Subject: LRO digest, Vol 1 #102 - 21 msgs

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2001 03:06:32 -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: terminal shudder (John Cranfield)
   2. Re: terminal shudder (Paul Quin)
   3. Re: Fixing up a Land Rover (Faure, Marin)
   4. Re: Sourcing swivel grease (Faure, Marin)
   5. Re: Air conditioning (Faure, Marin)
   6. Mogs/C303's (Kirk Hillman)
   7. Re: Re: Fixing up a Land Rover ([email-masked])
   8. MAR (William L Leacock)
   9. air conditioning (William L Leacock)
  10. Re: Re: Fixing up a Land Rover (Jeff Bieler)
  11. Re: Fixing up a Land Rover (Bryan Hoult)
  12. Re: rubber side window gasket? (Bryan Hoult)
  13. The soul of a Land Rover (was fixing up a Land Rover) (Faure, Marin)
  14. Re: Re: Fixing up a Land Rover (Peter Ogilvie)
  15. Land Rover search (Lori Sickley)
  16. Re: terminal shudder (Jim Hall)
  17. Re: Air Conditioning in a Series (Derek Pommerenck)
  18. Burn baby burn! (Keith Tanner)
  19. Re: The soul of a Land Rover (was fixing up a Land Rover) (Keith Tanner)
  20. Fixing up a Land Rover (aaron)
  21. Re: terminal shudder (Paul Oxley)

--__--__--

Message: 1
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 20:25:01 -0300
From: [email-masked] (John Cranfield)
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] terminal shudder
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I suspect that the bolts have been over tightened and are stretched.
Stretched bolts will continue to stretch and will not stay tight.
John and Muddy

Smokey Briggs wrote:
> 
> Somebody awhile back posted a problem with a terminal shudder that would not
> stop until the vehicle nearly stopped from front end, usually experienced at
> low speeds on un-even ground. I had this problem, rebuilt the entire front
> end and shudder went away. Now I have found the actual source of the
> problem.
> 
> Once into the front end I renewed most everything - shocks to bushings and
> bearings and shudder went away. About six months later, much to my dismay,
> shudder reappeared -- same symptoms -- bumpy ground (sometimes a single bump
> -- that applied forces to one wheel but not the other).
> 
> The source was a loosening steering arm. The four big bolts were working
> their way loose despite the new safeties installed with the rebuild. The
> kicker is that you can't tell the thing is loose till you jack the front end
> up and relieve the pressure on the sterring assembly. Retightened bolts and
> bingo, no more shudder. (No more dripping 90W either. I had refinished this
> swivel ball with JB weld during rebuild and assumed my fix had shredded the
> new swivel ball seal when it started dripping, not long before the shudder
> reappeared).
> 
> What I cannot figure out is why only one side is working loose? This is a
> LHD 5dr 109 NAS. Right side is loosening - left is fine. The safeties are
> hammered down in place.
> 
> My next idea is loctite but it seems like something must be wrong -- that
> loctite may treat the symptom but not the cause. Any ideas.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Smokey Briggs
> Pecos, Texas
> _______________________________________________
> LRO mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

--__--__--

Message: 2
From: "Paul Quin" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] terminal shudder
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 16:49:29 -0700
Reply-To: [email-masked]

FWIW I've got the same symptoms, but the cause is slightly different.  I've
got a loose steering relay.  It wiggles back and forth inside the retainer
ring.

That's this weekends project...

Paul in Victoria.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Smokey Briggs" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2001 9:06 AM
Subject: [lro] terminal shudder

>
> Somebody awhile back posted a problem with a terminal shudder that would
not
> stop until the vehicle nearly stopped from front end, usually experienced
at
> low speeds on un-even ground. I had this problem, rebuilt the entire front
> end and shudder went away. Now I have found the actual source of the
> problem.
>
> Once into the front end I renewed most everything - shocks to bushings and
> bearings and shudder went away. About six months later, much to my dismay,
> shudder reappeared -- same symptoms -- bumpy ground (sometimes a single
bump
> -- that applied forces to one wheel but not the other).
>
> The source was a loosening steering arm. The four big bolts were working
> their way loose despite the new safeties installed with the rebuild. The
> kicker is that you can't tell the thing is loose till you jack the front
end
> up and relieve the pressure on the sterring assembly. Retightened bolts
and
> bingo, no more shudder. (No more dripping 90W either. I had refinished
this
> swivel ball with JB weld during rebuild and assumed my fix had shredded
the
> new swivel ball seal when it started dripping, not long before the shudder
> reappeared).
>
> What I cannot figure out is why only one side is working loose? This is a
> LHD 5dr 109 NAS. Right side is loosening - left is fine. The safeties are
> hammered down in place.
>
> My next idea is loctite but it seems like something must be wrong -- that
> loctite may treat the symptom but not the cause. Any ideas.

