Subject: LRO digest, Vol 1 #33 - 49 msgs

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 17:52:05 -0400 (EDT)

Send LRO mailing list submissions to
	[email-masked]

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	[email-masked]

You can reach the person managing the list at
	[email-masked]

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of LRO digest..."

Today's Topics:

   1. Re: LRO digest, Vol 1 #32 - 31 msgs ([email-masked])
   2. Re: Glow plugs and starting (Andy Woodward)
   3. Re: Re: Glow plugs and starting (John Cranfield)
   4. RE: Manifold pressure gauge (was engine speeds) (Easton Trevor A)
   5. rear ends (Rob MacCormick)
   6. RE: LR 1 - Rodeo 0 (long story) (Easton Trevor A)
   7. Re: rear ends (Rob MacCormick)
   8. RE: rear ends (Easton Trevor A)
   9. Zenith rebuild question (Matthew Wilson)
  10. spin on oil filter adapters (Jeff Bieler)
  11. Re: spin on oil filter adapters (Alan Richer/CAM/Lotus)
  12. Re: spin on oil filter adapters (Keith Tanner)
  13. those thingys (Jerrod)
  14. RE: those thingys (Easton Trevor A)
  15. Re: spin on oil filter adapters ([email-masked])
  16. Re: rear ends (Phil Norris)
  17. RE: those thingys for posers (Simon J. Harding)
  18. windshield protection not just for trees! (Rob MacCormick)
  19. Re: those thingys (Bill Fishel)
  20. Manifold pressure gauge (was engine speeds) (Tom Gross)
  21. Re: Manifold pressure gauge (was engine speeds) (Perrone Ford)
  22. RE: windshield protection not just for trees! (Simon J. Harding)
  23. Re: spin on oil filter adapters (Rich Williams II)
  24. RE: those thingys (Lee Jones)
  25. Crimp Gap Problem Solved (Carl Kinkade)
  26. Re: Kids and Rovers (Frank Elson)
  27. Re: those thingys (TeriAnn Wakeman)
  28. Wise Owl (Kirk Hillman)
  29. RE: those thingys for posers (TeriAnn Wakeman)
  30. RE: windshield protection not just for trees! (Jerrod)
  31. RE: those thingys for posers (Easton Trevor A)
  32. Re: Wise Owl (Keith Tanner)
  33. Unleaded fuel (was manifold pressure gauge) (Faure, Marin)
  34. RE: Manifold pressure gauge (Faure, Marin)
  35. RE: Kids and Rovers (Simon J. Harding)
  36. RE: RE: Manifold pressure gauge (Easton Trevor A)
  37. RE: RE: Manifold pressure gauge (Sergi, Michael)
  38. Re: windshield protection not just for trees! (Rolston)
  39. Driving a Series (Faure, Marin)
  40. Re: those thingys for posers (Hope Peter)
  41. RE: windshield protection not just for trees! (Simon J. Harding)
  42. Re: windshield protection not just for trees! (Rolston)
  43. RE: Wise Owl (Lee Jones)
  44. RE: windshield protection not just for trees! (G. Mugele)
  45. Re: those thingys (Alex Maiolo)
  46. Re: those thingys for posers (TeriAnn Wakeman)
  47. RE: windshield protection not just for trees! (TeriAnn Wakeman)
  48. Re: Kids and Rovers (Mike Rogers)
  49. RE: windshield protection not just for trees! (Simon J. Harding)

--__--__--

Message: 1
From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 07:01:45 EDT
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [lro] Re: LRO digest, Vol 1 #32 - 31 msgs
Reply-To: [email-masked]

--part1_7a.18985fdd.289a8d19_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

--part1_7a.18985fdd.289a8d19_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2><B>
<BR>
<BR></B></FONT></HTML>

--part1_7a.18985fdd.289a8d19_boundary--

--__--__--

Message: 2
From: "Andy Woodward" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 12:05:07 +0100
Subject: [lro] Re: Glow plugs and starting
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Is it of greater long term benefit to teh engine to let it preheat for
a long time before starting so it runs smoothly right from start, or
to start it as soon as it'll catch without stalling again?

I.e can overuse of glowplugs be damaging to engine longevity?

--__--__--

Message: 3
Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2001 08:15:55 -0300
From: [email-masked] (John Cranfield)
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Re: Glow plugs and starting
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Over use of the glow plugs will only shorten the life of the plugs
themselves. It is better to use the plugs a little over time than have a
cold missfire with the potential of the fuel washing the cylinder walls.
John and Muddy

Andy Woodward wrote:
> 
> Is it of greater long term benefit to teh engine to let it preheat for
> a long time before starting so it runs smoothly right from start, or
> to start it as soon as it'll catch without stalling again?
> 
> I.e can overuse of glowplugs be damaging to engine longevity?
> 
> _______________________________________________
> LRO mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

--__--__--

Message: 4
From: Easton Trevor A <[email-masked]>
To: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [lro] Manifold pressure gauge (was engine speeds)
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 07:47:44 -0400 
Reply-To: [email-masked]

	Marin wrote 
> I have very little experience with diesel engines other than the ones in
> our trawler, so 
> I don't know how a manifold pressure or vacuum gauge should be interpreted
> in those 
> engines.  I imagine the same way, but I don't know enough about them to
> give you a 
> meaningful answer.
> 
	[Easton Trevor A]  The diesel doesn't have a throttle so doesn't
generate manifold vacuum, that's why you need a vacuum pump for power
brakes. I'm not sure if there is an equivalent to the vacuum gauge for a
diesel as a "working load" gauge. The diesel controls engine power by
varying the amount of fuel injected and this is controlled by engine RPM and
the drivers foot so I guess the answer is that the working load gauge is
your right foot position.

--__--__--

Message: 5
Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2001 07:55:37 -0400
From: Rob MacCormick <[email-masked]>
Organization: Boston College
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [lro] rear ends
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I've been rear ended twice in the last 4 monthes..I drive around Boston, MA USA
so I figure that's about normal......1st time I had slowely come to a stop to
allow pedistrians to cross in a legitatmate cross walk. The second time I was at
the end of a line of cars waiting for a green light. Niether incident damged my
Honda but the second incident was really sad as the owner driver of a nice
series II was injured when he hit me....He came out of the truck with a
separated shoulder and the parking brake handle still clutched in his
hand......JUST KIDDING!

I too moved my spare tire from the rear door to the bonnet...Roof rack not
currently a possibility for the dor(k)mobile......I thought it was becuase it
looked cool and would stress the rear door less but really it was a damage
prevention engineering solution.....

