Subject: LRO digest, Vol 1 #44 - 49 msgs

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 17:08:15 -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: Locking differential. What options? (Paul Oxley)
   2. RE: Kodiak heater (Easton Trevor A)
   3. RE: Kodiak heater (Alan Richer/CAM/Lotus)
   4. RE: Kodiak heater (Easton Trevor A)
   5. Re: Locking differential. What options? (Rolston)
   6. kodiak heater (Rob MacCormick)
   7. Re: Locking differential. What options? (Jim Hall)
   8. Re: Locking differential. What options? (Rob MacCormick)
   9. Re: Tune Up Results and Koenig Rebuild (Tim Thorpe)
  10. Re: Re: Tune Up Results and Koenig Rebuild (Alan Richer/CAM/Lotus)
  11. Re: RE: spray paint (John Karlsson)
  12. Re: Parabolics (KEITH ARMSTRONG)
  13. Re: Parabolics (RON WARD)
  14. Re: Kodiak heater (RON WARD)
  15. Re: Locking differential. What options? (Paul Oxley)
  16. Re: Locking differential. What options? (Paul Oxley)
  17. RE: Parabolics (Matt Peckham)
  18. Re: Kodiak heater (David Scheidt)
  19. Re: Parabolics (Jeff Berg)
  20. Re: Parabolics (Jeff Bieler)
  21. Re: Kodiak heater (Jeff Bieler)
  22. Re: Parabolics (Jeff Bieler)
  23. Another Engine Conversion question . . ([email-masked])
  24. RE: Re:SIIA gearbox and engine in my late S1 (Ford Stephen CFMETR FORN)
  25. Re: 2.25 Engine Conversion Options . . (Hope Peter)
  26. Re: Locking differential. What options? (TeriAnn Wakeman)
  27. Re: Back pressure, etc. Long (Hope Peter)
  28. Re: Re: engine tuning and Vacume question.- headers (Hope Peter)
  29. Re: Back pressure, etc. Long (Perrone Ford)
  30. Re: Locking differential. What options? (Hope Peter)
  31. Re: Locking differential. What options? (Rolston)
  32. Re: Locking differential. What options? (Rolston)
  33. rear dif leak (Jeff Bieler)
  34. Re: Parabolics (TeriAnn Wakeman)
  35. Re: Parabolics (Jeff Bieler)
  36. scotty's adapter ([email-masked])
  37. Re: Locking differential. What options? (TeriAnn Wakeman)
  38. Re: Parabolics (TeriAnn Wakeman)
  39. Re: rear dif leak (RON WARD)
  40. Re: rear dif leak (Jeff Bieler)
  41. Re: Another Engine Conversion question . . (William J. Rice)
  42. Re: Parabolics (Jeff Bieler)
  43. Re: Exhaust (was back pressure) (Faure, Marin)
  44. Re: SIIA gearbox in Series 1 (Martin Rothman)
  45. Re: Re: Exhaust (was back pressure) (Kirk Hillman)
  46. RE: Exhaust (was back pressure) (Faure, Marin)
  47. Re: Exhaust (was back pressure) (Tim Czajka)
  48. Re: Re: looking for little bits... (Frank Elson)
  49. Re: 200tdi fit? (Frank Elson)

--__--__--

Message: 1
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2001 10:36:01 +0200
From: Paul Oxley <[email-masked]>
Organization: AfricanAdrenalin Safaris
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Locking differential. What options?
Reply-To: [email-masked]

aaron wrote:
> 
> What options are there for locking diffs in a standard rover axle?

In back go for ARB hydraulic lockers, they're available for Rover diffs,
and don't break halfshafts like the Detroit Lockers (Detroit Lockers are
FTD). Up front ARBs are also best, but limited slip works too.
 
Regards

Paul Oxley
AfricanAdrenalin.com

--__--__--

Message: 2
From: Easton Trevor A <[email-masked]>
To: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [lro] Kodiak heater
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 06:44:49 -0400 
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> That being said, between the starter button and the hand throttle is a
> knob marked
> "Water      Fast      Slow" which turns left to right, but does not pull.
> What does that
> one do?
> 
> Jeff
> 
	[Easton Trevor A]  That must be the renowned "Sea Rover" knob
(Remember folks) used for selection of displacement or planing modes. 

--__--__--

Message: 3
Subject: RE: [lro] Kodiak heater
To: [email-masked]
From: "Alan Richer/CAM/Lotus" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 07:11:45 -0400
Reply-To: [email-masked]

           [Easton Trevor A]  That must be the renowned "Sea Rover" knob
(Remember folks) used for selection of displacement or planing modes.

Yup - leftover from the conversion. It controlled the hydraulics for the
trim tabs.

Now it's probably been converted to something mundane like the water flow
from the Kodiak's heater valve.

Re: Kodiak heaters: If it doesn't run you out of the cab when it's on it's
not working right. They are progidous producers of heat if set up properly.

The water valves in these have a tendency to slip - it's a plastic spool
with a pressed metal shaft in it, and sometimes the spools partially jam
and the shaft still turns. If you're getting lukewarm performance out of a
Kodiak my first guess would be to check the water valve by taking the valve
out of the heater circuit.

Next, if you don't have the right ther,mostat in the engine (unskirted
generic American thermostat) then the heater doesn't work right. Generic
thermostats don't restrict the water flow properly in the secondary circuit
and can cause heat problens in the engine as welll as cause the heater not
to work right.

                    ajr

--__--__--

Message: 4
From: Easton Trevor A <[email-masked]>
To: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [lro] Kodiak heater
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 07:21:25 -0400 
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> Now it's probably been converted to something mundane like the water flow
> from the Kodiak's heater valve.
> 
> 
> The water valves in these have a tendency to slip - it's a plastic spool
> with a pressed metal shaft in it, and sometimes the spools partially jam
> and the shaft still turns. If you're getting lukewarm performance out of a
> Kodiak my first guess would be to check the water valve by taking the
> valve
> out of the heater circuit.
> 
	[Easton Trevor A]  I  found a good replacement for the water valve
on a 1984 VW Golf. The water control is an nice plastic in line globe valve
with a cable operator. Removes the need to have a valve that is threaded
into the head. Just screw a barbed union instead and put the valve in the
heater hose where it is most convenient. The action is smooth and throttling
the water flow so you don't become too hot is easy. 

--__--__--

Message: 5
From: "Rolston" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Locking differential. What options?
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 07:31:41 -0400
Reply-To: [email-masked]

How about suggestions for a Salisbury rear axle?  Just installed one on our
'68 ambulance/camper.....at 6400lbs fully loaded for a months camping,
figured we needed it. Wonder if anyone makes parabolics that coudl deal with
that weight?  Jim

--__--__--

Message: 6
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2001 07:47:07 -0400
From: Rob MacCormick <[email-masked]>
Organization: Boston College
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [lro] kodiak heater
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I don't know the first thing about kodiak heaters but If the fan is centrifugal
and is wired wrong it could be running backward which would decrease (but not
reverse) performance...
Rob M

Kirk Hillman wrote:

>     Who knows what the stock Kodiak installation looked like?  I have a hand
> throttle and numerous extra gauges on my LHD 88".  As such a previous owner
> mounted the plate holding the three controls horizontally on the right side
> of the hand throttle.  Is there a parts book or something that I could
> see/get that has pictures of this as it came of the factory floor?
>     My Kodiak has never worked very well from my point of view.  Maybe it is
> because I live in Alberta, Canada and we do occasionally get down to -40C.
> I don't think it produces much heat or moves it very well either.  Maybe
> something is plugged in the heater core?  And the fan is running at half
> speed?  ; )
>
> Kirk
> _______________________________________________
> LRO mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

--__--__--

Message: 7
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2001 05:55:50 -0600
From: "Jim Hall" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Locking differential. What options?
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I would strongly suggest upgraded halfshafts if you are getting a
locker.
KAM and LockRites are also available for a standard axle, as well as a
Great Basin manual locker.

