mixture.
I am wondering if my spring is to week, so the diaphram remains open at all
times.
I have to back the mixture needle all most all the way out and have the idle
screw turned almost all the way in to get the thing to idle, and it only
idles at 1100rpms.  Any less and it dies.
Pete

> Pete,
>
> That 3rd port on the bottom of my 34ICH is blocked by the gasket
> as well.  I just rebuilt mine too, so I remember thinking "hmmm"
> as I reassembled it.

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 13:33:00 -0400
From: "Alan Richer/CAM/Lotus" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: Clinton's Midget

When I first saw this subject I was afraid we were gonna start talking
about
the former President's *ahem* accoutrements.

Nate

ROFLMAO.....

     aj"Or would tyhat be CLinton's cocktail weenie?"r

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 13:41:59 -0400 
From: Easton Trevor A <[email-masked]>
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 18:53:00 +0100
From: "Phil Norris" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: Re: Re: Wasted youth

We have a saying over here involving a pot, a kettle and the colour
black......
Rgds
P hil Norris
110 V8 SW god knows how many owners and couldn't care less....
Bolton, England
- -----Original Message-----
From: Faure, Marin <[email-masked]>
To: 'Land Rover Mail Group' <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]' <[email-masked]>
Date: 05 April 2001 17:07
Subject: LRO: Re: Wasted youth

>Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 16:53:10 +1200
>From: "Macka" <[email-masked]>
>Subject: LRO: Re: Wasted youth (was parts availability, etc.)
>
>>The below statement from  Marin is quite staggering, down here in New
>Zealand we have learnt of the US President's new stance on the Kyoto
>agreement....surely this is a view held by the President and his advisors?
>Surely not all Americans hold a view similar to Marin's which is arrogant
>and selfish in the extreme.
>
>You take life WAY too seriously....
>___________________________
>C. Marin Faure
>  (original owner)
>  1973 Land Rover Series III-88
>  1991 Range Rover Vogue SE
>  Seattle
>
>

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 12:53:30 -0500
From: "Brian Willoughby" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: The Land-Rover Bodied Bastard (Long and Bitter)

I think that a vehicle properly restored to original condition or
maintained from new in its original state is a considerably more difficult
goal to accomplish than cutting one up and modifying it.  If I had a nickel
for every time I've been "advised" to exchange my early 2.25 for something
else, I could probably buy another new chassis, though maintaining the
original engine keeps the vehicle's history intact.  Besides, I enjoy the
challenge of tracking down rare parts that the engine swappers don't give
two cents about:  I even have a set of four long-out of production Lodge
spark plugs for car show display purposes.  (I could explain what Lodge
spark plugs are and look like; however, those who care already know and
those who are concerned about Iron Dukes will never understand.) With
swapping engines, originality is out the window and nothing else really
matters so why bother yourself with tracking down a correct turn signal
lens.  I have an idea that frequently some rare and valuable parts are
discarded in the zeal and fury to create the perfect, ultimate, coolest,
whatever Land-Rover-bodied bastard.  I didn't buy a Land-Rover expecting it
to be a perfect vehicle and I accepted it for what it was.  People accept
most other vehicles for what they are:  why can't they do it with
Land-Rovers?

I think it would do some of these engine swapping kids good to be forced to
read a history of the Rover Company Ltd.  Mind you, I mean something
concerning Rover as a whole and not just Land-Rover.  I would like them to
realize the company had a history prior to producing Land-Rovers, beginning
with bicycle manufacture during the late 1800s and proceeding to building
some of the first jet engines during World War II.  Then after they've
covered the pre-war history, they could research the mergers of all the
automobile companies that formed British Leyland and finally proceed to
BMW's buyout of Rover Group and then the selling and division of the
remains to the subsequent purchase of the Land-Rover division by Ford. 
Perhaps if they'd do this they'd have a little more respect for their
Land-Rovers and what they represent.  Someone mentioned that Land-Rovers
seemed to be intended to be disassembled (and consequently modified) due to
their simple, Mecanno-set style construction.  Apparently, the prevailing
wisdom is that the Wilkes brothers envisioned any and every conceivable
engine being shoehorned into Land-Rovers someday.  I guess the fact that
Rover, like most other automobile producers in post-war Britain, was
strapped for funds and that they couldn't afford to produce complicated
body panels had nothing to do with the design of the vehicle.  It was all
done to accommodate Iron Dukes!  Thanks to all the engine swappers for
setting the record straight!  I'm sure that Maurice Wilkes is smiling down
on these ultimate Land-Rover-bodied bastards since they have corrected all
of his mistakes.  