>    Glad to hear your ok.  Let me guess, said woman was on the
> cell/repremanding little Billy/fixing makeup?

both of my ncidents were caused by inattentive women drivers. I believe this to
be coincidental though. (looking over shoulder as I type - yeah hun I'll be off
the computer in just a sec.)

> Lately, I've been almost in a
> few fender-benders.

What's the UK equiv? Wing warper? Wing wrinkler?

> Is it the heat or are people just too damn preoccupied
> with other crap in their cars?

Yes, also, I don't know the details but something like 80% of drivers asked,
think they are better drivers than everyone else....

> I've penned a good article (I think anyway)
> for our newsletter and some of these opinions came out about drivers today.
> Too many drivers?  Too many angry sounding Hondas with the loud speakers?
> Speaker-boys I call them.  Boy are they annoying.  Ok, enough rant.

HA! my IIa dormobile is ten times louder than any Honda I've seen...But I'm
working on it, its a rear end (diff.) kind of thing....
Rob M Concord, MA USA
'68 dor(k)mobile currently known as the growlernashnash

--__--__--

Message: 6
From: Easton Trevor A <[email-masked]>
To: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [lro] LR 1 - Rodeo 0 (long story)
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 07:54:24 -0400 
Reply-To: [email-masked]

>  a lot worse than this, but the young guy that
> hit me was going a lot faster and even worse I could
> see it coming in my mirror. My car, an Austin Maxi
> was totalled.
> 
	[Easton Trevor A]  The guy was a hero then :-) 

--__--__--

Message: 7
Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2001 08:01:19 -0400
From: Rob MacCormick <[email-masked]>
Organization: Boston College
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] rear ends
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Too much attention to the rear view mirror is as distracting as dealing with Billy,
yakking on phone, reading paper, applying cosmetics and jumping down, turning around
and poicking a bail of cotton.....Be careful you don't rear end someone while
scrutinizing your own rear end.

--__--__--

Message: 8
From: Easton Trevor A <[email-masked]>
To: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [lro] rear ends
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 07:58:56 -0400 
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> What's the UK equiv? Wing warper? Wing wrinkler?
> 
	[Easton Trevor A]  Wing ding? 

--__--__--

Message: 9
From: "Matthew Wilson" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 08:35:29 -0400
Subject: [lro] Zenith rebuild question
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Good morning all,
  I started taking the Zenith 36IV apart last night.  This is one of the
last steps (I hope) in the mechanical rebuild.  So as I'm stepping through
the green bible, it seems that the accelerator pump piston should pretty
much drop out of the emulsion block when it is separated from the top cover.
Step 8 says: Lift out accelerator pump piston.  The piston in my emulsion
block will move up and down, but I can't seem to get it out of there.  So,
um, am I missing something?  Should I not worry about it and leave it in
there?
Thanks,
Matthew

--__--__--

Message: 10
Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2001 05:49:20 -0700
From: Jeff Bieler <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [lro] spin on oil filter adapters
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Looking for some opinions on the spin on oil filter adapters out there.  In
theory, it would be nice to get my engine oil and filters the same for both
trucks (IIA and Discovery), but do these adapters work well?

Also, if they worth picking up, any installation tips?

Thanks,

Jeff

--__--__--

Message: 11
Subject: Re: [lro] spin on oil filter adapters
To: [email-masked]
From: "Alan Richer/CAM/Lotus" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 09:40:26 -0400
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Got one on my 109 and I like it. The PH8A is the commonest oil filter type
in the known universe (Motorcraft FL1 and the like) and it is nice to be
able to change the oil w/o losing my shirt to the filter runoff.

Just be damn careful to get the adapter on the right way round, otherwise
you will starve your engine of oil and quickly lose the bearings...

                    ajr

--__--__--

Message: 12
Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2001 10:08:15 -0400
To: [email-masked]
From: Keith Tanner <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] spin on oil filter adapters
Reply-To: [email-masked]

>Just be damn careful to get the adapter on the right way round, otherwise
>you will starve your engine of oil and quickly lose the bearings...

It's pretty obvious which is the best way around when you look at the 
adaptor, actually. I've got one on Basil and I'm happy so far. Of course, 
it's only been on there a month or two...

Keith
------------
Keith's page de home:
    http://keith.miata.net
------------

--__--__--

Message: 13
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 07:57:03 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jerrod <[email-masked]>
To: land rover list <[email-masked]>
Subject: [lro] those thingys
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Hello all!!  What are those cables that lead from the
bull bar on the front to the roof rack on mostly
expedition vehicles?  What are they used for?

Sorry for the rookie question but 1 experience at a
time will surely make me a pro.

Peace,
Jerrod
'89RR
redrover

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/

--__--__--

Message: 14
From: Easton Trevor A <[email-masked]>
To: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [lro] those thingys
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 11:03:58 -0400 
Reply-To: [email-masked]

They are there to prevent tree boughs from smashing into the windscreen.
Also good for amputating limbs from pedestrians and motorcylists when used
on road.

> Hello all!!  What are those cables that lead from the
> bull bar on the front to the roof rack on mostly
> expedition vehicles?  What are they used for?
> 
> Sorry for the rookie question but 1 experience at a
> time will surely make me a pro.
> 
> Peace,
> Jerrod
> '89RR
> redrover
> 
> 

--__--__--

Message: 15
From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 11:32:42 EDT
Subject: Re: [lro] spin on oil filter adapters
To: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

--part1_ad.e4a0d9f.289acc9a_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I had one on my 88 and it was the first thing I upgraded on my 109 after the 
seat belts. No problems with it at all, after eight years of combined running 
time.
It also makes getting your oil changed in the dead of winter at Jiffy lube a 
snap.
Well, worth the 60 or so dollars that Wise Owl charges for them.
Scott Just
Rochester, MI.

--part1_ad.e4a0d9f.289acc9a_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>I had one on my 88 and it was the first thing I upgraded on my 109 after the 
<BR>seat belts. No problems with it at all, after eight years of combined running 
<BR>time.
<BR>It also makes getting your oil changed in the dead of winter at Jiffy lube a 
<BR>snap.
<BR>Well, worth the 60 or so dollars that Wise Owl charges for them.
<BR>Scott Just
<BR>Rochester, MI.
<BR></FONT></HTML>

--part1_ad.e4a0d9f.289acc9a_boundary--

--__--__--

Message: 16
From: "Phil Norris" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] rear ends
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 16:47:15 +0100
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Crash/bang/smash/bump/knock/accident......

;-))))

Brgds
PhilN

(snip...)

From: Rob MacCormick <[email-masked]>
Subject: [lro] rear ends

>> Lately, I've been almost in a
>> few fender-benders.
>
>What's the UK equiv? Wing warper? Wing wrinkler?