Paul Oxley wrote:
> 
> aaron wrote:
> >
> > What options are there for locking diffs in a standard rover axle?
> 
> In back go for ARB hydraulic lockers, they're available for Rover diffs,
> and don't break halfshafts like the Detroit Lockers (Detroit Lockers are
> FTD). Up front ARBs are also best, but limited slip works too.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Paul Oxley
> AfricanAdrenalin.com
> _______________________________________________
> LRO mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

-- 
Jim Hall
1966 88" Elephant Chaser
http://www.users.qwest.net/~jimfoo
"You know, I never really damaged my Rover 'till I started wheeling 
with Jim." Mitch Stockdale

--__--__--

Message: 8
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2001 08:16:05 -0400
From: Rob MacCormick <[email-masked]>
Organization: Boston College
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Locking differential. What options?
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Hi Jim,
For diffs. British pacific sells an ARB air locker kit for the salisbury rear.
Its a long shot but it may be a solution should the carrier in my diff not be
worthy of re-use....Currently beyond my needs and means...Rob M

Rolston wrote:

> How about suggestions for a Salisbury rear axle?  Just installed one on our
> '68 ambulance/camper.....at 6400lbs fully loaded for a months camping,
> figured we needed it. Wonder if anyone makes parabolics that coudl deal with
> that weight?  Jim
> _______________________________________________
> LRO mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

--__--__--

Message: 9
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 13:14:58 +0100 (BST)
From: Tim Thorpe <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [lro] Re: Tune Up Results and Koenig Rebuild
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Peter wrote:

>            Holding a steady 2500rpm
> the timing floats +/- 5 degrees.  Does this seem right?  Or should I track
> down some springs and rebuild the mechanical advance?

If you take the arm off and try firmly to wiggle the shaft
from side to side, can you feel much play? I forget the figures,
but I found that a very small sideways deflection makes a large
difference in the angle at which the points open. If the dizzy
bearings are worn, either a new dizzy and/or optical electronic
ignition should solve this.

I've seen descriptions of replacing the bearing sleeve in
old Lucas distributors. I'd love to do that (I'm a fan of
make-do and mend) but I think it unlikely that replacement
sleeves are available.

Tim.
------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Thorpe	                        Tel: +44 1223 240366 
[email-masked]                  Fax: +44 1223 414402
------------------------------------------------------------

--__--__--

Message: 10
Subject: Re: [lro] Re: Tune Up Results and Koenig Rebuild
To: [email-masked]
From: "Alan Richer/CAM/Lotus" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 08:28:58 -0400
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I've seen descriptions of replacing the bearing sleeve in
old Lucas distributors. I'd love to do that (I'm a fan of
make-do and mend) but I think it unlikely that replacement
sleeves are available.

Tim.

They are - though I'd be very surprised if a good generic Oilite bushing
couldn't be installed in there with good results. Bronze bushings are easy
to get and even easier to make...8*)

                         ajr

--__--__--

Message: 11
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2001 08:40:05 -0400
To: [email-masked]
From: John Karlsson <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] RE: spray paint
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I use Krylon Rust Tough Enamel, RTA 9207 Almond.

> >Anyone out there remember the spray bomb paint that most nearly approximates
> >Limestone?  I've got a few things to paint and want to get the paint at the
> >hardware store.
>
>Jim & Jeanne Wolf
>Elvenwood Kennel
>   at Tighe na Ulbhaidh
>450 Mount Vernon Ave
>Portsmouth, VA, 23707 USA
>757-397-2428
>[email-masked]
>http://www.elvenwood.com
>_______________________________________________
>LRO mailing list
>[email-masked]
>http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

John Karlsson
956 Main Street
P.O. Box 1023
Hope Valley, RI  02832

--__--__--

Message: 12
From: "KEITH ARMSTRONG" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 07:52:08 -0500
Subject: [lro] Re: Parabolics
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Just to beat this topic a little more :-)

I bought my springs from Ray @ Wise Owl some two years ago now.  On my hard
top, ex-MoD 109 with usually nothing in the back, but sometimes a full load
of wood, the three leaves seem to do a fine job although I'm sure they limit
articulation somewhat.

Keith Armstrong
Des Moines, Iowa

--__--__--

Message: 13
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2001 08:57:07 -0400
From: "RON WARD" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Parabolics
Reply-To: [email-masked]

What an awesome looking rig!  Jeff, all those keys hanging off that ignition will cause it too fail.  Too much weight.

Ron

>>> [email-masked] 08/08/01 06:26PM >>>

Mine looks similar.  In my picture, the air control knob is the silver one to the
right of the wheel.  The water control valve is just below it, but it's too dark
too see.  The fan switch is immediately to the right of the speednometer.

Also, the unit in the passenger foot well looks a bit different.  Mine appears
more square/box like.  Your's appears angular.

<http://home.earthlink.net/~mrbieler/_uimages/rightinterior.jpg>

Jeff

Keith Tanner wrote:

> You can see my controls in this photo - they're the three knobs directly to
> the right of the steering wheel. Air, Fan, Water.
> http://keith.miata.net/landy/images/at_home_5.jpg 
>
> Keith
>
> At 17:16 08-08-01, you wrote:
>
> >Kodiak owners,
> >     I suspect my Kodiak controls are not standard.  I don't even have a flap
> >in the box inside the cab.  Would any of you be able to post or email me
> >pictures of what your set-up looks like?
> >
> >Kirk
> >_______________________________________________
> >LRO mailing list
> >[email-masked] 
> >http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro 
>
> ------------
> Keith's page de home:
>     http://keith.miata.net 
> ------------
> _______________________________________________
> LRO mailing list
> [email-masked] 
> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro 
_______________________________________________
LRO mailing list
[email-masked] 
http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

--__--__--

Message: 14
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2001 09:01:42 -0400
From: "RON WARD" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Kodiak heater
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Oh God, you didn't turn that one did you?  Run, get your child and wife and run far far away!!!!!!!

It is disconnected.  Used to control the water like the push pull lever.  I s'pose it was more convenient to have it up near the driver's hands.

Cheers!

>>> [email-masked] 08/08/01 10:04PM >>>

Ok Ron, now I am confused.

The unmarked black pull knob under the "Air Control" knob next to the wheel appears to be
the water control vavle.  When I pulled it, the heater worked.

That being said, between the starter button and the hand throttle is a knob marked
"Water      Fast      Slow" which turns left to right, but does not pull.  What does that
one do?