I'm sure that in 1948 Maurice remarked, "You know, this vehicle is a heap
of crap and, quite honestly, I'm ashamed of it.  My conscience is also
bothering me:  these things are going to have a high selling price and they
are so flawed and irregular--simply trash.  Though that's okay.  We
designed them so that the people who buy them will be able to make their
own modifications and change them 'round. Nevertheless, it still seems a
pity to ask such a high price for the things and then expect people to be
forced to go out and have to purchase another engine to replace these
worthless lumps we're installing.  Alas, I'm certain that 20 year old kids
in the year 2001 will understand that we so poorly engineered these things
that they have to be rebuilt by their owners to be any good."  Of course,
Maurice Wilkes didn't say that and if the factory-stock Land-Rover had been
as bad as some people make them out to be, Rover wouldn't have ever sold a
single unit.  For that matter, Rover, much less Land-Rover, would probably
have never survived.

All this engine swapping nonsense shows a complete lack of understanding of
Rover's history and how the Land-Rover came about.  I guess that's what
happens when people buy them because they "look cool".  The cool looks wear
thin after a short while and they can't and don't satisfy these peoples'
need for a modern car and, thus, they start in on engine conversions.  It's
too bad that perspective buyers can't rent a Series Land-Rover for a couple
of weeks to find out if they really do want one.  (Before any of you get
any ideas, I thought of this renting scheme first!)  I have an idea that
most would shy away from them and be asking for a refund, probably before
the lease contract had more than a few days used up.  (Personally, if I had
such a Land-Rover leasing business, I'd only rent them out during December
and January and make certain that the only heater allowed to be installed
in my fleet would be the infamous Smiths shin-burners.  I'd also only rent
Is, IIs and IIAs with no overdrives and the earlier transmissions with
unsynchronized first and second gears.  That ought to cure the "man those
things look cool" crowd in no time.)

About seven years ago, being an admirer of all things Rover, I nearly
bought a '66 Rover 2000SC from a college student:  it had been bought
merely based on the fact that it "was funky".  The idiot hadn't a clue
about how to care for the car and used DOT 3 to top off the fluid
reservoir.  Naturally, the rubber in the brake system quickly
self-destructed and to alleviate the problem, a bottle of "Heavy Duty DOT
3" was purchased (I found the bottle in the boot.)  Of course, the car
wouldn't stop and since the kid was too dumb and proud to ask a question or
try to analyze what had gone wrong, the car was for sale as someone else's
problem to solve.  The deal fell through and I later found out that a
salvage yard was called to haul the car away.  I was told the kid got paid
$25 for the "funky car."  The moral is that if the kid had bother to learn
something about the car, it might still be on the road rather than having
been crushed.  What a shame, it was a really nice, original P6. 

Hot rods hold no appeal for me.  I was en route to Asheville, NC about a
year ago and decided to stay over in Pigeon Forge, TN and drive through the
Smokies to get to Asheville.  Unbeknownst to me, there was a hot rod meet
going on and the things were everywhere--like flies on fresh...  Anyhow,
being a car nut, I felt that I had to take a few minutes to at least look
at the ones in the hotel parking lot before I left.  There they were: 
Fords with Chevy engines, Chryslers with Ford engines and Chevys with Ford
powerplants, etc.  The interiors were completely modified and basically the
cars were unidentifiable save for the body shells they were built up from. 
Some were for sale and I couldn't believe the asking prices.  Needless to
say, there were few buyers and I walked away wondering how a price could be
set on these contraptions.  What's a 1940s Chevy bodyshell with a
late-model Ford engine and a Pontiac rear end worth? Who knows.  One thing
I was surprised to learn was that there are companies out there that
essentially sell their customers all the parts needed to "build up" certain
cars that are popular hot rod targets.  Build a hot rod by the numbers, or
something like that.  At least this ensures that some level of proper
engineering goes into the end result.  In the midst of all these hot rods
was a lost looking and completely stock Triumph TR6.  I spent more time
examining it than all the hundreds of Yank Tank hot rods combined.