--__--__--

Message: 17
From: "Simon J. Harding" <[email-masked]>
To: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [lro] those thingys for posers
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 08:50:02 -0700
Reply-To: [email-masked]

------ =_NextPart_000_01C11B30.1F00A280
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Trevor, you left out the part about them making the person's never been =
off road poseur rig look tough.  I've never seen them around here, where =
we have plenty of trees and brush, on any real offroad rig.  Have seen =
them on a couple pretty boy rigs with real shiny paint though....
	 I've driven plenty of overgrown logging roads and for the most part =
the stuff you come upon is scotch broom, alder, willow and small fir =
trees, and they can be a problem after a heavy snow year because they =
get bent down.  If you are encountering trees and brush that have the =
potential for damaging your windshield you are driving where you =
shouldn't, driving too fast, or encountering big stuff that's going to =
damage your windshield or the other mounting points for limb risers =
regardless.  Most of the growth that is small enough to be dealt with by =
the limb risers is so short the risers are not going to actually put it =
up and over the top of the rig.  Instead, it drags along the side, the =
same as it would without the risers.  I've seen pretty stupid mounting =
done for these risers too.  Cable anchored to the wings or a wimpy bull =
bar and to windshield frame or galvy roof rack.=20
	Windshield frames are actually pretty strong.  Never damaged mine =
simply going through slow with corner of the windshield frame serving =
this duty, in old chevy trucks, Jeep cherokee and SIII 109.  The key is =
you can't drive through the stuff at speed.  And sometimes (gasp!) a =
person may actually have to stop and get out the  saw, loppers, axe, or =
(double gasp!!) turn around.

They are there to prevent tree boughs from smashing into the windscreen.
Also good for amputating limbs from pedestrians and motorcylists when =
used
on road.

------ =_NextPart_000_01C11B30.1F00A280
Content-Type: application/ms-tnef
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64

------ =_NextPart_000_01C11B30.1F00A280--

--__--__--

Message: 18
Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2001 12:13:34 -0400
From: Rob MacCormick <[email-masked]>
Organization: Boston College
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [lro] windshield protection not just for trees!
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Why not put chainsaw chains on there instead of silly wires? It goes without saying that they would probably need to be crafted of chrome plated gold.......In Boston those things are more commonly installed to thwart parking ticket application...Baffles the heck out of meter readers...The deluxe kit comes with a voltage regulator and harness to connect the limb (hand and arm) risers to the vehicles electrical system....

--__--__--

Message: 19
From: "Bill Fishel" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] those thingys
Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2001 00:17:48 -0400
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I've always heard them called limb risers. Like Treveor
said, there used to prevent the windshield from getting
whacked. They also would have kept me from catching
a branch between the front edge of the roof rack and 
the roof. Nice dent to keep the bullet hole company.
Bill Fishel

----------
> From: Jerrod <[email-masked]>
> To: land rover list <[email-masked]>
> Subject: [lro] those thingys
> Date: Thursday, August 02, 2001 10:57 AM
> 
> 
> Hello all!!  What are those cables that lead from the
> bull bar on the front to the roof rack on mostly
> expedition vehicles?  What are they used for?
> 
> Sorry for the rookie question but 1 experience at a
> time will surely make me a pro.
> 
> Peace,
> Jerrod
> '89RR
> redrover
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
> http://phonecard.yahoo.com/
> _______________________________________________
> LRO mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

--__--__--

Message: 20
From: Tom Gross <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 09:30:37 -0700 
Subject: [lro] Manifold pressure gauge (was engine speeds)
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Perrone's comment:

"Manifold pressure can be more than outside pressure and often is for 
well designed engines and manifolds."

Got me thinking that maybe my mental fantasy of what manifold pressure or
manifold vacuum is might be out of whack.  If I'm inside the manifold of a
normally aspirated engine, then the only way I can get air to come to me
through the carburetor is to be in a state of lower pressure than the
outside air, or else no air from the outside would come in.  I can envision
that there would be positive pressure relative to the outside air pressure
if there was a turbocharger or supercharger involved.  Maybe there could be
positive pressure generated if it came from the cylinder side into the
intake manifold.  That could happen if the intake valve is open during the
exhaust stroke.  I think this happens more with racing cams, though.  

A diesel engine doesn't usually have a butterfly valve like a carburetor
has, so a vacuum gauge probably wouldn't tell you much.  If it's
turbocharged, then there would be positive pressure inside the intake
manifold.

Tom Gross
'67 IIa 109

--__--__--

Message: 21
Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2001 12:59:43 -0400
From: Perrone Ford <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Manifold pressure gauge (was engine speeds)
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Hmm...

   My comments may have been misleading.  Lets see if we can rework this 
a bit:

Vacuum is created on the intake stroke by the piston.  This moves 
mixture into the chamber by force of vacuum.  At this moment pressure in 
the manifold should be HIGH as the mixture floods the manifold.  The 
more vacuum created by the cylinder, the more mixture gets forced into 
the manifold and therefore into the chambers.  A supercharger increases 
this because it supplements the vacuum of the piston with an external 
push of mixture.  This raises pressure in the manifold even more.  Think 
of it this way...

You are drinking a drink through a straw.  If we use your mouth to model 
the combustion chamber and your lungs as the piston, then the straw 
could be considered the manifold.  Pressure on the straw is greatest 
when you suck very hard on the straw.  Pressure would increase in the 
straw again when you exhaled, but in the case of the engine, there is a 
closed valve in the way to prevent that from happening.  So the manifold 
is getting pulses of pressure as each cylinder pulls mixture through it. 

Or at least that is the way I see it. Anyone want to enlighten me to a 
different way of thinking?

-P

Tom Gross wrote:

> Perrone's comment:
> 
> "Manifold pressure can be more than outside pressure and often is for 
> well designed engines and manifolds."
> 
> Got me thinking that maybe my mental fantasy of what manifold pressure or
> manifold vacuum is might be out of whack.  If I'm inside the manifold of a
> normally aspirated engine, then the only way I can get air to come to me
> through the carburetor is to be in a state of lower pressure than the
> outside air, or else no air from the outside would come in.  I can envision
> that there would be positive pressure relative to the outside air pressure
> if there was a turbocharger or supercharger involved.  Maybe there could be
> positive pressure generated if it came from the cylinder side into the
> intake manifold.  That could happen if the intake valve is open during the
> exhaust stroke.  I think this happens more with racing cams, though.  
> 
> A diesel engine doesn't usually have a butterfly valve like a carburetor
> has, so a vacuum gauge probably wouldn't tell you much.  If it's
> turbocharged, then there would be positive pressure inside the intake
> manifold.
> 
> Tom Gross
> '67 IIa 109

--__--__--

Message: 22
From: "Simon J. Harding" <[email-masked]>
To: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [lro] windshield protection not just for trees!
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 09:56:11 -0700
Reply-To: [email-masked]

------ =_NextPart_000_01C11B39.68155980
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hey go easy on the chrome plated gold comments.  Yer gonna hurt my =
feelings.  I'm still smarting from TA Wakeman pointing out my poor =
knowledge of the periodic table of the elements and the ensuing chrome =
plated floorboard discussion of a week or so ago!