Jeff

RON WARD wrote:

> Hey, Don't blame me for your ignorance!  ;>
>
> The following description is for the truck I just sold to Jeff.  If may differ
> from any some other particular setup.
>
> There are two knobs in the panel just to the left of the "safety gauge" and to
> the right of the steering wheel.  The top push lever controls the air.  The
> bottom, the hot water.  Now, with the top lever pushed in the air to the
> blower on the engine side of the bulkhead is cut off.  Pull the top lever out
> and the valve opens and fresh air from the front of the truck can feed the
> blower and be pushed passed the heater core through my nifty Maytag dryer hose
> setup.
>
> With the bottom lever pushed in, the valve in the heater hose is closed and
> hot water from the engine is not allowed to flow freely to the heater core.
> If the blower motor is turned on at the dash and the air valve is open and the
> water valve is closed you won't feel much heat.  Open the water valve by
> pulling out the lower knob and open the air valve by pulling out the top lever
> and hit the fan switch and you are warming the cabin.  Here's the good part.
> At speed, you can turn off the blower motor and use ram air to heat the
> cabin.
>
> It works great in the winters we get here in Georgia and should be fine for
> yours out west.
>
> Cheers!
>
> >>> [email-masked] 08/08/01 03:56PM >>>
>
> Water valve on the dash?  OK.  I give.  Which one is that?  I know where the
> fan switch is and I know the air control knob.  What am I missing now?
>
> This is fun, busting your chops over your old truck.... ; - )
>
> Jeff
>
> RON WARD wrote:
>
> > What do you mean "get the Kodiak working"?  Open the water valve on the
> dash, open the air valve, and hit the fan switch and you'll have more heat
> that you can stand?
> >
> > >>> [email-masked] 08/08/01 01:44PM >>>
> >
> > Nah.  Please pass on the hard top to a nice home.  All I need to do is get
> the Kodiak working before what passes for winter around here.
> >
> > Jeff
> >
> > RON WARD wrote:
> >
> > > Sounds like yours will be used for around town and some varied off-roading
> so you should be ok with the 2 leaf.  If you ever want the hard top sitting
> out back of my carriage house, get the 3 leaf.
> > >
> > > >>> [email-masked] 08/08/01 12:29PM >>>
> > >
> > > Old Man Emu.  I have a good deal on them here.
> > >
> > > Ray at Rocky Mountain was pretty confident that the 2leaf was the way to
> go for me, but I wanted to
> > > here from owners as well.
> > >
> > > Jeff
> > >
> > > RON WARD wrote:
> > >
> > > > Jeff, you want the RM 2 leafers in the rear with the soft top.  What
> shocks are you going to put on?
> > > >
> > > > >>> [email-masked] 08/08/01 10:53AM >>>
> > > >
> > > > It seems that the call for the 3 leaf pack is coming mostly from guys
> with the
> > > > hard top.
> > > >
> > > > I have a soft top and don't plan to change.  With that in mind, is a 2
> leaf
> > > > setup the way for me to go?
> > > >
> > > > Jeff
> > > >
> > > > N Forbes wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Frank, the Red Zit has three leaf rears and they work well. YOu want
> to have
> > > > > some gear in the back though. Two leaf rears give a really nice ride
> but I
> > > > > think they may be more succeptable to sagging.
> > > > >
> > > > > Niall Forbes
> > > > > 66 IIa 88SW - The Red Zit
> > > > > Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
> > > > > The Nova Scotian Rover - http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/forbes/intro.htm 
> > > > >
> > > > > "See the happy moron,
> > > > > He doesn't give a damn.
> > > > > I wish I were a moron.
> > > > > My God! Perhaps I am!"
> > > > > --author unknown
> > > > >
> > > > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
> http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp 
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > LRO mailing list
> > > > > [email-masked] 
> > > > > http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro 
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > LRO mailing list
> > > > [email-masked] 
> > > > http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro 
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > LRO mailing list
> > > > [email-masked] 
> > > > http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > LRO mailing list
> > > [email-masked] 
> > > http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > LRO mailing list
> > > [email-masked] 
> > > http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro 
> > _______________________________________________
> > LRO mailing list
> > [email-masked] 
> > http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro 
> > _______________________________________________
> > LRO mailing list
> > [email-masked] 
> > http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro 
> _______________________________________________
> LRO mailing list
> [email-masked] 
> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro 
>
> [demime 0.98b removed an attachment of type image/jpeg which had a name of bulkhead.jpg]
> _______________________________________________
> LRO mailing list
> [email-masked] 
> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro 
_______________________________________________
LRO mailing list
[email-masked] 
http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

--__--__--

Message: 15
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2001 15:19:58 +0200
From: Paul Oxley <[email-masked]>
Organization: AfricanAdrenalin Safaris
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Locking differential. What options?
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Rolston wrote:
> 
> How about suggestions for a Salisbury rear axle? 

The trouble with Salisbury's is you lose about an inch of ground
clearance and gain mass as well as additional rolling resistance through
the heavier components (equates to about 5% more fuel and 5% off the
topend).

I am building a hybrid rear diff for my S3 88" at the moment that
consists of a S2b long halfshaft (24 spline both ends), 24 spline spider
gears, and a S3 109" short halfshaft (24 spline both ends). Gives me the
best of both worlds, minimal weight gain, 24 splines and no sacrifice in
the ground clerance dept.

Regards

Paul Oxley
AfricanAdrenalin.com

--__--__--

Message: 16
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2001 15:26:44 +0200
From: Paul Oxley <[email-masked]>
Organization: AfricanAdrenalin Safaris
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Locking differential. What options?
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Jim Hall wrote:
 
> I would strongly suggest upgraded halfshafts if you are getting a
> locker.
> KAM and LockRites are also available for a standard axle, as well as a
> Great Basin manual locker.

I'm not sure about KAM and LockRite, but Detroit Lockers trash special
high strength halfshafts just as easily as ordinary ones - BTDTGTP (Bin
There Dun That Got The Pikshas
http://braaigrid.org.za/..\..\liuwanumber2\images\full\MVC-361S.jpg).
 
Regards

Paul Oxley
AfricanAdrenalin.com

--__--__--

Message: 17
From: Matt Peckham <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [lro] Parabolics
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 09:38:16 -0400 
Reply-To: [email-masked]

ok, Jeff... who's pulling who here?

http://home.earthlink.net/~mrbieler/_uimages/tug.jpg

and Jeff, that Oil of Olay has really been working, glad to hear it.

http://home.earthlink.net/~mrbieler/_uimages/roverdriver.jpg

Matt

--__--__--

Message: 18
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2001 21:09:59 -0500 (CDT)
From: David Scheidt <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Kodiak heater
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Wed, 8 Aug 2001, Jeff Bieler wrote:

:
:Ok Ron, now I am confused.
:
:The unmarked black pull knob under the "Air Control" knob next to the wheel appears to be
:the water control vavle.  When I pulled it, the heater worked.
:
:That being said, between the starter button and the hand throttle is a knob marked
:"Water      Fast      Slow" which turns left to right, but does not pull.  What does that
:one do?
:

It turns the propellors on, of course.

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

--__--__--

Message: 19
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 10:04:01 -0400
To: [email-masked]
From: Jeff Berg <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Parabolics
Reply-To: [email-masked]

>Old Man Emu.  I have a good deal on them here.
>
>Ray at Rocky Mountain was pretty confident that the 2leaf was the 
>way to go for me, but I wanted to
>here from owners as well.