The thing that bothers me about these homemade hybrids is that they are not
being designed by automotive engineers.  For that matter, they're not even
being approached in a very scientific manner at all.  Engineering or
re-engineering a car is not for amateurs; for that matter, even the experts
can develop things that are deathtraps (the grossly overpowered Sunbeam
Tiger and A.C. Cobra are prime examples of a legitimate [i.e.
factory-built] hybrids that could be downright dangerous in the hands of an
inexperienced driver.)  I have to seriously question the abilities of some
of the people currently contemplating re-engineering their Land-Rovers.  Do
these people have the capabilities to perform testing with computer models
of how all their modifications will work out?  I doubt it.  They certainly
can't build a series prototypes to help envision what the finished
product's dynamics will be like.  Most car companies build test mule after
mule in an attempt to get everything right. With these amateur engine
swaps, it's simply a matter of do it and hope for the best.  And what
happens when they fail to create the ultimate Land-Rover-bodied bastard? 
It will be difficult to find a buyer for the thing who wants to drive it
(especially if the truth is revealed about what a mess the vehicle is) and,
sadly, prices for scrap iron and aluminum have plummeted in recent years.

Someone mentioned that these "hybrids" are an essential part of
Land-Rover's history--that the make's history has been recorded and written
with these creations as an integral part thereof.  I would argue that they
are not even a footnote.  Does the Motor Heritage Trust go out seeking
hacked up Land-Rovers with Iron Dukes in them?  Hardly.  What is in their
collection?  Vehicles like HUE 166--which was bought back from a farmer who
had owned and used it for years and hadn't "re-engined" it.  Does anyone
ever discussed these vehicles after the fact?  I've never heard anyone
concerning themselves about John Q. Public's Volkswagen-diesel powered
Land-Rover bodied bastard after John Q. does his conversion--no one cares
after a few months or years.  If these things are so important in the
greater scheme of Land-Rover history, why aren't they detailed and
discussed in depth in books dealing with Land-Rover history?  Could it be
because they aren't part of the history that the manufacturer was
responsible for?  Obviously, the manufacturer (as well as many others) does
not recognize the Land-Rover-bodied bastards as being Land-Rovers and why
should they?  They aren't anything more than a Land-Rover bodyshell in the
end.

Speaking of hot rods, there's an interesting one locally--it's based on a
Citroen 15CV.  Yes, it's fascinating that someone put a Chevy engine and
rear end in it, though what a shame to chop up what is a quite scarce car
on this side of the Atlantic.  In this transition, it's lost all of its
original French charm that made it uniquely Citroen; now it's just a
collection of parts.  Hell, it's even lost its famous "traction avant" in
this futile attempt to create a better Big 15.  Is there a single auto
museum that would want this thing in their collection?  I doubt the Henry
Ford Museum or Harrah's have been in contact.  Basically, that's the
problem with cutting up and mutilating a Land-Rover:  what these Land-Rover
engine swappers are doing is creating collections of unrelated parts that
have no value except to their owners and no provenance.  These conversions
have no future because they have no regard for the past.

Brian Willoughby
1960 Land-Rover Series II 88" S.W.--"The Lady Eleanor"

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 07:55:43 -1000
From: "Hope Peter" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: LRO: Ghost Driver?

> a bit odd -- it should sound different in English). In German this is the 
> term for people driving on the wrong side of the road (which is 
> especially 
> bad on highways as there are barriers between the two directions so even 
> if you realize your mistake you can't go over to the right side. Either 
> reverse right on the highway or go all the way to the next exit).

Thanks for the explanation.....now the joke makes perfect sense. :-)

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

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

> 
> The radical side of the environmental movement just succeeded in getting the Georgia
> 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.
> 
> Looking at it in black and white, diesel generators do pollute.  Power plants can pollute,
> too, if they aren't designed and managed properly.  The mill, which had done a great deal
> over the last few years to clean up its operation, still polluted some.  So the
> environmentalists can truthfully say they have successfully shut down a source of pollution.
> But what about the 400-plus people who are out of work?  Every job at that mill supported
> seven jobs in the community (these are government statistics, not mine).  So it's not
> just the mill workers that are losing their jobs, but waiters, bookstore owners, supermarket
> clerks, real estate agents, etc., etc., etc.  It won't be long before one of the protesters
> complains because his or her favorite little restaurant has closed, or the auto parts
> store has closed, or the funky used bookstore went out of business.  But they won't
> see the connection between those things and their all-or-nothing protest campaign.
> 
> And THAT's my single biggest complaint about "youth."  They don't have the experience
> or knowledge to see that everything is connected.  In the past, it didn't matter so much
> because youth was over-ridden by more experienced reason.  But now in our
> "minority rules" society, the one-sided yammerings of special-interest groups
> are given far too much say in matters that ultimately affect the lives of hundreds,
> if not thousands of people.
> 