--__--__--

Message: 3
From: "Faure, Marin" <[email-masked]>
To: "'Land Rover Mail Group'" <[email-masked]>
Cc: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 17:16:18 -0700
Subject: [lro] Re: Fixing up a Land Rover
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 10:17:16 -0400
From: Bill Adams <[email-masked]>
Organization: U.S. International Broadcasting Bureau
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Fixing up a Land Rover
Reply-To: [email-masked]

>British horsepower = expensive, unreliable, hard to source, usually
relies on American technology, leaks.
American horsepower = cheap, easy to come by, lots of aftermarket
support, reliable, things fit together, doesn't leak.

Well, I've had some experience with American horsepower, and I'm sure 
not impressed.  The absolute crappiest engine I've ever dealt with is the 
300 cu. in. six in my Ford F-250.  It split it's block wide open in No. 3
 cylinder at 52,000 miles.  It's been through two exhaust manifolds.  The 
"automatic" choke was a joke from day one, the thing leaks oil from the
joints FAR worse 
than either of my Rover engines, it gets atrocious mileage, it's been
through several 
water pumps.  For an engine that supposedly has a great reputation, mine and
the 
ones that have been in friends' pickups and vans have been nothing but
trouble.  
As for Dodge, my experience with their V-8 engines has been enough to swear
me 
off any Daimler-Chrysler product for ever.  Hard to start, hard to keep
running, hard 
to maintain, and in the end, hard to justify bothering with in the first
place.

The old small-block Ford V-8 was a great engine, as was the Chevy.

The most reliable engine, in terms of always starting and never quitting,
I've ever operated 
is the 2.25 petrol engine in my Land Rover.  The second most reliable engine
(so far) has 
been the 3.9 V-8 in our Range Rover.  After that, it's the 3.5 engine in my
BMW 635csi.  
After that it's the various engines in the Japanese vehicles I've used over
the years.  But 
American engines have been nothing to write home about in my experience over
the last 
few decades.  And in terms of parts, I have often gotten parts for the Land
Rover and 
Range Rover (first from Atlantic British in California and now from Rovers
North) faster 
than I can get parts for either my Ford F-250 or BMW here in the Seattle
area.  The Ford 
and BMW people invariably have to order the part from the "warehouse," which
in the case 
of Ford is probably in Mexico.  So far, I have seen no advantage in
maintenance, repair, or 
parts acquisition in owning an American vehicle.  And the Ford factory
service manuals are 
the absolute worst manuals I have ever seen in my life, where the Land Rover
manuals are 
the best.  Surprisingly, the BMW manuals are not very good, either.

And if you want to talk diesels, the Cummins and Ford diesels used in light
trucks and 
vans are garbage compared to what's available in Europe.  All you have to do
is listen 
to them to know that.  We used a Ford E350 van in Calgary the other week,
and it had the 
Ford Powerstroke V-8 in it.  God, what a bucket of bolts.  The de Havilland
Beaver I 
fly has a quieter, smoother engine.  I've rented Land Rover Discoveries and
Defenders in the UK, 
all with the diesel engine.  I have a friend who drives a Kenworth T600 with
a MAN 
diesel in it.  I have ridden in London taxis and a friend's 5-cylinder
diesel Volvo station wagon 
in France.  Hell, I drive by idling EMD and GE railroad locomotives in the
yard in Bellingham 
every weekend.  NONE of them are as irritatingly loud as a Ford diesel
pickup or van or a Dodge Ram.  
Somehow, the Europeans have figured out how to make diesel engines of all
sizes that are no louder 
than gas engines.  It is a talent that has apparently escaped American
engine designers, at least those 
creating diesels for smaller vehicles.

One of the best, albeit unsophisticated, marine engines ever made is the
Ford Lehman 
120.  The base engine was designed and manufactured in England (known over
there as the 
Dorset engine).  A few years ago, GM tried to market a marine diesel that
was based on one of 
their light truck diesels.  It was far and away the worst marine diesel ever
foisted off on the public.  
Cummins is doing the same thing today with their 6-cylinder, and while their
engine is not nearly 
so bad as the GM attempt, it is far behind the offerings from Volvo and MAN
in terms of reliability.  
Caterpillars aren't bad, and the John Deere's are improving.  But the best,
most reliable marine diesels 
are not from this country.  A friend of mine runs a commercial fishing fleet
in Honolulu.  His boats 
are all equipped with Volvo diesels, and he gets about 35,000 hours out of
each one with nothing more 
than routine oil changes and maintenance.  He tried running Caterpillars
once, and got less than half 
that many hours.  He had one boat with a Cummins, and it needed a new engine
after 7,500 hours.