Simon
would probably need to be crafted of chrome plated gold

------ =_NextPart_000_01C11B39.68155980
Content-Type: application/ms-tnef
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64

------ =_NextPart_000_01C11B39.68155980--

--__--__--

Message: 23
From: "Rich Williams II" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] spin on oil filter adapters
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 09:06:09 -0700
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Like mine too.  I think I saw that Wise Owl is running a special on them
right now.  Installation is pretty straight forward.  We use a similar
adaptor on some of dad's vintage Jaguars.  He's used them for the past 4-5
years without any trouble whatsoever.  And the type he uses and the one I
got from BP look virtually the same.

Rich

>Just be damn careful to get the adapter on the right way round, otherwise
>you will starve your engine of oil and quickly lose the bearings...

It's pretty obvious which is the best way around when you look at the
adaptor, actually. I've got one on Basil and I'm happy so far. Of course,
it's only been on there a month or two...

Keith
------------
Keith's page de home:
    http://keith.miata.net
------------

_______________________________________________
LRO mailing list
[email-masked]
http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

--__--__--

Message: 24
From: "Lee Jones" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [lro] those thingys
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 13:27:24 -0400
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The wires are known as limb risers - they guide limbs from in front of the
truck to over the windshield.

Lee

"There are two kinds of fool. One says, 'This is old, and therefore good.'
And one says, 'This is new, and therefore better.'"

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf
Of Jerrod
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 10:57 AM
To: land rover list
Subject: [lro] those thingys

Hello all!!  What are those cables that lead from the
bull bar on the front to the roof rack on mostly
expedition vehicles?  What are they used for?

Sorry for the rookie question but 1 experience at a
time will surely make me a pro.

Peace,
Jerrod
'89RR
redrover

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/
_______________________________________________
LRO mailing list
[email-masked]
http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

--__--__--

Message: 25
From: "Carl Kinkade" <[email-masked]>
To: "RRO" <[email-masked]>, "LRO" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 12:51:56 -0500
Subject: [lro] Crimp Gap Problem Solved
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I had emailed the group a couple of days ago about my confusion on the crimp
gap on my kickdown cable.

Come to find out the kickdown cable was supposed to have had the lug crimped
down at the factory, thanks to Mike at Rovers North for this information, no
thanks to Atlantic British where I bought the part and they referred me to
Mike for the question of, "Should the lug have been crimped down when I
received it".

The lug on my kickdown cable was free moving, so that is why I could not
figure out how to set the crimp gap between two moving parts, the lug and
the barrel of the sheath.

Mike's advice was to drive the rover and see how it shifts, if it shifts
late and revs the engine up then there is too much slack in the cable, if it
shift early then it is too tight.  So he said to drive it and make
adjustments until the shifting is correct.

By having a crimped lug, it would prevent me from doing this.  And Michael
thanks for your help, but Mike said by knowing you length from your lug to
the engine connector wouldn't help me.  He said your could be stretched or a
different type of cable (genuine or not) so to just drive it and make the
necessary adjustment.

Thanks all,
Carl

--__--__--

Message: 26
From: "Frank Elson" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Kids and Rovers
Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2001 19:37:33 +0100
Reply-To: [email-masked]

of course Land Rovers are OK for the kid until he gets old enough to borrow
it...
then you end up buying him one to keep his hands off yours,
then you have to pay to keep two going,
then you end up working on it as well as your own...

but when you roll up at a show/event, you in your Land Rover and your son in
his... ain't nothing beats that!

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, August 01, 2001 3:39 PM
Subject: [lro] Kids and Rovers

>
> Jeff Bieler <[email-masked]> wrote:
>
> >Today was Mr. Mom day with myself and our 2 month old.
>
> >I bought the Series for a lot of reasons, but while out and about running
> >errands today with Cameron buckled into the child's seat (gets to ride up
> >front, no airbags here!), I looked over at him as we bounced along over
the
> >potholes and he had the biggest sh*t eating grin I have ever seen.
>
> Kids love Rovers.  Years ago...many years ago...when my nephew was just 5
> months old (he's 27 now....) we would go for a ride in the Rover.  He was
> at that stage where his mother was having trouble getting him to calm
down,
> go to sleep and quit fussin'.  Anyway, we would come to a stop light or
> stop sign, and he would bawl bloody murder.  Get going again, and all was
> quiet...you could tell he was just diggin' it, having a great time, 'til
we
> came to another stop.  The rougher the road, the more he'd like it and off
> roading brought squeals of delight.   Unfortunately, he owns a jeep
today....
>
> Cheers
>
>
> *-----"jeep may be famous, LAND-ROVER is legendary"----*
> |                 A. P. "Sandy" Grice                  |
> |    The Rover Owners' Association of Virginia, Ltd    |
> |     1633 Melrose Parkway, Norfolk, VA 23508-1730     |
> |     757-622-7054  (H)423-4898  (FAX)757-622-7056     |
> *------------------------------------------------------*
> _______________________________________________
> LRO mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro
>

--__--__--

Message: 27
Subject: Re: [lro] those thingys
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 01 11:40:45 -0700
From: TeriAnn Wakeman <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]

>
>Hello all!!  What are those cables that lead from the
>bull bar on the front to the roof rack on mostly
>expedition vehicles?  What are they used for?

Mine are there of two reasons.

1. To lift branches up and away from my windscreen and roof rack.  By 
gradally lifting them up you are less apt to have one whap the underside 
of flat front of the rack and try to destroy it.

2. In case the rack does get whacked the wires help keep it from getting 
pushed back into my fibre glass pop up roof.

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

--__--__--

Message: 28
From: "Kirk Hillman" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 12:35:17 -0600
Subject: [lro] Wise Owl
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I have been trying to reach Wise Owl by email with no luck.  Is there a
temporary problem that is bouncing my mail or something else?

Kirk

--__--__--

Message: 29
Subject: RE: [lro] those thingys for posers
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 01 12:03:22 -0700
From: TeriAnn Wakeman <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]

>Trevor, you left out the part about them making the person's never been 
>off road poseur rig look tough. 