He said the same thing to me--but I don't think he took me seriously 
regarding the tool box, recovery gear and spares.  I stick with the 
notion that if you plan on loading the back on an 88, you'll want the 
heavier springs.

Russ--no need for a diet here, I'm still doing my time in the gym. 
What I need is to stop hauling so much crap around with me. However, 
as I'm now running a hard top during the winter, the move to heavier 
duty springs will occur one of these days.

My shocks are the Pro Comps that Ray sells. No complaints so far.

jeff
-- 
==                                                                   
  Jeffrey A. Berg     Purple Shark Media        Rowayton, CT        
                     [email-masked]
                      ==================
	My garden is full of papayas and mangos.
	My dance card is filled with merengues and tangos.
	Taste for the good life, 
	I can see it no other way.
		--Jimmy Buffett, Lone Palm (live version)

--__--__--

Message: 20
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2001 07:04:30 -0700
From: Jeff Bieler <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Parabolics
Reply-To: [email-masked]

That's me pulling Steve (from SCCX) out of a ditch that he had just
pulled me out of.  We were trying to see who could cross it, but the
drop was too steep.  Unfortunately, we both still had stock front air
dams at the time (our truck was about 4 days old).  Now that I've cut
the front facia and Steve has an ARB front bumper, we both can clear
it.  I still had on stock tires too that were pretty much racing slicks
from 40k miles of wear.    I think Steve has a pic of that scene in
reverse (my truck being the one recovered).

As for the Oil of Olay, as you can see, it has not helped my hair line.
The height isn't that much different either...

Jeff

Matt Peckham wrote:

> ok, Jeff... who's pulling who here?
>
> http://home.earthlink.net/~mrbieler/_uimages/tug.jpg
>
> and Jeff, that Oil of Olay has really been working, glad to hear it.
>
> http://home.earthlink.net/~mrbieler/_uimages/roverdriver.jpg
>
> Matt
> _______________________________________________
> LRO mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

--__--__--

Message: 21
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2001 07:13:02 -0700
From: Jeff Bieler <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Kodiak heater
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Go Go Gadget Rover?

David Scheidt wrote:

> On Wed, 8 Aug 2001, Jeff Bieler wrote:
>
> :
> :Ok Ron, now I am confused.
> :
> :The unmarked black pull knob under the "Air Control" knob next to the wheel appears to be
> :the water control vavle.  When I pulled it, the heater worked.
> :
> :That being said, between the starter button and the hand throttle is a knob marked
> :"Water      Fast      Slow" which turns left to right, but does not pull.  What does that
> :one do?
> :
>
> It turns the propellors on, of course.
>
> --
> [email-masked]
> Bipedalism is only a fad.
> _______________________________________________
> LRO mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

--__--__--

Message: 22
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2001 07:29:24 -0700
From: Jeff Bieler <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Parabolics
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I think most of the black blob you see there with the keys is the hand throttle knob.  Aside from two extra keys, there
is only a bottle opener on there and a black nylon lanyard.  I'll keep that in mind though.  I try to limit the weight on
my ignition key sets for any car/truck I've owned.

Jeff

RON WARD wrote:

> What an awesome looking rig!  Jeff, all those keys hanging off that ignition will cause it too fail.  Too much weight.
>
> Ron
>
> >>> [email-masked] 08/08/01 06:26PM >>>
>
> Mine looks similar.  In my picture, the air control knob is the silver one to the
> right of the wheel.  The water control valve is just below it, but it's too dark
> too see.  The fan switch is immediately to the right of the speednometer.
>
> Also, the unit in the passenger foot well looks a bit different.  Mine appears
> more square/box like.  Your's appears angular.
>
> <http://home.earthlink.net/~mrbieler/_uimages/rightinterior.jpg>
>
> Jeff
>
> Keith Tanner wrote:
>
> > You can see my controls in this photo - they're the three knobs directly to
> > the right of the steering wheel. Air, Fan, Water.
> > http://keith.miata.net/landy/images/at_home_5.jpg
> >
> > Keith
> >
> > At 17:16 08-08-01, you wrote:
> >
> > >Kodiak owners,
> > >     I suspect my Kodiak controls are not standard.  I don't even have a flap
> > >in the box inside the cab.  Would any of you be able to post or email me
> > >pictures of what your set-up looks like?
> > >
> > >Kirk
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >LRO mailing list
> > >[email-masked]
> > >http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro
> >
> > ------------
> > Keith's page de home:
> >     http://keith.miata.net
> > ------------
> > _______________________________________________
> > LRO mailing list
> > [email-masked]
> > http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro
> _______________________________________________
> LRO mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro
> _______________________________________________
> LRO mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

--__--__--

Message: 23
From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 11:02:19 EDT
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [lro] Another Engine Conversion question . .
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On the GM engines what rerouting needs to happen? Fuel lines and Carb. 
linkage are a concern.
thanks
Scott

--__--__--

Message: 24
From: "Ford Stephen CFMETR FORN" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [lro] Re:SIIA gearbox and engine in my late S1
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 08:10:58 -0700
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Richard,
Thanks for the input.  I agree that a mechanical clutch linkage is probably
preferable. I'm not sure about the Australian S1's, but mine is definitely a
1958, and definitely has the pedals thru the floor.  To further complicate
things, the S1 engine and SIIA engine have different flywheel bolt patterns,
so I can't just use my S1 gearbox.  And from what I've learned on this list,
the bellhousing bearings and S1 main shaft are different from the SIIA, so a
simple bellhousing swap is not on, without changing a lot of the S1 gearbox
internals.

Another problem you're probably familiar with, is the narrowness of the S1
bulkhead, which precludes mounting both the brake and clutch boxes side by
side on the bulkhead without interfering with the steering box, although if
it comes to it, I probably have the room to mount the clutch pedal box only,
after cutting a suitable hole in the bulkhead (shudder!!). 

So I guess the simple answer is, there is no simple answer.  Anyway, glad to
hear you were successful, I'll blunder on, and get there one way or another.

Stephen
Nanaimo, B.C.

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked]
[mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2001 8:14 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [lro] Re:SIIA gearbox and engine in my late S1

Sephen,

I fitted a series II gearbox (and engine) to my series I,
If yours really is a1958 model it should have the pedals (clutch and brake)
mounted on the firewall and as such just changing over to the hydralic
process
from a later series vehicle should be a bolt in job

If your pedals are through the floor it is probably an earlier Series I,
check
the wheelbase, should be 80 inches not 88.

If yours raelly was an 88 inch series one, the bell bousing and clutch
actuator
from the old set-up, I believe, should be able to be swapped for the one
attached to your new engine.

Personally my preference is for the mechanical actuation, as long as the
sleve
on the shaft is fine and the pins not worn or broken, there is nothing much
to
go wrong, the occasional adjustment is not hard to do once you have done it
once
or twice.  My preference has always been to, as far as possible, to swap
components rather than modify existing ones too much - it makes it much
easier
to fix later when something brakes, you just get another one from the spares
shed, rather than have to go through the challenge of trying to manufacture
something again

Of course all my experience is RHD orientated, so some aspects of your query
I
have no experience with.