Go*damn it Marin will you quit doing that.
Just when I am about to say you are full sh*t you say some thing I agree
with.
However to all those who  try to assure us that nuclear is non poluting
have you so soon forgotten Chernobyl.
It simply saves its polution to be released in one catastrophy.
Then there is question of spent fuel which is just being hidden at the
present.
John and Muddy

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 01 10:13:22 -0700
From: TeriAnn Wakeman <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: RE: Parts availability vs. bulletproofing

>Apparently all the new Defenders will be manufactured in SA (from when I
>don't know), LR is looking at the V8 Caddie engine (I think).

Rest assured that Ford will not produce a car with A GM power plant.  As 
to where they will all be built?  Who knows, especially after the 
complete Defender line is reintroduced in the US.

TeriAnn         
                      http://www.overlander.net

  The world's most complete set of links connecting Rover 4X4 owners
  with Rover parts, service, accessory & sales companies world wide.

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 01 10:06:10 -0700
From: TeriAnn Wakeman <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: RE: April LROI

>Not only are the "round" type guards prevalent on some of the most serious
>off-roaders, but many can also be "tack" welded into place.

Sounds like a plan to me.  Mine fell off too.  Luckally I was able to 
retrieve it.  I was thinking of having it tack welded in place.

The problem seems to be that late diff housings have a noticable 
cylinderical space before the rounded end.  Early ones like mine just 
have the rounded end.  The late version of the housing provides something 
for the diff guard to clamp too.  They just kinda percariously hold onto 
the early version housing.

TeriAnn Wakeman               Marigold Ltd.
Santa Cruz, California        Web design, site updating, testing
[email-masked]      search engine optimization, graphics
                              and more

http://www.overlander.net/Marigold/index.html

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 13:34:51 +0100
From: "Frank Elson" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: Re: New words

Those words should suit the Washington Post.
 When I worked for them in the 1970s they couldn't spell colour, aluminium,
or tyre; they didn't know what a chassis was, or the boot of a car; they
laughed when I smoked fags; they didn't know how to use a knife and fork
properly AND they all drove on the wrong side of the road :-)>

Best Cheers

Frank
    +--+--+--+
     I !__|  [_]|_\___
     I ____|"_|"__|_ | /     B791 PKV
     "(o)======(o)"    Bronze Green 110 CSW

- ----- Original Message -----
From: A. P. "Sandy" Grice <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2001 2:58 PM
Subject: LRO: New words

> OK, gang, this doesn't have a thing to do with Rovers, but I found it
amusing and educational nonetheless, and thought that ya'll might even start
using some of them. Enjoy....
>
> The Washington Post's Style Invitational asked readers to take any word
from the dictionary, alter it by adding, subtracting, or changing one
letter, and supply a new definition. Here are some recent winners:
>
> 1) Intaxication: Euphoria at getting a tax refund, which lasts until you
realize it was your money to start with.
>
> 2) Reintarnation: Coming back to life as a hillbilly.
>
> 3) Foreploy: Any misrepresentation about yourself for the purpose of
getting laid.
>
> 4) Giraffiti: Vandalism spray-painted very, very high.
>
> 5) Sarchasm: The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person
who doesn't get it.
>
> 6) Inoculatte: To take coffee intravenously when you are running late.
>
> 7) Hipatitis: Terminal coolness.
>
> 8) Osteopornosis: A degenerate disease. (this one got extra credit)
>
> 9) Karmageddon: It's like, when everybody is sending off all these really
bad vibes, right? And then, like, the Earth explodes and it's, like, a
serious bummer.
>
> 10) Glibido: All talk and no action.
>
> 11) Dopeler effect: The tendency of stupid ideas to seem smarter when they
come at you rapidly.
>
> And, the pick of the litterature:
>
> 12) Ignoranus: A person who's both stupid and an asshole.
>
>
>
>
>
> *----jeep may be famous, LAND-ROVER is Legendary----*
> | |
> | A. P. ("Sandy") Grice |
> | Rover Owners' Association of Virginia, Ltd. |
> | 1633 Melrose Pkwy., Norfolk, VA 23508-1730 |
> |(O)757-622-7054, (H)757-423-4898, FAX 757-622-7056 |
> | www.roav.org |
> | (original owner) (pre-production) |
> *----1972 Series III------1996 Discovery SE-7(m)----*
>

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

Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 13:15:50 -0500
From: Bill Adams <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: Split the list?

