Subject: LRO digest, Vol 1 #74 - 5 msgs

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2001 03:05:42 -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. ambulance springs (Rolston)
   2. Buying a Series (was ex-MOD) (C. Marin Faure)
   3. RE: Buying a Series (was ex-MOD) (Perrone Ford)
   4. Somewhere in Sooke, BC (Paul Quin)
   5. Re: Buying a Series (was ex-MOD) (Keith Tanner)

--__--__--

Message: 1
From: "Rolston" <[email-masked]>
To: "LR list" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2001 08:29:03 -0400
Subject: [lro] ambulance springs
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Drove a friends Series 3 hardtop, kind of rough ride. The rear springs are 9
leaves, the ones on our series 2A ambulance are only 8 leaves.  WE could use a
bit of lift in the back of our ambulance anyway, does anyone know if the
ambulance used the one-ton springs?  thanks, Jim

--__--__--

Message: 2
Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2001 09:40:25 -0700
To: [email-masked]
From: "C. Marin Faure" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [lro] Buying a Series (was ex-MOD)
Reply-To: [email-masked]

>>> [email-masked] 08/30/01 11:05PM >>>
Basically I have decided my next vehicle will be DIRT simple, and cheaper
to maintain.  So I am looking at either an early bronco, a series rover, or
a Unimog.

I can't speak for the Bronco or the Unimog, but I can tell you that a
Series Land Rover is not necessarily cheap to maintain.  While they can be
extremely reliable, at least mine certainly has been, it takes quite a bit
of effort to keep them that way over time.  During the first ten years I
owned my SIII, it was the only vehicle I had, so I drove it every single
day, many times a day.  It took a pretty good degree of messing with to
keep it in top shape.  Hub seals go out, the timing needs adjusting, the
valves need adjusting, things need to be oiled and greased, oil leaks need
to be tracked down and fixed (if you care about such things- I don't
anymore).   There always seems to be something to do on the vehicle, even
when it was new.

Today, unless you buy a newly restored Series for big bucks, you'll
probably be looking at replacing brake cylinders, clutch cylinders, the
water pump, fuel pump, a lot of seals, maybe the radiator, the steering
relay, springs, shocks, carburetor, exhaust system, etc., etc., etc.
Armed with the correct tools and a factory service manual, all these jobs
are extremely easy to do, although some of them can be time consuming.  But
the parts are not anywhere near as cheap as they were in the 70s and 80s.
In some cases, there are non-Rover components you can get that are less
expensive.  But while parts are fortunately still readily available for at
least the Series IIa and III, their prices are climbing rapidly,
particularly here in the US.

While I have virtually no experience with the Bronco, I suspect that while
it may or may not be as reliable as a Series, it will definitely be less
expensive to maintain.  Also, the Bronco will have more power than the
Series.  As you can tell by the large number of people on this list who
have, or who want to, replace the engine in their Series, the lack of power
of the 2.25 (and the diesel is even worse) is a big frustration to Land
Rover owners, particularly those who have only recently purchased one.  I
think there is a tendency among new Land Rover enthusiasts to think that a
1960s or 70s vintage Series is like one of today's 4wds only with a funky
body and spartan interior.  Many of them, at least the ones I've met and
talked to, are extremely disappointed to find after they've bought one that
the Series is, in fact, a 1950s-era utility truck, with very little power,
crude handling, and minimal passenger amenities.  But with terrific gearing
and the ability to go in its stock configuration just about anywhere you
need it to go.  Look at some of the expeditions Land Rovers were used on
before the advent of locking differentials, parablolic springs, and fancy
tires, and I daresay you'll find that they were taken through a lot more
challenging terrain worldwide than they are today.

Those of us who bought them knowing what they really are, especially those
of us who bought them when they were new, don't seem to have a big problem
with the vehicle's low power, noisy ride, and minimal interior.  We
probably bought them to work them, not because they were cool old "jeeps"
that would be fun to drive around.  I'm not condeming the people today who
do that, but many of them are surprised to discover how slow and crude the
Series really is.  So you get all the attempts to repower them, upgrade the
suspensions and steering, and so on.  If you end up going this route
yourself, you will discover just how expensive Series ownership can be,
although you can end up, like TeriAnn did, with a very suitable vehicle for
your specific purposes.

I know you have a 91 Range Rover, as I do.  Believe, me, other than the
basic design philosphy (the frame and drivetrain layout is similar along
with a few other details like the axles, parking brake, etc.), there is no
relationship whatsoever between a Range Rover and a Series, except that
parts for the Range Rover are even more expensive, althogh the Series is
catching up.  So don't assume that because you've had experience with the
Range Rover, a Series won't be that much different.  Twenty years or more
made a big difference in automotive technology, and things that need little
or minimal attention on a 90s Range Rover may need a fair amount of
attention on a Series, like hub seals, valve clearances, timing, and so on.