Hey, it gets my rig second and third looks at the Mall.  Works reeel good.

> If you are encountering trees and brush that have the potential for 
>damaging your windshield you are driving where you shouldn't, driving too 
>fast

In the West it is common to come across unmaintained trails with decidous 
banches growing well out into the trail at or just below roof rack 
height.  With the right climate some of those deciduous trees grow 
quickly.

> Most of the growth 
>that is small enough to be dealt with by the limb risers is so short the 
>risers are not going to actually put it up and over the top of the rig.  
>Instead, it drags along the side, the same as it would without the risers. 

That's mostly true.  But my concern is protecting my roof rack and 
keeping it from being hit by something strong enough to slide it 
rearwards.  The roofrack sits just in front of the fibre glass Dormobile 
top and protects it from limb damage.  The last thing I need is for the 
rack to get pushed back and cause the damage.

> I've seen pretty stupid mounting done for these risers too.

Me too.  I have 1 inch pipes vertical at the corners of my front bumpers 
that extend through the bumper, the military over riders to about an inch 
higher than the front wings.  THe wires expend between these and the top 
corners of my roof rack and hace spring loaded front mounts to absorb 
branch impact.  The pipes provide branch impact protection for the front 
wing edges.

>	Windshield frames are actually pretty strong.  Never damaged mine simply 
>going through slow with corner of the windshield frame serving this duty, 

I have not seen an damaged frames but I have been with two LRs so far 
that have ended up with branches breaking the windscreen glass.

>in old chevy trucks, Jeep cherokee and SIII 109.  The key is you can't 
>drive through the stuff at speed.  And sometimes (gasp!) a person may 
>actually have to stop and get out the  saw,

Or maybe even pay attention to what is coming at their windscreen and not 
the obstical they are negotiating.

Actually I have found them very handy for hanging wet laundry while 
camping on the trail.

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

--__--__--

Message: 30
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 12:07:48 -0700 (PDT)
From: Jerrod <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [lro] windshield protection not just for trees!
To: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Chrome plated gold HA!

Thanks for the answers fellas
Peace,
Jerrod.
--- "Simon J. Harding" <[email-masked]>
wrote:
> Hey go easy on the chrome plated gold comments.  Yer
> gonna hurt my feelings.  I'm still smarting from TA
> Wakeman pointing out my poor knowledge of the
> periodic table of the elements and the ensuing
> chrome plated floorboard discussion of a week or so
> ago!
> 
> Simon
> would probably need to be crafted of chrome plated
> gold
> 

> ATTACHMENT part 2 application/ms-tnef 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/

--__--__--

Message: 31
From: Easton Trevor A <[email-masked]>
To: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [lro] those thingys for posers
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 15:12:35 -0400 
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> >Trevor, you left out the part about them making the person's never been 
> >off road poseur rig look tough. 
> 
> Hey, it gets my rig second and third looks at the Mall.  Works reeel good.
> 
	Of course, it's possible to rig these lines with marine safety line
hooks so they are only put in place while on the trail and otherwise safely
strung back along the roof edge or rack.

	Trevor "no law suits here" Easton

--__--__--

Message: 32
Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2001 15:16:35 -0400
To: [email-masked]
From: Keith Tanner <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Wise Owl
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I heard from Chris at Wise Owl ([email-masked]) just two days ago.

Keith

At 14:35 02-08-01, you wrote:

>I have been trying to reach Wise Owl by email with no luck.  Is there a
>temporary problem that is bouncing my mail or something else?
>
>Kirk
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>LRO mailing list
>[email-masked]
>http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

------------
Keith's page de home:
    http://keith.miata.net
------------

--__--__--

Message: 33
From: "Faure, Marin" <[email-masked]>
To: "'Land Rover Mail Group'" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 12:11:32 -0700 
Subject: [lro] Unleaded fuel (was manifold pressure gauge)
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2001 11:56:59 -0500 (CDT)
From: David Scheidt <[email-masked]>
To: "'Land Rover Mail Group'" <[email-masked]>
Cc: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Manifold pressure gauge (was engine speeds)
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Wed, 1 Aug 2001, Faure, Marin wrote:

>>:into the head, not a separate press-in seat.  Burn the machined-in seat
:bad enough, and you either need a new head or you have to find a shop
:with the skill to machine the head and install separate seats, both of
:which are expensive propositions.

>About a 100 bucks to have this done.  There's no excuse not to do it if
you've got the head off, since you need to run with unleaded gas.

I attended the EAA Arlington airshow a few weeks ago, and the folks 
running the airshow had invited a regional car club to bring their restored 
cars and display them in the rows with the classic aircraft.  There were 
things like a 1941 Cadillac convertible,  1950s Mercedes, an MG-TD, and a host of 
American cars from the 1930s, 40s, and 50s.  I asked a number of the owners 
what they did about the fact that leaded gas was no longer available.  To a man, 
they laughed and said the "unleaded is bad for older engines" theory is crap.  The 
fellow with the 1941 Cadillac said that he has a 1940s era Plymouth that he's put 
85,000 highway miles on since he restored the vehicle, all of it with unleaded fuel. He's 
had no problems whatsoever with valve seat erosion.  This was echoed by a number 
of the other owners of cars from a 1930s Packard to a 1957 Chevy.  Not a single person 
that I talked to said they'd had any problems with running unleaded in their vehicles, and 
some of them had put many tens of thousands of highway miles on them.  These are 
stock engines, by the way, not engines modified with hardened seats or valves, or so 
the owners all said.

I'm not saying the lead thing is total bollocks, but that sure seemed like an awful lot of folks 
with leaded engines all saying that running unleaded presented no problems at all.  Given 
the collective expertise and experience of these restorers and owners, I find it hard to 
believe they didn't know what they were talking about.  I have seen comments on this 
list and other places from Series Land Rover owners who had put 50,000 or more miles 
on their engines after the disappearance of leaded fuel from the service stations in 
their area with no valve/valve seat problems at all.  I've also seen comments from people 
who say they experienced incredibly rapid valve seat erosion after being forced to switch 
to unleaded fuel.  Don't know who's right, but after talking to the classic car folks, right now 
my tendency is to view the unleaded fuel "problem" more as armchair theory than actual 
fact.  Perhaps if you work a leaded engine very hard with high pressures and temperatures, 
valve seat erosion could very well be a real problem.  But driven intelligently, 
I suspect the 2.25 engine has no problems at all with a diet of unleaded fuel.  Another 
reason why a manifold pressure gauge is so valuable.