I guess we'll further have to split the LRO list. Bill, Can we modify
the Major to have a LRO-No non Rover engines and trannys or suspension
parts, even though Rover outsources a ton of stuff on their vehicles
(subscribe LRONNRETSPETROATOSOTV) list and an anything goes list
(subscribe-LROAG)? 
- -- 
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 13:22:10 -0500 (CDT)
From: David Scheidt <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: An actual Land-Rover question about 109 brakes

I'm getting ready to go do some work on the front brakes of my 109, and I'm
looking at the replacement parts I've got.  As near as I can tell, I've got
four identical shoes.  I'm sure there's a difference between them, isn't
there?  How do I tell?  

I hate to drag you folk away from your bickering about youth, global
warming, and caddy engines, but help?

Thanks,

David

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

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 12:21:45 -0600 
From: "Coates, Clinton" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: Dynamat

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, 05 Apr 2001 15:37:30 -0300
From: [email-masked] (John Cranfield)
Subject: Re: LRO: An actual Land-Rover question about 109 brakes

The 4 fronts are the same but the 4 rears have their own exact location.
John and Muddy

David Scheidt wrote:
> 
> I'm getting ready to go do some work on the front brakes of my 109, and I'm
> looking at the replacement parts I've got.  As near as I can tell, I've got
> four identical shoes.  I'm sure there's a difference between them, isn't
> there?  How do I tell?
> 
> I hate to drag you folk away from your bickering about youth, global
> warming, and caddy engines, but help?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> David
> 
> --
> [email-masked]
> Bipedalism is only a fad.

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 13:38:55 -0500 (CDT)
From: David Scheidt <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: An actual Land-Rover question about 109 brakes

On Thu, 5 Apr 2001, John Cranfield wrote:

:The 4 fronts are the same but the 4 rears have their own exact location.
:John and Muddy

Great.  Thanks, John.

David
:
:David Scheidt wrote:
:> 
:> I'm getting ready to go do some work on the front brakes of my 109, and I'm
:> looking at the replacement parts I've got.  As near as I can tell, I've got
:> four identical shoes.  I'm sure there's a difference between them, isn't
:> there?  How do I tell?
:> 
:> I hate to drag you folk away from your bickering about youth, global
:> warming, and caddy engines, but help?
:> 
:> Thanks,
:> 
:> David
:> 
:> --
:> [email-masked]
:> Bipedalism is only a fad.
:
:

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

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 14:52:49 -0400
From: "Alan Richer/CAM/Lotus" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: An actual Land-Rover question about 109 brakes

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*)

               ajr

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 12:00:35 -0700
From: "Rich Williams II" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: Re: The Land-Rover Bodied Bastard (Long and Bitter)

Someone hand Brian a pint!  

Cheers mate!

Rich Williams
'60 Series II 109 S.W. "Lucy"

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 15:03:46 -0400 
From: "Tackley, John" <[email-masked]>
Subject: LRO: RE: Engine Balancing

> Peter asked...
"So am going to do a total rebuild.  Just wonder if getting the
thing balanced would be a good idea given the increase in power and to
improve longevity."

My response is long, so either get comfortable, or hit 'delete' now.