Hope this helps, if I can provide further info. please email again (I'm on
digest so it might take me a while to get back to you unless you email
direct)

Richard C

I'm getting ready to install my SIIA gearbox and engine in my late S1 (1958
LHD 88"), and I need to address the clutch actuation issue. The S1
mechanically actuates the clutch withdrawal unit (from the LHS) while the
SIIA is a hydraulically actuated unit (from the RHS). I need to decide
whether to go mechanical or hydraulic, and how to go about it,  so input
from anyone who's done it would be appreciated.

For those not familiar with Series 1's, the pedals go through the floor, so
going hydraulic would probably involve cutting a hole in the bulkhead and
installing an SIIA pedal assembly on the engine side of the bulkhead.
Does anyone know if the S1 clutch withdrawal unit will bolt into and work in
the SIIA bellhousing?  If it does, I would consider cutting a hole in the
LHS of the bellhousing to use the S1 mechanical approach.

Sephen,

I fitted a series II gearbox (and engine) to my series I,

If yours really is a1958
_______________________________________________
LRO mailing list
[email-masked]
http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

--__--__--

Message: 25
From: "Hope Peter" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] 2.25 Engine Conversion Options . .
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 05:05:24 -1000
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> Oooooooo......I can't wait to hear from someone who has installed an
NV4500
> that to me always sounded like a great tranny
>

Maybe Lonn will speak up.  If not you can take a look at his conversion at
http://users.owt.com/hoops/V8_conversion.html
Pete

--__--__--

Message: 26
Subject: Re: [lro] Locking differential. What options?
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 01 08:18:43 -0700
From: TeriAnn Wakeman <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]

>How about suggestions for a Salisbury rear axle? 

That's the easy one.  A Salisbury is known in America as a Dana 60 and is 
a very popular truck/heavy duty SUV diff.  Your local 4X4 place will have 
a range of options including polished aluminum finned diff covers.  I had 
an ARB air locker installed in mine at the beginning of the year.

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: 27
From: "Hope Peter" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Back pressure, etc. Long
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 05:33:50 -1000
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> computer and we can see what the exhaust changes will do to it.  Maybe
I'll
> order my software tomorrow.
>
> -P
Software???? What software???
Pete

--__--__--

Message: 28
From: "Hope Peter" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Re: engine tuning and Vacume question.- headers
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 05:32:52 -1000
Reply-To: [email-masked]

My head with cam flows at 145cfm
Carb and intake are 191cfm.
I have a 2" diameter exhaust sytem.

Should the head and carb be more evenly matched, or as long as the carb is
'bigger' then the head your good?
Anyway to judge the pipe diameter based upon intake cfm?

I have an 8:1 head but compression is only ~140 in all 4.  I know that A
lower end rebuild is in my future so am not going to do anything that
requires a lot of coin until that time.  I know that big tires have changed
my effective gearing, but have no complaints of how she handles her self off
raod.  I also know that something just isn't right.
The last bit of throttle opening doesn't make any difference.  It's the last
inch of pedal travel, and seems to be about 15-20% of the throttle plate
movememnt.
I am really thinking that the springs and mechanical advance of my dizzy is
shot (plus it's the only original part left)
Before these changes I was running a Weber 1bbl and everything else was
stock 1970.  Had a real hesitation of idle problem and she could just barely
hold 40mph on my test hill.  Most of the hestitation is gone.  It no longer
stalls when mashing the accelorater from an idle.  She has hit 49mph on my
hill.  This is on the interstate, a 55mph zone, so everyone is doing 65.  I
have had no problem doing 65 in the 2.5l jeep.  I am not expecting race
horse performance from a 40 someodd year old designed plow horse.  Again, I
can tell that it just isn't 'right'.

I have loved all of the discussion that has arrissen from my original post.
No flames like other subjects seem to invoke.  I have been learning a lot.
And I  have made some nice improvements.  Idles real smooth.  Can take off
from a traffic light with out it stalling.  It can climb the hill to work
(35mph) like a champ.  Big difference.
Thanks for all the help so far,
Pete

--__--__--

Message: 29
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2001 11:42:25 -0400
From: Perrone Ford <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Back pressure, etc. Long
Reply-To: [email-masked]

My new engine computer modeling software.. thanks for reminding me.

-P

Hope Peter wrote:

>> computer and we can see what the exhaust changes will do to it.  Maybe
> 
> I'll
> 
>> order my software tomorrow.
>> 
>> -P
> 
> Software???? What software???
> Pete

--__--__--

Message: 30
From: "Hope Peter" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Locking differential. What options?
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 05:39:18 -1000
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I have been told that since the salisbury is a dana 60, any locker built for
the D-60 that has the right spline count will work.
Pete

--__--__--

Message: 31
From: "Rolston" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Locking differential. What options?
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 11:58:52 -0400
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Paul, we countered that some buy going up to 255-85's for tires, gained most
of the inch back.  And it look like at least the Salisbury axle casting is
massive enough that scraping a few high spots shouldn't do too much damage.
Jim

--__--__--

Message: 32
From: "Rolston" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Locking differential. What options?
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 12:00:09 -0400
Reply-To: [email-masked]

So how do you like it?   jim

--__--__--

Message: 33
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2001 08:58:13 -0700
From: Jeff Bieler <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [lro] rear dif leak
Reply-To: [email-masked]

 On the rear dif cover, below the fill/check hole and above and to the left of
the drain plug (looking from the front to the rear of the truck) there appears
to be a circular "plug" in my dif between two of the mounting bolts.  This
"plug" can be moved with a little finger pressure.  It also appears to be the
source of my persistant leak.

Any ideas what the plug is?  I can't find any clue to it's purpose in any of my
manuals or parts books.  Figure E1-5 of the Green Bible shows a pic of the
housing and the plug in question is visible, but I can't find any reference to
it at all.

Jeff

--__--__--

Message: 34
Subject: Re: [lro] Parabolics
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 01 09:07:46 -0700
From: TeriAnn Wakeman <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]

>As for the Oil of Olay, as you can see, it has not helped my hair line.
>The height isn't that much different either...

Where oil of Olay really works is if you apply it very soon after 
bathing.  The bath hydrates your skin and the oil of Olay seals the 
moisture in.  This keeps your skin from drying out during the day.  And 
as the commercial says this allows you to retain younger healthier 
looking skin.

Been using it for lots of years and no one comes close to guessing my 
real age.  Of course they could also all be just polite gentlmen.

As far as parabolics go I'm still unconvenced.  They allow a lot more 
side sway which means the dynamic centre of balance is a lot more dynamic 
and it would be easier to find it swinging outside the car on a side 
slope bump.

I still think the best way to go is to choose the correct leaf springs 
based upon the total weight and weight distribution of your LR then add 
sheets of dense plastic inbetween the leaves to eliminate most of the 
leaf to leaf friction.  You get a lot of the dampening affect of 
parabolics without the increased side to side sway.

TeriAnn & O'Malley (Born Feb 2001)

  http://www.cruzers.com/~twakeman/Dogs/Omalley.htm

--__--__--

Message: 35
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2001 09:18:08 -0700
From: Jeff Bieler <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Parabolics
Reply-To: [email-masked]

But that won't help the need for the phone book to see over the dash or the
wood blocks to reach the pedals....

TeriAnn, that is one big dog!