I haven't had a speedometer/odometer in my SIII since 1977, so all I can do is estimate the 
number of miles I've put on the thing since leaded fuel disappeared from the Seattle area.  But 
I'm guessing I've put about 20,000 miles on it.  So far I haven't had any indication of valve 
seat wear.  I do run a "lead substitute," but whether or not these additives actually do anything 
or are just snake oil, I don' t know.  None of the classic car folks I talked to at Arlington said they 
used any fuel additives.

Anyway, it's something to speculate about....

___________________________
C. Marin Faure
  (original owner)
  1973 Land Rover Series III-88
  1991 Range Rover Vogue SE
  Seattle
e-mail: [email-masked]

--__--__--

Message: 34
From: "Faure, Marin" <[email-masked]>
To: "'Land Rover Mail Group'" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 12:18:32 -0700 
Subject: [lro] RE: Manifold pressure gauge
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Message: 23
Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2001 13:34:48 -0400
From: Perrone Ford <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Manifold pressure gauge (was engine speeds)
Reply-To: [email-masked]

>Manifold pressure can be more than outside pressure and often is for 
well designed engines and manifolds.

I perhaps should have added that engines that are turbocharged 
or supercharged can achieve manifold pressures higher than 
the atmospheric pressure outside the manifold.  The de Havilland 
Beaver I fly has a supercharged Pratt & Whitney R-985 Wasp Jr. 
engine, and at sea level, the manifold pressure limit at takeoff 
is about 42 in/hg.  This is a good ten or more inches above 
the atmospheric pressure.  The mechanical supercharger on 
this engine can maintain sea level pressure in the manifold 
up to an altitude of 5,000 feet.  Above that, the manifold pressure 
drops off just like any other engine, about one inch of mercury per 
thousand feet.  A turbocharged engine, thanks to its waste gate, 
can generate higher manifold pressures to higher altitudes than 
a mechanically supercharged engine.
___________________________
C. Marin Faure
  (original owner)
  1973 Land Rover Series III-88
  1991 Range Rover Vogue SE
  Seattle

--__--__--

Message: 35
From: "Simon J. Harding" <[email-masked]>
To: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [lro] Kids and Rovers
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 12:27:35 -0700
Reply-To: [email-masked]

------ =_NextPart_000_01C11B4E.835A0B40
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

So long as they both roll in under their own power!!
Simon

but when you roll up at a show/event, you in your Land Rover and your son in
his... ain't nothing beats that!

------ =_NextPart_000_01C11B4E.835A0B40
Content-Type: application/ms-tnef
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64

------ =_NextPart_000_01C11B4E.835A0B40--

--__--__--

Message: 36
From: Easton Trevor A <[email-masked]>
To: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [lro] RE: Manifold pressure gauge
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 15:52:23 -0400 
Reply-To: [email-masked]

	Marin wrote 

>  the manifold pressure limit at takeoff 
> is about 42 in/hg.  This is a good ten or more inches above 
> the atmospheric pressure.  
	These gauges usually are referenced to atmosphere not6 absolute
pressures so this is 42" above atmosphere.

> .  A turbocharged engine, thanks to its waste gate, 
> can generate higher manifold pressures to higher altitudes than 
> a mechanically supercharged engine.
> 
	 The waste gate on the turbo serves to dump excess manifold pressure
to prevent the compressor being overloaded and slowing down. Without it
there would be excessive turbo lag on acceleration. It doesn't do anything
to help manifold pressure at high altitudes. Just that the exhaust pressure
differential across the turbo is increased at altitude and the centrifugal
compressor can pump more air because it is lighter loaded and free to spin
up regardless of engine speed whereas the supercharger is driven at some
proportion of engine speed.

--__--__--

Message: 37
From: "Sergi, Michael" <[email-masked]>
To: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [lro] RE: Manifold pressure gauge
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 15:56:28 -0400 
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Where is the connection made for the manifold gauge?

Mike

--__--__--

Message: 38
From: "Rolston" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] windshield protection not just for trees!
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 16:00:19 -0400
Reply-To: [email-masked]

If you have an overhanging roof rack, they are very good.  Keeps branches
from fetching up under the leading edge of the rack.  Be careful knocking
something you have not used.  Jim, CT

--__--__--

Message: 39
From: "Faure, Marin" <[email-masked]>
To: "'Land Rover Mail Group'" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 13:05:28 -0700 
Subject: [lro] Driving a Series
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Somebody wrote:

> Aren't we placing a lot of emphasis on rpm and engine stress here?  Even
with the 16" wheels and tall tires, my SWB doesn't seem very happy above 50-55
mph.  Drum brakes, square configuration (SWB), fairly high CG and solid
axles all seem to indicate a truck that was never really intended for interstate speeds.

You are correct.  The Series Land Rover was designed at a time when 60 mph was considered 
very fast for normal cars, although there were plenty around then that could go faster.  Roads were 
narrow, particularly in the UK and Europe, and the brake and suspension technology used on 
utility vehicles like the Land Rover were, by today's standards, pathetic.  However, they were fine 
for the way the designers anticipated the vehicles would be driven.  The Series was intended at the 
outset to be a utility vehicle like the Jeep.  As such, it didn't have to go fast or handle very well.  No 
one back then expected to climb into a utility 4wd and barrel down a motorway at 75 mph.

It has only been fairly recently that the 4wd image has changed.  With only a relative handful of 
owners ever venturing off pavement, the emphasis on 4wds has been placed almost totally 
on road handling, acceleration, and braking.  Even Land Rover admitted that almost all the 
improvements and changes they made to the Discovery SII were intended to improve the 
vehicle's pavement handling.

I bought my SIII in 1973, when I was living in Honolulu.  Back then, and perhaps still, road speeds 
were not nearly as fast as they are on the mainland.  I had no problems driving in traffic over there, 
as my self-mandated top speed of 55 mph was pretty much what everyone else was doing, too.  On the 
city and back roads, bumbling along at 35-40 mph was the norm for everyone, no matter what they were
driving.  And the drivers were pretty polite, which figures given the more laid back attitude you 
get in a tropical environment.  After moving to Seattle in 1979, I found much the same situation.  
True, people drove faster on the freeways, but I had no problems driving in all traffic conditions 
at the Land Rover's "normal" speeds, acceleration, and braking.

All this began to change in the mid- 1980s.  The "SUV" craze began to kick in big time, and road 
speeds began going up at the same time.  Drivers became more aggressive, preoccupied with their 
own needs and the hell with everyone else.  My Land Rover became more and more difficult to drive 
in traffic.  Forced to go faster, even on the surface streets, I tried to leave more room to the car in front 
to allow for the Series now-inadequate drum brakes, only to have impatient drivers zip into the gap.