The US has produced some outstanding powerplants, don't get me wrong.  But a
blanket statement 
that American engines are better than British engines is not correct.  Some
of them are far better, some of 
them are far worse.  If you go back in history a bit, the Allison V-12 used
in American fighters like the 
P-38, P-39, P-40, and initial run of P-51s was not such a great engine.  The
German inverted V-12 Daimler 
was far superior, as was the Rolls Royce Merlin and later the Griffon. It's
a not-too-well-known fact that 
the lackluster, Allison-equipped P-51 was on the road to cancellation until
someone stuck a Rolls Royce 
Merlin in one to see what would happen.  The result was magic, and Packard
was given the license to 
produce Merlins in this country for the Mustang program.

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

--__--__--

Message: 4
From: "Faure, Marin" <[email-masked]>
To: "'Land Rover Mail Group'" <[email-masked]>
Cc: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 17:19:54 -0700
Subject: [lro] Re: Sourcing swivel grease
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Date: 27 Sep 2001 09:33:24 -0500
From: george kase <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: [lro] sourcing swivel grease...
Reply-To: [email-masked]

>I am well aware of the debate concerning grease vs. 90 wt. I have
made up my mind on the side of grease...so I am looking for guidance
from a fellow "non-90 wt." user...

Bad decision.  I'd advise you to purchase a new set up upper swivel 
bushings at the same time you buy whatever grease you decide to use.  
The grease won't properly lubricate the bushings you have now, so you'll 
need the new ones pretty soon.  Might as well order them while you're 
thinking about it.....:-)

_________________________________________
C. Marin Faure
(original owner)
1973 Land Rover Series III
1991 Range Rover

--__--__--

Message: 5
From: "Faure, Marin" <[email-masked]>
To: "'Land Rover Mail Group'" <[email-masked]>
Cc: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 17:31:55 -0700
Subject: [lro] Re: Air conditioning
Reply-To: [email-masked]

From: "Rich Williams II" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: [LRO] Air Conditioning in a Series
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 08:58:13 -0700
Reply-To: [email-masked]

>Okay don't laugh - but with the recent discussions about V6 and V8 motors
as
a way to increase HP I've been wondering about the possibilities of adding
AC to Series trucks.

Actually a valid consideration, depending on where you live.  I agree the
stock 2.25 
petrol engine will bog down something fierce under the load of a
conventional 
AC compressor.  Solutions I can think of are converting to a more powerful
engine, 
installing the smallest compressor you can find, or perhaps trying an
electric 
AC compressor.  If you install a good, powerful alternator, you might be
able to 
run an AC compressor without overtaxing the engine too much.  The power 
to run the compressor has to come from somewhere, either directly off the 
engine or by adding resistance to the alternator drive belt.  But the
penalty 
of an electric compressor might not be so bad.  I wonder if you could 
cannibalize one of those rooftop AC units you see on motor homes and the  
like.  I assume those units are 12 volt DC.

If you're really clever, perhaps you could come up with some way of 
automatically declutching the compressor when the manifold pressure 
(vacuum) reaches a certain point.  That way, the engine would automatically 
be relieved of the extra AC burden when you drove up a grade.  Then as you 
ease off on the gas when the road levels out or starts down, the manifold 
pressure will drop and the compressor will automatically clutch back in.

Of course, your biggest problem will be trying to keep the cold air in as it

pours out through the poorly fitting door seals, around the worn out window 
seals, and simply transfers cold as fast as you can generate it through the
thin 
aluminum floor and door panels.

_________________________________________
C. Marin Faure
(original owner)
1973 Land Rover Series III
1991 Range Rover Vogue SE

--__--__--

Message: 6
From: "Kirk Hillman" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 18:37:56 -0600
Subject: [lro] Mogs/C303's
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Okay,
    I asked about the Unimogs, now is there anyone that has or knows about
Volvo C303's?  Specifically the portal axles?

Kirk

--__--__--

Message: 7
From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 20:52:42 EDT
Subject: Re: [lro] Re: Fixing up a Land Rover
To: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

In a message dated 9/27/2001 8:18:16 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
[email-masked] writes:

<< Well, I've had some experience with American horsepower, and I'm sure 
 not impressed.  >>

Gotta say, I've been very impressed with most of the American Iron I've dealt 
with.  Chevy 350--gotta love that engine  I've had several in several trucks 
and never did anything other than change oil and plugs--never leaked and only 
burned a small amount of oil after 170K

Chevy 454--Need I say more?  For a gas engine, it'll pull like crazy and runs 
forever--only thing is you have to ignore the lifter tap when first started.  
Never had one fail--does use a bit more oil (1/2 quart every 2K).  Bad gas 
mileage

Chevy 366--Big Block  Great engine.  Saw one run 600 miles with no oil 
pressure (in a horse van)  The owner figured the oil light was defective.  

AMC 360--Good basic engine--not my favorite but never had much to complain 
about.

Ford--No experience--I don't like Ford transmissions.