Jeff

TeriAnn Wakeman wrote:

> >As for the Oil of Olay, as you can see, it has not helped my hair line.
> >The height isn't that much different either...
>
> Where oil of Olay really works is if you apply it very soon after
> bathing.  The bath hydrates your skin and the oil of Olay seals the
> moisture in.  This keeps your skin from drying out during the day.  And
> as the commercial says this allows you to retain younger healthier
> looking skin.
>
> Been using it for lots of years and no one comes close to guessing my
> real age.  Of course they could also all be just polite gentlmen.
>
> As far as parabolics go I'm still unconvenced.  They allow a lot more
> side sway which means the dynamic centre of balance is a lot more dynamic
> and it would be easier to find it swinging outside the car on a side
> slope bump.
>
> I still think the best way to go is to choose the correct leaf springs
> based upon the total weight and weight distribution of your LR then add
> sheets of dense plastic inbetween the leaves to eliminate most of the
> leaf to leaf friction.  You get a lot of the dampening affect of
> parabolics without the increased side to side sway.
>
> TeriAnn & O'Malley (Born Feb 2001)
>
>   http://www.cruzers.com/~twakeman/Dogs/Omalley.htm
> _______________________________________________
> LRO mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

--__--__--

Message: 36
From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 12:25:27 EDT
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [lro] scotty's adapter
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Anyone out there with the Scotty's Adapter and bushing that's willing to part 
with it.  Or anyone know the location to buy one?  I'm looking to first, find 
all the parts/info necessary before commiting to either conversion.  (Td or 
Iron Duke)

Matt

--__--__--

Message: 37
Subject: Re: [lro] Locking differential. What options?
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 01 09:36:56 -0700
From: TeriAnn Wakeman <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]

>Paul, we countered that some buy going up to 255-85's for tires, gained most
>of the inch back.  And it look like at least the Salisbury axle casting is
>massive enough that scraping a few high spots shouldn't do too much damage.

And of course the extra beefyness serves to lower the centre of gravity 
and counters the weight of the engine up front, moving the front to rear 
balance a little more to the rear.

So yeh, the rear end drags a little where it didn't before but it just 
slides over the obstical.  Next set of tyres may well be 33s with the 
wheels modified  to move the rims about 3/4 inch outward (which should 
retain inboard wing clearence, keep the centre of gravity from rising 
with the taller tyre and decrease RPM for a given  vehicle speed by about 
100 RPM).

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: 38
Subject: Re: [lro] Parabolics
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 01 09:50:32 -0700
From: TeriAnn Wakeman <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]

>But that won't help the need for the phone book to see over the dash or the
>wood blocks to reach the pedals....

On a series rig?????  Normally the problem is the other way around.

The alternative of course is fitting one of the smaller model airplane 
engines to a Corgi

>TeriAnn, that is one big dog!

No.  O'Malley is just a baby.   He will be six months old tommorrow and 
only stands 31 inches at the shoulder.  I still have to bend over to pet 
him.  For those of you who knew Lacy, she was 34 inches at the shoulder.  
I expect O'Mally to be around 37 inches when all is said & done.

I don't travel with two dogs because a pair would be a very tight fit in 
a 109.

TeriAnn & O'Malley (Born Feb 2001)

  http://www.cruzers.com/~twakeman/Dogs/Omalley.htm

--__--__--

Message: 39
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2001 13:08:44 -0400
From: "RON WARD" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] rear dif leak
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Jeff, I thought it was a dowel for use in aligning the two parts.  It moves?

>>> [email-masked] 08/09/01 11:58AM >>>

 On the rear dif cover, below the fill/check hole and above and to the left of
the drain plug (looking from the front to the rear of the truck) there appears
to be a circular "plug" in my dif between two of the mounting bolts.  This
"plug" can be moved with a little finger pressure.  It also appears to be the
source of my persistant leak.

Any ideas what the plug is?  I can't find any clue to it's purpose in any of my
manuals or parts books.  Figure E1-5 of the Green Bible shows a pic of the
housing and the plug in question is visible, but I can't find any reference to
it at all.

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

--__--__--

Message: 40
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2001 10:13:35 -0700
From: Jeff Bieler <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] rear dif leak
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I'm starting to think it's on the rim along with the mounting studs which would
mean the gasket is the problem.  I'd like some input though as I'm not sure.

Jeff

RON WARD wrote:

> Jeff, I thought it was a dowel for use in aligning the two parts.  It moves?
>
> >>> [email-masked] 08/09/01 11:58AM >>>
>
>  On the rear dif cover, below the fill/check hole and above and to the left of
> the drain plug (looking from the front to the rear of the truck) there appears
> to be a circular "plug" in my dif between two of the mounting bolts.  This
> "plug" can be moved with a little finger pressure.  It also appears to be the
> source of my persistant leak.
>
> Any ideas what the plug is?  I can't find any clue to it's purpose in any of my
> manuals or parts books.  Figure E1-5 of the Green Bible shows a pic of the
> housing and the plug in question is visible, but I can't find any reference to
> it at all.
>
> Jeff
> _______________________________________________
> LRO mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro
> _______________________________________________
> LRO mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

--__--__--

Message: 41
To: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 10:59:21 -0600
Subject: Re: [lro] Another Engine Conversion question . .
From: "William J. Rice" <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]

For the carb linkage, the guys who did my conversion just welded a washer
to the end of the existing carb linkage that fits over a little nub on
the Rochester linkage.  Fuel lines--they just slipped some 5/16" line
over the existing LR line and ran that to the engine's fuel pump.  Rad
hoses--The Sunbird lower hose works almost perfectly--the LR lower rad
connection is too small for it however.  The guys who did my conversion
(real shadetree mechanic types) just put that hose over a section of the
LR hose and tightened it down well.  Since then I've had a GM lower hose
pipe put on the rad, replacing the smaller LR one.  Top rad hose is just
a 15" by 2 1/4" (I think) flex hose--works great.

bill

On Thu, 9 Aug 2001 11:02:19 EDT [email-masked] writes:
> 
> On the GM engines what rerouting needs to happen? Fuel lines and 
> Carb. 
> linkage are a concern.
> thanks
> Scott
> _______________________________________________
> LRO mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

--__--__--

Message: 42
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2001 10:18:45 -0700
From: Jeff Bieler <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Parabolics
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I guess O'Malleys parents just look real big in the pictures.

At 5'6" and a 28" inseam, the Series is a very comfortable fit, as is the Bren
carrier I get to drive a about once a month.  Not surprisingly, the two
vehicles are very similar in handling, interior noise, maintainance, etc.

My son, however, is a long long way from seeing anything other then the bottom
of the wheel.  His feet don't quite come to the edge of the seat cushion yet.
The Corgi might be his best bet.

Jeff

TeriAnn Wakeman wrote:

> >But that won't help the need for the phone book to see over the dash or the
> >wood blocks to reach the pedals....
>
> On a series rig?????  Normally the problem is the other way around.
>
> The alternative of course is fitting one of the smaller model airplane
> engines to a Corgi
>
> >TeriAnn, that is one big dog!
>
> No.  O'Malley is just a baby.   He will be six months old tommorrow and
> only stands 31 inches at the shoulder.  I still have to bend over to pet
> him.  For those of you who knew Lacy, she was 34 inches at the shoulder.
> I expect O'Mally to be around 37 inches when all is said & done.
>
> I don't travel with two dogs because a pair would be a very tight fit in
> a 109.
>
> TeriAnn & O'Malley (Born Feb 2001)
>
>   http://www.cruzers.com/~twakeman/Dogs/Omalley.htm
> _______________________________________________
> LRO mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

--__--__--

Message: 43
From: "Faure, Marin" <[email-masked]>
To: "'Land Rover Mail Group'" <[email-masked]>
Cc: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 10:24:54 -0700 
Subject: [lro] Re: Exhaust (was back pressure)
Reply-To: [email-masked]

From: "Perrone Ford" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [lro] Back pressure, etc. Long
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2001 19:51:15 -0400
Reply-To: [email-masked]

>And those kids you see with the lowered Japanese cars in most
instances are putting large exhaust TIPS on standard sized exhausts so you
can't use that as a barometer.