I finally stopped using the Land Rover as a daily driver and bought a pickup, and later a BMW.  Today, 
driving a stock Series, at least in the Seattle area, is an exercise in defensive driving, all based 
on the total inadequacy of the vehicle for the current conditions.  Just pulling out onto a busy 
street can be frustrating, as the cars barrel toward you.  Knowing the acceleration of the Land 
Rover is measured in minutes, you have to wait for a long enough gap between vehicles to pull 
out and get up to speed.  On a busy street, this can take awhile.  Meanwhile, the impatient 
soccer moms in their 300 horsepower, single-occupancy Expeditions are lining up behind you.

If you want to go the route TeriAnn did and re-engine your Series and then add the brakes, steering, 
and suspension to cope with the added power and speed, you can end up with a vehicle much
more suited to today's "me first, you're irrelevant" driving environment.  But if you keep 
the vehicle stock, the
high center of gravity, "leaning suspension," sloppy steering, weak engine, and antique brake system 
all combine to make a vehicle pretty much totally unsuited for today's on-pavement driving conditions.  
Land Rover "did it with gearing" which is what you want in a utility vehicle that's supposed to negotiate 
horrible roads or pull things through fields.  For that, you don't need a lot of power, only a fair amount 
of torque and good gearing.  At this, the Series is excellent.  You don't need dual piston, self-adjusting, 
cross-drilled disk brakes because you're never going to go fast enough to need them.  A simple 
drum brake will work just fine.

Today, speed's the thing, no matter whether you're driving a BMW or a Ford Excursion.  In reality, 
the Land Rover, like the original Army Jeep, has become a classic car.  Had Land Rover stopped 
making them in the 1960s, that is how they would be regarded and driven today.  But since the line 
kept going, and evolved into the Defender, there's a tendency to view the Series in the same vein.  
A Defender can cruise all day at 70-80 mph with the brakes and handling to deal with this, so the 
Series should too, right?  After all, they're basically the same vehicle, right?  So people drive them 
this way, and then you get people wondering why they're only getting 15,000 miles between valve 
jobs, or why they have head gasket problems, or why they're burning pistons, or why their brake 
lining is shot after 12,000 miles, or why they're only getting 12 miles to the gallon.

Drive the thing like the designers meant it to be driven, and it will 
go 28 years needing little more than routine maintenance.  I think the Series Land Rover's 
design and construction basically sucks, but it's been the most reliable vehicle I've ever 
owned or driven in 53 years.
___________________________
C. Marin Faure
  (original owner)
  1973 Land Rover Series III-88
  1991 Range Rover Vogue SE
  Seattle

--__--__--

Message: 40
From: "Hope Peter" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] those thingys for posers
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 08:14:55 -1000
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I would also think that limb raisers would be a real inconvienance when you
wanted to do some work under the hood of the vehicle.
Pete

--__--__--

Message: 41
From: "Simon J. Harding" <[email-masked]>
To: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [lro] windshield protection not just for trees!
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 13:01:51 -0700
Reply-To: [email-masked]

------ =_NextPart_000_01C11B53.4C942FA0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Jim, if your post was directed to me, my apologies.  I stand corrected.  =
I don't have an overhanging roofrack so hadn't considered that.  =
Wouldn't ever have one, unless I was forced, as in if I had a Dormobile. =
Which I sometimes wish I did.  I've only seen the riser thingys in =
person (off the web) on shiny mall mobiles.  Still think they're =
unnescessary for most.
Simon

-----Original Message-----
From:	Rolston [SMTP:[email-masked]]
Sent:	Thursday, August 02, 2001 1:00 PM
To:	[email-masked]
Subject:	Re: [lro] windshield protection not just for trees!

If you have an overhanging roof rack, they are very good.  Keeps =
branches
from fetching up under the leading edge of the rack.  Be careful =
knocking
something you have not used.  Jim, CT

_______________________________________________
LRO mailing list
[email-masked]
http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

------ =_NextPart_000_01C11B53.4C942FA0
Content-Type: application/ms-tnef
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64

------ =_NextPart_000_01C11B53.4C942FA0--

--__--__--

Message: 42
From: "Rolston" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] windshield protection not just for trees!
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 16:34:06 -0400
Reply-To: [email-masked]

we have one on our '68 ambulance, helps get the weight forward, and allows
room for the Caranex tent to wrap around the back.  J

--__--__--

Message: 43
From: "Lee Jones" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [lro] Wise Owl
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 17:04:25 -0400
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I sent them a conformation for a spin on filter adapter two times and they
both bounced. I then called them and they were unaware of any problems
saying that they get "hundreds of emails daily".  Check their site as they
have a toll free number.

Lee

"There are two kinds of fool. One says, 'This is old, and therefore good.'
And one says, 'This is new, and therefore better.'"

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf
Of Kirk Hillman
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 2:35 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [lro] Wise Owl

I have been trying to reach Wise Owl by email with no luck.  Is there a
temporary problem that is bouncing my mail or something else?

Kirk

_______________________________________________
LRO mailing list
[email-masked]
http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

--__--__--

Message: 44
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 14:04:43 -0700
To: [email-masked]
From: "G. Mugele" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [lro] windshield protection not just for trees!
Reply-To: [email-masked]

At 1:01 PM -0700 8/2/01, Simon J. Harding wrote:
>  I've only seen the riser thingys in person (off the web) on shiny 
>mall mobiles.  Still think they're unnescessary for most.

I think that you oughta try driving in the Manzanita infested brushy 
area of Northern California.  Aside from the free pin-stripping 
you'll get you'll learn to appreciate any protection from that super 
hard wood shrubbery slamming back into your windshield.  With the 
hood mounted spare on the Series III I found it wise to put it inside 
in that brush.  In the D90 I've been grateful for the roll cage 
around the windshield.  I have not installed risers, not out of 
superiority to the poseurs but due to abject laziness and/or 
procrastination.  Well that and I think that it'd screw up the 
beautiful and graceful lines of my truck.

       _
     / o\_         Gerald Mugele
    /   )-- \       [email-masked]
   /    |            Glen Ellen, CA
*** "It's not on any map - true places never are."  -- Mark Twain 

--__--__--

Message: 45
From: "Alex Maiolo" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] those thingys
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 17:16:17 -0400
Reply-To: [email-masked]

What? And all this time I thought they were for drying beef jerky on the
trail....

mmmmm....beef....jerky.