Well, let's examine this situation...you will have gone to some considerable
expense to improve the 2.25, perhaps to keep the truck an original LR or
just because you like seeing the results (...or lack of same) of your own
personal engine enhancement theories, whatever.  We know from the
experiences of others that it is possible to increase/improve on the stock
7:1 comp. 2.25 petrol LR engine's (engines, not motors...motors only convert
electricity to mech. energy, I was taught)HP and Torque curves and peaks.
Also, there are many routes to that destination.  You can increase such
things as the compression ratio and the displacement by various means, (skim
the head, change the pistons, bore the cylinders oversize, stroke the crank)
etc.  Simpler and less expensive methods of increasing HP/Torque can also be
followed, such as increasing the air flow thru the engine by changing to
higher flow carbs, cams, manifolds and exhausts.  
There are specific costs associated with each of these operations though,
both in terms of parts and/or labor/machine shop time and otherwise.
Horsepower by-the-dollar(or pound-sterling, if you prefer...)I like to call
it.
The enjoyment for me is to first determine the objective, then develop both
a budget and a plan for the improvements/modifications, then estimate the
relative costs of planned changes and then press on.  Sometime you win,
sometimes you lose, but there are no mistakes ever, only lessons.
Will balancing a LR 2.25 have its benefits...abso-damn-lutely, and don't let
anyone tell you differently...the issue is; Is the benefit worthy of the
effort?  Or, is it worth the relative cost?  Isn't cost a relative issue to
each of us?  What seems expensive to me may come cheap to you, and so on.
There WILL be a benefit, however slight it may be.  Only you can weigh the
facts and decide.
When I, or rather my local machine/speed shop) did my 2.25 engine, we
discussed each of these and other points, they gave me estimates of the
costs and expected benefits, and then I picked a peddle, to stop or go; I
made the call.  I performed most of the above mentioned mods, and some
others, including a port&polish of the head (which was bench flowed before
and after to verify the increase/improvement in flow rates).  This in turn
was matched to flow rate specs for manifolds/carbs and I decided on APB's SU
carb/Aluminum manifold combo.  Add to that an AB header out of
necessity...what goes in has to get out. 
I have not fired up this engine yet.  In the future I plan to utilize a
SuperTrapp exhaust, which is tuneable via 'discs' that are added or removed
to change the flow rate of the exhaust system.  Essentially, I used known
techniques for increasing HP and Torque hot rodders have been using for many
years and threw them at LR's 'tractor' technology engine because I wnated
to.  I am quite certain every one of the mods carried out will have its
benefit, however slight, and to me, the relative cost (all tallied I spent
less than $2500 for parts and labor)was well below the cost of a new Turner
or other known quality re-built 2.25, and $300 of that total was just for
re-assembling the complete engine and then standing behind that work.  The
guarantee I recieved from the shop was for 1 year/unlimited mileage, which
commences the day I fire it up for the first time, which will be several
months after it left their shop(this in exchange for paying them to assemble
and test, ...yes test, not by actually starting and running the engine, but
by 'spinning' it up to 500 rpm for a prolonged period of time and checking
all the things they check to insure quality work).  That all made good sense
to me and seemed a good value, compared to other choices available to me.
So, back to Pete's question, or rather my answer to it...will balancing have
any benefit in terms of 
increased power and longevity...abolutely it will.  If it develops more HP
and Torque as a result of your chosen mods, will you not enjoy more
smiles-per-mile because of them?  Will you not rev the engine higher, or
cruise at a higher relative rpm just because you can, as a result of those
mods?  I'm sure you will and those mods will allow you to do that with an
increased margin of safety/longevity.
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.

Good Luck,

JT/ric

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

Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 20:11:19 +0100
From: "Mike Rogers" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: LRO: Real Rovers (was Parts availability....)

> An interesting dilemma arises when considering older
>Series Land Rovers that have been fitted with Rover
> V-8s.  Are they Land Rovers?

I have been reading this thread with interest wondering where it will end up
and have decided to add the thoughts that led to my Hybrid building.

Firstly I just like land Rovers, secondly the Lightweight, to me, is the
best looking vehicle Land Rover ever built, sadly they were built in the era
of leaf springs and poor performing engines. Hence I came to the conclusion
that if I were to keep up with modern traffic on the roads, and compete with
modern Land Rovers off road a Hybrid was the only way to go if I were to
keep the body style I like so much.

To me it is still a Land Rover, to the ARC club rules it is still a Land
Rover, to the vehicle licensing dept it is still a Land Rover, to NFU
insurance it is still a Land Rover.

All the parts with the exception of the, VW seats, SD1 steering wheel,
Freight Rover handbrake lever and Ford fuel filler neck and cap were
originally made by Land Rover Ltd. A few items I had to custom make myself
such as radiator grill, chassis parts, and Roll cage.

The fact that I arranged these parts in a way that Land Rover Ltd never did
does not make the vehicle non-Land Rover.

I am currently re-building a 110 (I at last have a gearlever for it) in
different way to that which Land Rover Ltd chose. They in there wisdom put
in a Diesel engine, I am putting in a Range Rover V8 and LT95 gearbox. I
will probably use car seats and convert it to run on LPG.

It will still be a Land Rover.

PS.
Why does my spellchecker always want me to change SD1 to SAD, does it too
have opinions?

Mike Rogers
Lightweight/Range Rover hybrid
Transferboxleverless 110 project
(if you can't get there in a Land Rover you can't get there)

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

End of LRO Mailing List DIGEST * * * * V1 #314
**********************************************