So if your criteria is a dependable 4wd that requires little maintenance,
and the costs are relatively low when it does, I'm not sure a Series Land
Rover is the answer.  You might be better off with an older Bronco.  I
don't know how the Unimog would compare, but I would think the vehicle's
relatively low numbers in the US plus it's "uniqueness" would make it
somewhat expensive to own and maintain, at least in terms of parts.  Plus I
understand they are even slower than a Series, if that's possible.....:-)

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

--__--__--

Message: 3
From: "Perrone Ford" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [lro] Buying a Series (was ex-MOD)
Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2001 12:52:23 -0400
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Marin,

	Thanks for your comments, and they are well understood.  I suppose that I
should have been more clear in my comments about simple and cheaper to
maintain.

	For the price of changing out the radiator on my 91 RR, I could replace the
cooling system on a series or a Unimog.  The cost of replacing the exhaust
on the RR could easily buy me a 2.25l engine for a series or 2 M180 engines
in the Unimog.  It's these kinds of careful comparisons that I am making.

	I do understand what a series truck really is.  And I understand what a
Unimog really is.  They are VERY basic trucks that demand regular simple
maintenance.  I am under my RR 2-3 times a month. I don't think a series or
a Unimog would be any different and that's ok since I enjoy it.  But the
prices of most series components seems to be half or less, particularly if
ordering from the UK.

	If you think the series is slow, try the Unimog.  With a top speed of about
55-60 mph limited by engine AND gearing, its a slow truck.  If I am in a
hurry, I have a BMW.  If I'm in a relative hurry and need to tow or haul,
then I've got the RR.  But for sheer off-road fun, I'll have something else
to play with.  In truth, I'll probably drive the new vehicle FAR more than
the RR or BMW.  Something about not having to lock the doors, or worry if it
rains when I have the top off, or worry about paint, etc.  Plenty of appeal
to me.  My daily 20 mile commute to work on mostly 2 lane roads will be just
fine.  I can't get over 45mph on my commute anyway.  I only wonder if I can
get the Unimog in my parking garage! :)

Peace

-P

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf
> Of C. Marin Faure
> Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2001 12:40 PM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: [lro] Buying a Series (was ex-MOD)
>
>
>
> >>> [email-masked] 08/30/01 11:05PM >>>
> Basically I have decided my next vehicle will be DIRT simple, and cheaper
> to maintain.  So I am looking at either an early bronco, a series
> rover, or
> a Unimog.
>
> I can't speak for the Bronco or the Unimog, but I can tell you that a
> Series Land Rover is not necessarily cheap to maintain.  While they can be
> extremely reliable, at least mine certainly has been, it takes quite a bit
> of effort to keep them that way over time.  During the first ten years I
> owned my SIII, it was the only vehicle I had, so I drove it every single
> day, many times a day.  It took a pretty good degree of messing with to
> keep it in top shape.  Hub seals go out, the timing needs adjusting, the
> valves need adjusting, things need to be oiled and greased, oil leaks need
> to be tracked down and fixed (if you care about such things- I don't
> anymore).   There always seems to be something to do on the vehicle, even
> when it was new.
>
> Today, unless you buy a newly restored Series for big bucks, you'll
> probably be looking at replacing brake cylinders, clutch cylinders, the
> water pump, fuel pump, a lot of seals, maybe the radiator, the steering
> relay, springs, shocks, carburetor, exhaust system, etc., etc., etc.
> Armed with the correct tools and a factory service manual, all these jobs
> are extremely easy to do, although some of them can be time
> consuming.  But
> the parts are not anywhere near as cheap as they were in the 70s and 80s.
> In some cases, there are non-Rover components you can get that are less
> expensive.  But while parts are fortunately still readily available for at
> least the Series IIa and III, their prices are climbing rapidly,
> particularly here in the US.
>
> While I have virtually no experience with the Bronco, I suspect that while
> it may or may not be as reliable as a Series, it will definitely be less
> expensive to maintain.  Also, the Bronco will have more power than the
> Series.  As you can tell by the large number of people on this list who
> have, or who want to, replace the engine in their Series, the
> lack of power
> of the 2.25 (and the diesel is even worse) is a big frustration to Land
> Rover owners, particularly those who have only recently purchased one.  I
> think there is a tendency among new Land Rover enthusiasts to think that a
> 1960s or 70s vintage Series is like one of today's 4wds only with a funky
> body and spartan interior.  Many of them, at least the ones I've met and
> talked to, are extremely disappointed to find after they've
> bought one that
> the Series is, in fact, a 1950s-era utility truck, with very little power,
> crude handling, and minimal passenger amenities.  But with
> terrific gearing
> and the ability to go in its stock configuration just about anywhere you
> need it to go.  Look at some of the expeditions Land Rovers were used on
> before the advent of locking differentials, parablolic springs, and fancy
> tires, and I daresay you'll find that they were taken through a lot more
> challenging terrain worldwide than they are today.
>
> Those of us who bought them knowing what they really are, especially those
> of us who bought them when they were new, don't seem to have a big problem
> with the vehicle's low power, noisy ride, and minimal interior.  We
> probably bought them to work them, not because they were cool old "jeeps"
> that would be fun to drive around.  I'm not condeming the people today who
> do that, but many of them are surprised to discover how slow and crude the
> Series really is.  So you get all the attempts to repower them,
> upgrade the
> suspensions and steering, and so on.  If you end up going this route
> yourself, you will discover just how expensive Series ownership can be,
> although you can end up, like TeriAnn did, with a very suitable
> vehicle for
> your specific purposes.
>
> I know you have a 91 Range Rover, as I do.  Believe, me, other than the
> basic design philosphy (the frame and drivetrain layout is similar along
> with a few other details like the axles, parking brake, etc.), there is no
> relationship whatsoever between a Range Rover and a Series, except that
> parts for the Range Rover are even more expensive, althogh the Series is
> catching up.  So don't assume that because you've had experience with the
> Range Rover, a Series won't be that much different.  Twenty years or more
> made a big difference in automotive technology, and things that
> need little
> or minimal attention on a 90s Range Rover may need a fair amount of
> attention on a Series, like hub seals, valve clearances, timing,
> and so on.
>
> So if your criteria is a dependable 4wd that requires little maintenance,
> and the costs are relatively low when it does, I'm not sure a Series Land
> Rover is the answer.  You might be better off with an older Bronco.  I
> don't know how the Unimog would compare, but I would think the vehicle's
> relatively low numbers in the US plus it's "uniqueness" would make it
> somewhat expensive to own and maintain, at least in terms of
> parts.  Plus I
> understand they are even slower than a Series, if that's possible.....:-)
>
>
> ________________________
> C. Marin Faure
>   (original owner)
>   1973 Land Rover Series III-88
>   1991 Range Rover Vogue SE
>    Seattle, WA
> _______________________________________________
> LRO mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