Alex Maiolo
Chapel Hill NC

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jerrod" <[email-masked]>
To: "land rover list" <[email-masked]>
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 10:57 AM
Subject: [lro] those thingys

>
> Hello all!!  What are those cables that lead from the
> bull bar on the front to the roof rack on mostly
> expedition vehicles?  What are they used for?
>
> Sorry for the rookie question but 1 experience at a
> time will surely make me a pro.
>
> Peace,
> Jerrod
> '89RR
> redrover
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
> http://phonecard.yahoo.com/
> _______________________________________________
> LRO mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

--__--__--

Message: 46
Subject: Re: [lro] those thingys for posers
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 01 14:16:10 -0700
From: TeriAnn Wakeman <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]

>
>I would also think that limb raisers would be a real inconvienance when you
>wanted to do some work under the hood of the vehicle.

Nope.  Hardly at all.  But if I did I can undo them at the front in less 
than 30 sec ea.

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

--__--__--

Message: 47
Subject: RE: [lro] windshield protection not just for trees!
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 01 14:26:21 -0700
From: TeriAnn Wakeman <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]

>I don't have an overhanging roofrack so hadn't considered that. Wouldn't 
>ever have one, unless I was forced,

One advantage of an overhanging roof rack is that you can run the rack's 
front mounts to the hinge at the base of the windscreen.  The base of the 
windscreen is very stout.

Racks mounted at the front of the roof put pressure on the windscreen 
frame.  Now suppose you have a weighty load (which I recommend against) 
on that rack and are on a very bouncy trail.  The pressure on the 
windscreen frame is varying in sync with the suspension bounces.

More than one time this has caused windscreens to crack.  The bottom of 
the windscrren mounting prevents that.  It also allows you a defacto 
sun/rain visor and you can hang aux lighting from the underside of the 
rack in a well protected location.

Then it also gives you an extra foot and a half or so additional load 
space.

> Still think they're unnescessary for most.

Probably quite correct in that idea.

But they DO look cool at the mall!

8*)

TeriAnn Near Santa Cruz, California

My old car: 1960 Land Rover 109 owned since 1978
My new car: 1961 Triumph TR3A owned since 1986
  "Who could ask for anything more"

--__--__--

Message: 48
From: "Mike Rogers" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Kids and Rovers
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 22:17:57 +0100
Reply-To: [email-masked]

>
> of course Land Rovers are OK for the kid until he gets old enough to
borrow
> it...
Yes I know I am at that stage right now.

> then you end up buying him one to keep his hands off yours,
Hence the 110 project.

> then you have to pay to keep two going,
Hence the LPG part.

> then you end up working on it as well as your own...
Thats why its taking so long to finnish it.

> but when you roll up at a show/event, you in your Land Rover and your son
in
> his... ain't nothing beats that!
Realy looking forward to that bit :-)

Mike Rogers
Lightweight/Range Rover hybrid
LPG V8 110 project (thanks to Marijn)
(if you can't get there in a Land Rover you can't get there)

--__--__--

Message: 49
From: "Simon J. Harding" <[email-masked]>
To: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [lro] windshield protection not just for trees!
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 14:41:52 -0700
Reply-To: [email-masked]

------ =_NextPart_000_01C11B61.45836060
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I'll stick with willow, fir, hemlock and alder up here thanks.  And free =
pinstriping is a good thing.=20

 I guess my philosophy when it comes to 4 wheeling doesn't call for =
bulling through endless brush.  If it did, I guess I'd  get a cat and an =
army surplus Rome Plow.  If its so thick it threatens to yank the spare =
off the hood, I'd only continue if it was a short stretch or until I =
could stop and clear the way or find/make a spot to turn around.  Like =
to see what the tires and diffs are aimed at.  And at a proper speed and =
interval from the vehicle ahead, nothing of size should be slamming into =
the windshield.  Every year I drive an old logging road to a retired =
4300 foot elev. lookout as soon as the snow clears adequately.  I stop =
and move the large frost heaved rocks, cut out the blowdown and =
sometimes trim back the snow crushed brush.  I cut out or pull down =
partly down trees.  I could drive around them or bull past them, but =
I've noticed they have a tendency to stay there if I don't remove them =
and I have to deal with them coming back out, as a loop route is not =
possible to this particular spot.  Another stretch of logging road I =
drive at over 4500 feet in the cascades is partly through a clearcut =
logged in the late 60s or early 70s from the look of it.  the brush and =
trees are thick and encroach heavily on the road, but there is nothing =
requiring a limb guard.  Brush does drag the vehicle sides, so its not =
as if its a clear route.  The only route that has big enough stuff to =
damage a windshield is a road called the old jeep trail, last used maybe =
in the 50s, probably the 40s, and its so over grown limb risers would be =
no help.  They don't help you get over 4 -6 inch alders and firs growing =
up where your engine would pass -ie:  middle of the track.  and even if =
that route could be passed, it should not be passed as it represents the =
kind of wheeling that gives 4 wheelers a bad name.  On the map its still =
officially a road, but it should not be driven on. =20

I think they're unnecessary and may even cause a person to cause damage =
to their vehicle and the trail/environment by not being as careful as =
they otherwise might.

They're not for me, everyone has an opinion, etc, etc.  Nuff said.
Simon

-----Original Message-----
From:	G. Mugele [SMTP:[email-masked]]
Sent:	Thursday, August 02, 2001 2:05 PM
To:	[email-masked]
Subject:	RE: [lro] windshield protection not just for trees!

At 1:01 PM -0700 8/2/01, Simon J. Harding wrote:
>  I've only seen the riser thingys in person (off the web) on shiny=20
>mall mobiles.  Still think they're unnescessary for most.

I think that you oughta try driving in the Manzanita infested brushy=20
area of Northern California.  Aside from the free pin-stripping=20
you'll get you'll learn to appreciate any protection from that super=20
hard wood shrubbery slamming back into your windshield.  With the=20
hood mounted spare on the Series III I found it wise to put it inside=20
in that brush.  In the D90 I've been grateful for the roll cage=20
around the windshield.  I have not installed risers, not out of=20
superiority to the poseurs but due to abject laziness and/or=20
procrastination.  Well that and I think that it'd screw up the=20
beautiful and graceful lines of my truck.

       _
     / o\_         Gerald Mugele
    /   )-- \       [email-masked]
   /    |            Glen Ellen, CA
*** "It's not on any map - true places never are."  -- Mark Twain=20
_______________________________________________
LRO mailing list
[email-masked]
http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

------ =_NextPart_000_01C11B61.45836060
Content-Type: application/ms-tnef
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64

------ =_NextPart_000_01C11B61.45836060--

--__--__--

_______________________________________________
* Team.Net hosted courtesy of Amaranth Networks, Inc. http://Amaranth.com/ *
* Powered by SUN(r). The network is the computer.(tm) *
LRO mailing list
[email-masked]
http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

End of LRO Digest