I've been curious about those bucket-size exhaust attachments I see on 
most of the Honda kiddy-cars around here.  The visual implication is, of course, 
that you've got an engine with power proportionate to the size of the exhaust  
pipe.  I understand that in most cases these exhaust tips are simply fastened 
to the stock Honda pipes.  The cars do sound different, which I assume is in part 
due to the resonance characteristics of that big hollow tip.  But do the large diameter 
tips actually accomplish anything in terms of the engine's power output?  If the exhaust 
system forward of the tip is unchanged, I would think that simply installing a large-
diameter tip would have no effect on back pressure other than the fact you've 
in effect chopped a foot or so off the length of the standard exhaust pipe, which 
I suppose could lower back pressure a tiny bit.

I'd also be curious to know how much "engineering" went into the design of the 
Series exhaust system.  There have been plenty of people decrying the incredible 
inefficiency of the stock setup on this list, and I'm certainly not going to claim it 
can't be improved.

But I find it hard to believe that in the 60s and 70s, the people at Rover were going 
around totally ignorant of the effect the exhaust system has on an engine.  After all, 
this was the time when you had Abarth (remember them?) developing exhaust systems 
for everything from Fiats to the Mini Cooper S.  The Formula One and Le Mans-type 
cars had exhaust systems that looked like nests of spagetti around their 
engines.  So a lot of people were putting a lot of effort into coming up with optimum 
exhausts, even back in the "dark ages" of the 50s, 60s, and 70s.  

While there was certainly no need to create 
a performance-type exhaust system for the Land Rover, I can't believe they gave no thought 
whatsoever to the effect the exhaust system would have on the power of the engine, which 
was already low enough.  I'm sure a major requirement was to come up with a system that 
was as much out of physical danger as possible when the vehicle was being driven on rough 
ground.  Perhaps this is what led to the use of smaller pipes and the in-and-out-the-same-side 
muffler tucked up between the frame rails.  There is also a requirement in the UK, or there was, that the 
exhaust exit on the side of the vehicle away from the pavement (sidewalk), which maybe 
had some effect on the design.  (I guess an exhaust exiting straight back is okay, as evidenced 
by the Jaguar E-type, the later Austin Healey 3000s, etc.)

As I said, I'm not claiming the stock Series exhaust is the best setup that can be created, 
nor am I claiming that a degree of performance improvement cannot be achieved by changing 
the exhaust system.  But I wonder if the stock exhaust is really as terrible as some people 
on this list seem to think.  Given the intended purpose of the vehicle, which was not to 
cruise down motorways at 70 mph and blast up mud piles in competitive trials,
but to meander reliably around fields, farms, back roads, and no roads, the stock exhaust 
certainly seems adequate to me.

While I have no complaint about people who want to squeeze the maximum power and torque 
out of a 1950s industrial engine design, in the words of a helicopter pilot I knew who was 
lamenting the lousy helicopter he had to fly, you can only polish a turd so much.  So as 
I read about all these expensive headers and low-restriction mufflers, larger pipes, and 
flow-optimized heads, all aimed at getting more from the 2.25 Land Rover engine, I cannot 
help but ask, why the hell bother?  So what if you get another 10 mph out of the thing?  That 
just means you'll hit the car in front of you 10mph harder when your Series' pathetic drum brakes fade 
instantly to nothing in your frantic attempts to stop as all the disk brake, ABS equipped vehicles 
in front of you slam to a halt on the freeway because someone did something stupid a quarter 
mile up ahead.

But I can certainly see the challenge in trying to get the Land Rover lump to perform like a real 
engine, so perhaps that in itself is sufficient justification for doing a victory dance when you realize 
a performance boost of 0.58673298468219 horsepower :-).  Those guys in the Jeeps and Land Cruisers 
will be eating your dust now!
___________________________
C. Marin Faure
  (original owner)
  1973 Land Rover Series III-88
  1991 Range Rover Vogue SE
  Seattle

--__--__--

Message: 44
From: "Martin Rothman" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] SIIA gearbox in Series 1
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2001 13:43:05 -0400
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Hi Stephen,

The linkages for the clutch are different than the S1 and you will have to 
make some custom adaptors.  Most people just take a S2 clutch pedal assembly 
and mate it to the S1 bulkhead. Having said this, it can and has been done 
before.

Many people drop a complete S2 engine and transmission into a S1.  Bolts to 
the same mount points without any modifications at all.  An extra benefit is 
the significantly greater torque from the 2.25 litre engine.

I suggest that you join the S1 list (see www.landrover.net and follow the 
links) and pose the question up there.  Several of the members have done the 
switch and can give you more specific advise.

Good luck

******************************************
Martin Rothman
52 S1-80" (with original engine and non-syncro tranny!)

>From: "Ford Stephen CFMETR FORN" <[email-masked]>
>Reply-To: [email-masked]
>To: [email-masked]
>Subject: [lro] SIIA gearbox in Series 1
>Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2001 13:12:23 -0700
>
>
>To all,
>
>I'm getting ready to install my SIIA gearbox and engine in my late S1 (1958
>LHD 88"), and I need to address the clutch actuation issue. The S1
>mechanically actuates the clutch withdrawal unit (from the LHS) while the
>SIIA is a hydraulically actuated unit (from the RHS). I need to decide
>whether to go mechanical or hydraulic, and how to go about it,  so input
>from anyone who's done it would be appreciated.
>
>For those not familiar with Series 1's, the pedals go through the floor, so
>going hydraulic would probably involve cutting a hole in the bulkhead and
>installing an SIIA pedal assembly on the engine side of the bulkhead.
>Does anyone know if the S1 clutch withdrawal unit will bolt into and work 
>in
>the SIIA bellhousing?  If it does, I would consider cutting a hole in the
>LHS of the bellhousing to use the S1 mechanical approach.
>
>Thanks,
>Stephen Ford
>Nanaimo, B.C.
>_______________________________________________
>LRO mailing list
>[email-masked]
>http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

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

--__--__--

Message: 45
From: "Kirk Hillman" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Re: Exhaust (was back pressure)
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 12:28:18 -0600
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Marin,
    That last message -almost- started to sound like you were defending
these poorly engineered, ill conceived vehicles we call Land Rovers!  ; )
    The very first LR mechanic I ever talked to shortly after I bought mine
gave me his take on the exhaust.  He simply stated that in use as an
agricultural implement, the small exhaust produced the most power and torque
at low RPM's.  There was no theory or hesitation in his voice.  That's
simply how it was!  (I promptly agreed with everything this guy told me
because he was selling me a mint condition diff. for virtually nothing.)
    My question is why cannot someone devise a simple dual exhaust system
that is progressive just like the Weber 32/36 carb?  Have it flow through
the small pipe at low throttle and open up the second as RPM increases?
They do things like this on Work's motorcycles, and surely in other sports.
Maybe it causes too much problem with regular carbs?  It would be a perfect
fit for either a progressive two barrel or fuel injection.  The progressive
carb could be jetted on the second barrel for the larger exhaust flow, FI
meters itself.... HMMMMM

Kirk

--__--__--

Message: 46
From: "Faure, Marin" <[email-masked]>
To: "'Perrone Ford'" <[email-masked]>
Cc: "'Land Rover Mail Group'" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 11:41:50 -0700 
Subject: [lro] RE: Exhaust (was back pressure)
Reply-To: [email-masked]

	Perrone Ford wrote:
	>Easy Marin!  :)

Oh, I wasn't questioning the validity of your comments or experience with exhaust 
systems.  I was just expressing my opinion on the overall notion of trying to turn 
the 2.25 into something it was never designed to be.