Overall, I have no complaints on the American V8 powerplants (plus they seem 
to go farther between rebuilds than my 2.25L).  My main complaints about the 
2.25 L are:
1. Leaks even with careful rebuild
2. Not very good fuel mileage for a 4 cylinder
3.  I'd be happier with a little more HP

Otherwise, I'd have to say I'm pretty happy with it.

Nate

--__--__--

Message: 8
To: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 20:07:53 -0400
From: William L Leacock <[email-masked]>
Subject: [lro] MAR
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Last year I attended the MAR and upon my return home found that many
other listers did too. I missed an opportunity to put a face behind the
name.  Might I sugest that this year we consider a meeting place, or all
agree to wear pink shirts or something to enable mutual recognition.

Regards from Western New York State

  Bill Leacock.

--__--__--

Message: 9
To: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 20:03:48 -0400
From: William L Leacock <[email-masked]>
Subject: [lro] air conditioning
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Rich writes: 
Okay don't laugh - but with the recent discussions about V6 and V8 motors
as
a way to increase HP I've been wondering about the possibilities of
adding
AC to Series trucks.

  My employers claim to have produced the first under hood air
conditioning system for  a  vehicle in 1954 (Pontiac). What they do not
know is that Rover beat them to it in 1948.  The simple expedient of
puting holes in the bulkhead (firewall) gave all the air conditioning
required for the UK, elsewhere they just took the top off. Then in 1955
Rover introduced external air conditioning which they still use today on
the Defenders. (simply because there was no power to spare for frivolous
add ons) This system also keeps the environmental lobby happy since there
is no energy cost involved in operating it.

Regards from Western New York State

  Bill Leacock.

--__--__--

Message: 10
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 18:08:37 -0700
Subject: Re: [lro] Re: Fixing up a Land Rover
From: Jeff Bieler <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]

My V8 experience is limited, but a motor I liked a lot has to be the
Dauntless 225CID V6 we had in our 1968 Kaiser CJ5.

Driving that was a close to a Series as I've come in a non-LR.  All low end,
could idle and not over heat for days on end, and didn't like to drive over
55MPH.  Mileage was the same as was the tank size.  It sure was an easy
beast to maintain.

Jeff

on 9/27/01 5:16 PM, Faure, Marin at [email-masked] wrote:

> 
> Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 10:17:16 -0400
> From: Bill Adams <[email-masked]>
> Organization: U.S. International Broadcasting Bureau
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [lro] Fixing up a Land Rover
> Reply-To: [email-masked]
> 
> 
>> British horsepower = expensive, unreliable, hard to source, usually
> relies on American technology, leaks.
> American horsepower = cheap, easy to come by, lots of aftermarket
> support, reliable, things fit together, doesn't leak.
> 
> Well, I've had some experience with American horsepower, and I'm sure
> not impressed.  The absolute crappiest engine I've ever dealt with is the
> 300 cu. in. six in my Ford F-250.  It split it's block wide open in No. 3
> cylinder at 52,000 miles.  It's been through two exhaust manifolds.  The
> "automatic" choke was a joke from day one, the thing leaks oil from the
> joints FAR worse 
> than either of my Rover engines, it gets atrocious mileage, it's been
> through several 
> water pumps.  For an engine that supposedly has a great reputation, mine and
> the 
> ones that have been in friends' pickups and vans have been nothing but
> trouble.  
> As for Dodge, my experience with their V-8 engines has been enough to swear
> me 
> off any Daimler-Chrysler product for ever.  Hard to start, hard to keep
> running, hard 
> to maintain, and in the end, hard to justify bothering with in the first
> place.
> 
> The old small-block Ford V-8 was a great engine, as was the Chevy.
> 
> The most reliable engine, in terms of always starting and never quitting,
> I've ever operated
> is the 2.25 petrol engine in my Land Rover.  The second most reliable engine
> (so far) has 
> been the 3.9 V-8 in our Range Rover.  After that, it's the 3.5 engine in my
> BMW 635csi.  
> After that it's the various engines in the Japanese vehicles I've used over
> the years.  But 
> American engines have been nothing to write home about in my experience over
> the last 
> few decades.  And in terms of parts, I have often gotten parts for the Land
> Rover and 
> Range Rover (first from Atlantic British in California and now from Rovers
> North) faster 
> than I can get parts for either my Ford F-250 or BMW here in the Seattle
> area.  The Ford 
> and BMW people invariably have to order the part from the "warehouse," which
> in the case 
> of Ford is probably in Mexico.  So far, I have seen no advantage in
> maintenance, repair, or
> parts acquisition in owning an American vehicle.  And the Ford factory
> service manuals are
> the absolute worst manuals I have ever seen in my life, where the Land Rover
> manuals are 
> the best.  Surprisingly, the BMW manuals are not very good, either.
> 
> And if you want to talk diesels, the Cummins and Ford diesels used in light
> trucks and 
> vans are garbage compared to what's available in Europe.  All you have to do
> is listen 
> to them to know that.  We used a Ford E350 van in Calgary the other week,
> and it had the 
> Ford Powerstroke V-8 in it.  God, what a bucket of bolts.  The de Havilland
> Beaver I 
> fly has a quieter, smoother engine.  I've rented Land Rover Discoveries and
> Defenders in the UK,
> all with the diesel engine.  I have a friend who drives a Kenworth T600 with
> a MAN 
> diesel in it.  I have ridden in London taxis and a friend's 5-cylinder
> diesel Volvo station wagon
> in France.  Hell, I drive by idling EMD and GE railroad locomotives in the
> yard in Bellingham
> every weekend.  NONE of them are as irritatingly loud as a Ford diesel
> pickup or van or a Dodge Ram.
> Somehow, the Europeans have figured out how to make diesel engines of all
> sizes that are no louder
> than gas engines.  It is a talent that has apparently escaped American
> engine designers, at least those
> creating diesels for smaller vehicles.
> 
> One of the best, albeit unsophisticated, marine engines ever made is the
> Ford Lehman 
> 120.  The base engine was designed and manufactured in England (known over
> there as the 
> Dorset engine).  A few years ago, GM tried to market a marine diesel that
> was based on one of
> their light truck diesels.  It was far and away the worst marine diesel ever
> foisted off on the public.
> Cummins is doing the same thing today with their 6-cylinder, and while their
> engine is not nearly
> so bad as the GM attempt, it is far behind the offerings from Volvo and MAN
> in terms of reliability.
> Caterpillars aren't bad, and the John Deere's are improving.  But the best,
> most reliable marine diesels
> are not from this country.  A friend of mine runs a commercial fishing fleet
> in Honolulu.  His boats
> are all equipped with Volvo diesels, and he gets about 35,000 hours out of
> each one with nothing more
> than routine oil changes and maintenance.  He tried running Caterpillars
> once, and got less than half
> that many hours.  He had one boat with a Cummins, and it needed a new engine
> after 7,500 hours.
> 
> The US has produced some outstanding powerplants, don't get me wrong.  But a
> blanket statement
> that American engines are better than British engines is not correct.  Some
> of them are far better, some of
> them are far worse.  If you go back in history a bit, the Allison V-12 used
> in American fighters like the
> P-38, P-39, P-40, and initial run of P-51s was not such a great engine.  The
> German inverted V-12 Daimler
> was far superior, as was the Rolls Royce Merlin and later the Griffon. It's
> a not-too-well-known fact that
> the lackluster, Allison-equipped P-51 was on the road to cancellation until
> someone stuck a Rolls Royce
> Merlin in one to see what would happen.  The result was magic, and Packard
> was given the license to
> produce Merlins in this country for the Mustang program.
> 
> C. Marin Faure
> (original owner)
> 1973 Land Rover Series III
> 1991 Range Rover Vogue SE
> Seattle
> _______________________________________________
> LRO mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

--__--__--

Message: 11
Date: 27 Sep 2001 18:29:20 -0700
To: [email-masked]
From: Bryan Hoult <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Fixing up a Land Rover
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Thu, 27 September 2001, "Hope Peter" wrote:

>Nahh, I want the PowerStroke they put >into the F Series

The new modular OHC v-eights are the most likely choice.  The 5.4 would make a great 110 motor.

Bryan

________________________________________________
PeoplePC:  It's for people. And it's just smart. 
http://www.peoplepc.com 

--__--__--

Message: 12
Date: 27 Sep 2001 18:35:46 -0700
To: [email-masked]
From: Bryan Hoult <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] rubber side window gasket?
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Thu, 27 September 2001, george kase wrote:

> Any one know where to find the rubber >gasket that holds flat
> automotive glass in place on sheet >metal panels? 

I've had good luck with Minor Rubber.  (www.minorrubber.com).  I have the their extrusion catalog at my desk if you would like me to look  something up.

Bryan

________________________________________________
PeoplePC:  It's for people. And it's just smart. 
http://www.peoplepc.com 

--__--__--

Message: 13
From: "Faure, Marin" <[email-masked]>
To: "'Land Rover Mail Group'" <[email-masked]>
Cc: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 19:10:23 -0700
Subject: [lro] The soul of a Land Rover (was fixing up a Land Rover)
Reply-To: [email-masked]

From: Keith Tanner <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] RE: Fixing up a Land Rover
Reply-To: [email-masked]

>On a related note, where does the "soul" of a Land Rover reside? If I 
replace the transmission, the frame, the bulkhead, the suspension and other 
sundry bits, when does it become a different Land Rover?

It depends on how you approach the definition.  To the people heavily modifying 
Land Rovers (or any other vehicle) they sincerely believe they still have a Land Rover.  
To the people buying and selling Land Rovers for a living, a heavily modified 
Land Rover has only a portion of the value it would have if it were unmodified, even 
if the modifications increase the performance or reliability. In that vein, they are no longer 
considered Land Rovers, but are Land Rover hybrids, or vehicles based on Land Rovers.