--__--__--

Message: 4
From: "Paul Quin" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2001 10:40:11 -0700
Subject: [lro] Somewhere in Sooke, BC
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Last Thursday was a bit of a cool wet eveing so a few friends and myself
decided to take advantage of the muddy conditions and head off to the Sooke
Hills which are about a 45 minute drive SW of Victoria.

Along with my '61 SII came a Chevy pickup, a Toyota pickup and a Jeep
Cherokee.

It rained a bit, but this didn't dampen our spirits - even with no top on my
Land Rover.

We wound our way up Harbourview road to Shields lake along an old road that
used to lead to a resort at the lake many years ago.  All of the pavement
has long since washed away, leaving a very rugged path through the forest.
Some of the hill climbs were a bit challenging.  The Jeep had to take the
easy way up a few times due to it's summer tyres.

I was quite proud of the Rover as the Toyota driver is an old LandCruiser
fan and he was VERY impressed with the capabilities of my Series, especially
the axle articulation (stock springs).  Basically, his reaction can be
summed up in two words:  "Holly Sh*t!"

Here is one picture from the evening that I really like:
http://members.home.net/pquin/Harbourview_LR.jpg

You can't see it very clearly in this scan but the rear suspension is really
flexing into the bottom of this rut.

The Chevy was interesting.  The owner is a true west coast redneck.  The
truck has about a 5 inch lift, skinny BFG Track Edges, a loose battery
flopping around in the engine bay, sparking and shorting out.  He had at
least one minor engine bay fire...  This on a propane powered truck =8-0  I
expect that he has a few gas leaks too as he went though $45 of propane in
one evening.  The truck has very impressive articulation, probably aided by
so much frame rail flex that the rear box and cab sometimes formed a 10 deg
angle with each other...  There were a few wine corkscrew jokes while
watching him climb a few rough spots.

Next time, I'll keep a few car lengths between us...

Paul Quin
1961 SII 88
Victoria, BC  Canada

--__--__--

Message: 5
Date: Sat, 01 Sep 2001 17:56:06 -0400
To: [email-masked]
From: Keith Tanner <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Buying a Series (was ex-MOD)
Reply-To: [email-masked]

>Today, unless you buy a newly restored Series for big bucks, you'll
>probably be looking at replacing brake cylinders,
yup.

>clutch cylinders,
yup.

>the water pump,
rebuild kit is on the way.

>fuel pump
Not yet.

>, a lot of seals,
it just leaks instead.

>maybe the radiator, the steering relay,
Nope.

>springs, shocks,
Yup.

>  carburetor,
Rebuild kit in the garage along with a spare (am I a maschocist for 
sticking with my Solex?)

>  exhaust system,
Yup. Plus all the rest of the bits detailed on my web page: 
http://keith.miata.net/landy , the story of getting an old Series back on 
the road and off again :)

It's slow, especially up in the mountains here in Colorado. There's not a 
lot of carrying capacity in an 88. It leaves puddles wherever it parks. My 
IIa is still very spartan inside, unlike the cushy III :) But I've never 
had this much fun working on a vehicle. I'm amazed at what it will do 
offroad - and I love the character it has. I've modified every car I've 
owned, but this is the one that gets me into the most conversations in 
parking lots and which has taught me the most.

BTW, I came home from the birthday party in convoy with a SI and a Unimog. 
They were able to keep up a decent speed on the highway.

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

--__--__--

_______________________________________________
* 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