	>They could not anticipate the vehicles adaptation 
> to unleaded fuel, round the world expeditions, or exportation to 
> America's 100 mph highways.
> 
The unleaded fuel thing is certainly something the designers couldn't anticipate. 
However, the Land Rover was designed for export from the outset, and in 
fact a lot more "round the world" type work was done with it in the 50s, 60s, 
and 70s than is done today by its modern derivatives.  As to exporting to the 
US, don't forget that in the 50s and 60s, the other 
4wds of similar purpose didn't have much better performance.  The Willys 
Jeep (later AMC) with its relatively small four and six cylinder engines 
wasn't designed for 100 mph highways either.  I think a mistake a lot of 
people make is in attaching today's driving conditions to the original design 
of the Series.  Things were a lot different on the roads back thirty and forty 
years ago, even in this country.  But because the Land Rover design has 
continued more or less unchanged from 1946 to today, at least in appearance, 
it's all too easy for people to assume that the 1950s models are just older 
versions of today's Defenders.  In fact, there are major differences in power, 
braking, handling, and so on.  I'm not saying the Defender is great in those 
respects, either, but it's a lot better.

If Land Rover had radically changed 
the physical design of the Land Rover in the late 60s/early 70s, as they originally wanted 
to do with the Series III, I don't think you'd see so many attempts today to try 
to make "performance" machines out of the older models.  Few people (if any) try to 
take a 1941 Cadillac and make it perform like a 1998 Cadillac with a Northstar 
engine.  This is due in part, I believe, to the fact that the 1941 vehicle LOOKS like 
a 1941 vehicle, and everyone knows a 1941 car isn't ever going to match the 
performance of a 1998 car unless you totally modify it and rebuild it, which ruins 
the (very high) value of the 1941 Cadillac.  But for a variety of reasons, mainly lack of funds, 
Rover continued the basic Land Rover design unchanged except for inexpensive 
upgrades, like coil springs and newer engine designs.  So the old ones look like the 
new ones (more or less), which I believe has a psychological effect on many of today's 
Land Rover owners.  They don't look like they're thirty and forty years old because the 
new one the guy down the street bought looks pretty similar.  So my thirty-five year old 
Series ought to perform like his does.

Nobody gets upset at someone driving 
50 mph on the freeway in a Packard or Hudson or even a '57 Chevy.  
And the guy driving it isn't upset, because he knows 50 mph or whatever is the right 
speed for his car.  But people don't have the same patience for someone plodding along 
in a Series Land Rover (I know this from a LOT of experience), and the owner of the 
Land Rover usually doesn't look at all happy being the slowest one on the road.  It doesn't 
look like a 1955 vehicle to most people or the driver because a new one looks just like it.   
So the Land Rover owner tries to drive faster to keep up with the impatient drivers around him,
and then he wonders why his valves burn up every 10,000  miles or his head gasket goes or his 
water pump gives out, and so on.

If Land Rover had totally stopped production of the Series vehicle in 1969 and 
replaced it entirely with the Range Rover, I bet there would be more people today 
interested in preserving their Series machines totally stock, because there would be no 
question, real or physchological, that these are "classic" vehicles.  You don't see 
many people modifying Austin Healey 3000s these days, because everyone knows 
they only made them from 19xx to 19yy, and you can't get a new one.  So there is 
more emphasis on preserving the AH3000 as built, complete with its design and mechanical 
deficiencies, than in trying to make a "better" car out of it.

	>The exhaust on the series is actually quite well suited to the 
> motor.  Its just that the motor is a bit anemic for the job asked of 
> it.  This seems to be a rover trend.
> 
It's actually a European trend.  Until fairly recently, most European vehicles 
were quite underpowered by US standards.  A few sports cars had sufficient power, 
but even they when compared to US muscle cars of the 60s were woefully lacking 
in horsepower and torque.  Fuel has always been expensive in Europe, and with their 
far superior public transportation systems, there has never been the emphasis on the car 
as there has been from the outset in the US.  For most European drivers, if they had a car 
that could at least get out its own way, that was sufficient.  The Range Rover when it first 
came out in 1969, was considered in Europe to have amazing power.  Prior to this, 
the same engine in the US had been considered "adequate" in the Buick Skylark and whatever 
else GM used it in, and it didn't take GM long to stop using the engine (for a number of 
reasons, not just power).  It's a difference in basic vehicle philosophy, both on the part of the 
manufacturer and buyer. Small, low powered engines were not just a Rover thing.

	>And to answer your question about the little modified cars, putting 
> on an exhaust tip does little to change sound or quality of exhaust.  
> They usually take the pains to actually install loud mufflers too since 
> its less than $100 installed.
> 
Thanks.  I figured the big tip was primarily for visual effect, and not 
a performance thing.

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

--__--__--

Message: 47
From: "Tim Czajka" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2001 14:25:24 -0600
Subject: [lro] Re: Exhaust (was back pressure)
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Kirk Hillman wrote:
>Have it flow through the small pipe at low throttle and open up the second 
>as RPM increases?
>
There is a product in the JC Whitney catalog called
an exhaust by-pass.  It is basically a Y fitting that
is spliced into the stock exhaust pipe.  It allows
normal exhaust flow until the driver pulls a lever
and then bam - you bypass the downstream pipes and
muffler - basically running open with little back
pressure.  Great way to get a ticket.  Maybe something
could be rigged up to empty into a second down pipe
instead - to decrease the back  pressure without
bypassing the mufflers.  Not sure how to make it
automatic though.

Tim Czajka
1972 Series III 88

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

--__--__--

Message: 48
From: "Frank Elson" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Re: looking for little bits...
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 19:37:27 +0100
Reply-To: [email-masked]

we do have a lot of fun here in the UK picking up bits and pieces from
breakers yards but as far as the 4wheel drive station wagon badge goes, it
is a Land Rover part available new from any Land Rover dealer for just a few
pounds....

Best Cheers

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

--__--__--

Message: 49
From: "Frank Elson" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] 200tdi fit?
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 19:45:51 +0100
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Winn writes: >>>I've discovered that the Tdi isn't some mythical beast but a
2.5 liter
> that's derived from the 2.25<<<

no, it isn't, honest!
 True, Land Rover did build a 2.5 litre diesel (and petrol) based on the
2.25. Then they turbo'ed the 2.5 diesel. But the Tdi isn't any of them, it
is a completely different engine.

Best Cheers

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

--__--__--

_______________________________________________
* 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