I had a conversation with a 
classic car owner this weekend, and when I mentioned I had a 1973 Land Rover, he said 
don't even re-paint it until you absolutely have to.  As long as the original paint is serviceable 
and doing a decent job of protecting the vehicle, a worn original paint job makes a vehicle 
more valuable than a nice shiny new paint job.  (He has an MG-TD and an MG-C, and has 
owned classic cars, American and foreign, for years).  I'm sure you've seen the value of 
a piece of antique furniture knocked way down on Antiques Roadshow because the owner 
refinished it, thinking they were improving it.  Now that was a purist talking to me, and he 
certainly doesn't reflect the attitude of all Series Land Rover owners, not even me, as I'd 
rather like to have my SIII repainted someday.

One way to answer Mr. Tanner's question is to ask yourself what attracted you to the Land Rover in the 
first place?  To most of the owners I have known personally, they were attracted by the whole 
package, including its limitations.  The Land Rover as produced is what they wanted.  After owning 
one for awhile, some of them wished for more power, some for better brakes, some for better 
handling, but for the most part, they accepted the vehicle for what it was.  I'd love to have more 
power and better brakes, but it's not worth my time or money to make the modifications, and 
whatever value, both monetary and sentimental, there is in my SIII would be severely reduced.  
I might have vastly improved performance, but I would no longer have an example of 
a 1973 Land Rover Series III Model 88, which I rather like having.

For myself, I draw the line at the engine and drivetrain.  Changing to parabolic springs, 
or, as in my case, putting 109 springs on an 88 I don't think really changes the nature of the 
beast, except to a collector, restorer, or purist.  Over the years, I've modified the instrument 
panel of my SIII, and that certainly has reduced its value as far as being a stock Land Rover, 
but I don't think it really makes it "not-a-Land-Rover."  

But I believe that changing the powerplant and/or drivetrain changes 
the vehicle to the point that it is no longer an example of a Land Rover, but is simply something 
the owner created him or herself.  It may be a great vehicle for that owner's purposes.  It may 
be a better vehicle than the Land Rover it was based on.  I'm not saying the owner should be 
condemned for doing it.  But don't try to sell me on the idea that it's still a Land Rover, because 
it isn't anymore, at least not to me.  If I was in the market for a Land Rover 109, I would not 
buy TeriAnn's hybrid if it was for sale, because that's not a Land Rover 109 to me.  It sounds 
like TeriAnn has created a terrific vehicle for her purposes.  But if I am going to buy a Land Rover 
109, I would want a 109 as it was manufactured, anemic engine and all, because that's what a 
Model 109 is.  Now based on my use of the vehicle, I may decide to put in a more 
powerful engine because it may be worth it to me to retain the other qualities of the 
Series Land Rover- lots of usable interior space, aluminum body panels, etc.  But it 
would no longer be, even to me who made the modification, a real Land Rover.

One of my favorite cars is the early Jaguar E-type coupe with the 3.8 or 4.2 engine.  
I had one of these engines in what had been an Austin Healey 3000, and I know 
they are not the most reliable, or easy to maintain engines around.  In fact, they 
can be a downright pain in the ass.  But to me, that engine is a big part of what makes an 
E-type an E-type.

A popular modification of E-type a number of years ago was to replace the XK engine 
with a Chevy engine, 350 cubic inch I believe.  This certainly got rid of the hassles of dealing with 
the quirky XK, but was it really an E-type anymore?  Based on the prices these vehicles 
command today, the re-engined E-types sell for far less than E-types with the Jaguar XK 
engine.

I think a good way to judge the more esoteric "soul" value of a vehicle is by the prices they 
command.  We have seen ads on this list or on E-bay for fully restored, totally stock Series 
Land Rovers for astronomical prices, far more than they are in reality worth.  In some 
cases, the sellers have found buyers.  There have also been ads for stock Series Land 
Rovers in decent condition in the $6,000-$12,000 range.  While there are probably some 
exceptions, I'm not aware of heavily modified, re-engined Series Land Rovers 
commanding the same kinds of prices as the stock vehicles, assuming the same condition.

Now I know many of you will say you're not interested in the monetary worth of your 
Land Rovers, only in having a vehicle that will do what you want it to.  That's fine, and I don't 
dispute your opinion.  But what Mr. Tanner is asking is very hard to define, the "soul" of a 
Land Rover, because it will be different things to different people.  Monetary value is the 
one concrete indication we can point to of how most people feel about a certain item, be 
it a car, painting, boat, piece of furniture, etc.  At face value, a Monet painting is just some 
canvas, paint, and a frame.  The value of the components is a few dollars at most.  But the 
staggering prices of Monet's paintings today reflect the value we place on what he did, on
his interpretation of what he saw at the time, on the effort and thought he put into trying to 
convey his feelings to the rest of us.  But you may not like the shade of 
red he used in a particular painting.  Or you may feel the frame it's in is really ugly.  So 
should you change it because you don't agree with what Monet did?

As silly a comparison as this may seem, changing the engine and drivetrain, or the body, or 
any component of a Land Rover that defines the vehicle, is a bit like changing the hue of red 
in a Monet painting.  You may like the new red better.  It may even look better to a lot of 
other people.  You may well end up with a painting you much prefer 
on the wall in your home over the same painting with Monet's choice of red.  But is it what 
Monet had in mind when he painted the picture?  Is it still a Monet painting now, with 
your red on it?

The folks at Land Rover chose the components of the Series Land Rover using criteria we may 
never know.  The technology at the time, the parts that were available, the designs they thought would do 
the job best.  The end result was the Series I, II, IIa, and III.  Had they been building for today's 
driving conditions with today's technology, they would for sure have made the vehicle 
differently.  Monet might have used the red paint you like if he'd been able to buy it.  But it wasn't available, 
so maybe that's why he didn't use it.  The Chevy 350 engine wasn't available in the 1940s, so Land Rover 
didn't use it.  Of course, they might not have thought it was necessary even if it had been available, much 
as Monet might not have liked your shade of red even if he'd been able to come up with it.

So what defines the "soul" of a Land Rover?  I think the engineering that went into it, the thinking 
behind the way it was intended to be used and driven, and the design of the components, as old 
fashioned as they may be today, that make it up.  Change any of those things, and you no longer 
have a Series Land Rover.

Don't misinterpret me.  Some people think re-engining a Land Rover is a sin.  I don't feel that way, 
and I don't condemn people who modify their vehicles as evil history-killers. I've seen a lot of 
hot-rods over the years that I thought were really neat.  But while I may have really liked a particular 
hot rod, I did not think of it as a '32 Ford, but as a really neat car based on a '32 Ford.  
And the relatively few hot rod owners I've talked to didn't try to pawn their machines off as '32 
Fords or whatever.  The term I recall being used most was "'32 Ford hotrod."  Sort of like 
"'72 Series III hybrid."

So is a re-engined Land Rover still a Land Rover with the "soul" of a Land Rover?  In my never-to-
be-humble opinion, I don't think so.

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

--__--__--

Message: 14
From: "Peter Ogilvie" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Re: Fixing up a Land Rover
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 16:33:01 -1000
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Marin's rant against American Engines and for German and Japanese products 
is just about 180 degrees out from my experience.  BMW makes an extremely 
well engineered 'driver's' cars.  Unfortunately, there reliability ain't so 
hot.  Believe they fall below the median on independent surveys for 
reliability.  If you want junk marine engines, look at the Pathfinder 
Diesel, a marinization of the VW Rabbit diesel. It sank out of sight faster 
than the Titanic.  As far as Volvo Diesels, think their passenger diesel is 
actually a VW engine.  Other Volvo diesels probably come from their 
Volvo/White truck line which is an American subsidiary.  My own experience 
with samll Volvo Marine Diesels hasn't been so hot, rebuild needed after 
only a few thousand hours.  Everybody likes to brag about their Japanese 
cars but my experience has been terrible.  Wasted upper ends, oil burning, 
more money in maintenance than the cars cost and none got anywhere near the 
century mark without major repairs.

Haven't had a lot of experience with American engines other than the Jeep 
four and an ancient Oldsmobile 88 that got me through College. The only 
thing didn't fall apart on the jeeps were the engines.  The Olds was 
unkillable, despite some serious abuse and lots of miles.  It was the 
transmission that killed it, by the way, not the engine and that was after I 
sold it.  Best $100 I ever spent.  Haven't owned American cars for the same 
reasons that I own a bunch of series trucks, not big on marshmallows.

Detroit has come up with some turkeys.  GM's '80s v-8 diesel, and the 2.8 
V-6 of the same period were true boat anchor material.  The 318, 350, 351 
V-8s, the 3.5-3.8 V-6s and the little Iron Duke all have great reputations.  
Even our own beloved Rovers are powered by Detroit iron., make that 
aluminum.

All engine manufacturers have had some models that they would like to forget 
about.

American diesel engines have almost exclusively been aimed at trucks.  Quiet 
operation and light weight have not been high on their list of priorities.  
In the rest of the world, where fuel costs are a much greater consideration, 
the need for passenger vehicle diesel engines has had much greater priority. 
  When it comes to making efficient, powerful gasoline engines, the US auto 
makers are at the top.

As far as aircraft engines, the Allison had problems developing horsepower 
at altitude.  The engine was okay but not for a high altitude fighter.  
Believe they were even preferred over the Packard for Gold Cup Boats.  As 
far as the Mustang, it was a nice machine but the 'Jug' also had an 
impressive number of kills and believe there were more Ace's in the Jug than 
the Mustang.  When it came to Korea, the AirForce regretted the decision to 
keep the 51 and scrap the 47's.  The engines in the Mustang were just too 
fragile and lacked the power of big old radials, the American strong suit, 
that were in the Jug and the Navy's aircraft.

To issue a blanket statement, as Marin did, stretches credulity.  Given the 
choice of a 635 BMW or a Cadilac Seville, I'd be driving the Beamer in a New 
York Minute.  If I had to haul or tow something heavy, I'd take a 3/4 ton 
American Diesel Truck without giving a thought to a High Cap Rover 110 td5.  
If I was going to buy a 'new' 4x4 toy, I'd look no further than a TJ.  A lot 
of different cars with a lot of different personalities, just wish my wallet 
and garage was big enough to play with them all.

Still thinking about a 350 or 6.5 powered RR Classic.  You're going to see a 
Ford V-8 powering Defenders soon and a Jaguar engine in the RR.  Either one 
will be a big improvement over the historical relic, that does nothing well, 
now powering those vehicles.  Hopefully Ford will take the technology of the 
TD5, punch it out to 3.5 liters and give us a decent diesel option for a 
recreational vehicle in the US.  Not holding my breath on that as I'm not 
sure the Defender is going to survive with anything like its current charm.

Yep, will agree with Marin on the 2 1/4L, however.  The lump just keeps 
chugging along.

Aloha
Peter Ogilvie
Kona Coffee Rover
1970 88 soft top, 'huli' Mine since '84 but recovering
     from exposure of the dark side.
1966 109 pickup 'slime'  In my garage since '90, finally running.
1965 88 parts car, slowly sinking into the lava.
196? 88 hard top, possibly 'phoenix' if it rises, it will
     certainly be from ashes or at least a pile of rust

>From: "Faure, Marin" <[email-masked]>

>Well, I've had some experience with American horsepower, and I'm sure
>not impressed.  The absolute crappiest engine I've ever dealt with is the
>300 cu. in. six in my Ford F-250.  It split it's block wide open in No. 3
>  cylinder at 52,000 miles.  It's been through two exhaust manifolds.  The
>"automatic" choke was a joke from day one, the thing leaks oil from the
>joints FAR worse
>than either of my Rover engines, it gets atrocious mileage, it's been
>through several
>water pumps.  For an engine that supposedly has a great reputation, mine 
>and
>the
>ones that have been in friends' pickups and vans have been nothing but
>trouble.
>As for Dodge, my experience with their V-8 engines has been enough to swear
>me
>off any Daimler-Chrysler product for ever.  Hard to start, hard to keep
>running, hard
>to maintain, and in the end, hard to justify bothering with in the first
>place.
>
>The old small-block Ford V-8 was a great engine, as was the Chevy.
>
>The most reliable engine, in terms of always starting and never quitting,
>I've ever operated
>is the 2.25 petrol engine in my Land Rover.  The second most reliable 
>engine
>(so far) has
>been the 3.9 V-8 in our Range Rover.  After that, it's the 3.5 engine in my
>BMW 635csi.
>After that it's the various engines in the Japanese vehicles I've used over
>the years.  But
>American engines have been nothing to write home about in my experience 
>over
>the last
>few decades.  And in terms of parts, I have often gotten parts for the Land
>Rover and
>Range Rover (first from Atlantic British in California and now from Rovers
>North) faster
>than I can get parts for either my Ford F-250 or BMW here in the Seattle
>area.  The Ford
>and BMW people invariably have to order the part from the "warehouse," 
>which
>in the case
>of Ford is probably in Mexico.  So far, I have seen no advantage in
>maintenance, repair, or
>parts acquisition in owning an American vehicle.  And the Ford factory
>service manuals are
>the absolute worst manuals I have ever seen in my life, where the Land 
>Rover
>manuals are
>the best.  Surprisingly, the BMW manuals are not very good, either.
>
>And if you want to talk diesels, the Cummins and Ford diesels used in light
>trucks and
>vans are garbage compared to what's available in Europe.  All you have to 
>do
>is listen
>to them to know that.  We used a Ford E350 van in Calgary the other week,
>and it had the
>Ford Powerstroke V-8 in it.  God, what a bucket of bolts.  The de Havilland
>Beaver I
>fly has a quieter, smoother engine.  I've rented Land Rover Discoveries and
>Defenders in the UK,
>all with the diesel engine.  I have a friend who drives a Kenworth T600 
>with
>a MAN
>diesel in it.  I have ridden in London taxis and a friend's 5-cylinder
>diesel Volvo station wagon
>in France.  Hell, I drive by idling EMD and GE railroad locomotives in the
>yard in Bellingham
>every weekend.  NONE of them are as irritatingly loud as a Ford diesel
>pickup or van or a Dodge Ram.
>Somehow, the Europeans have figured out how to make diesel engines of all
>sizes that are no louder
>than gas engines.  It is a talent that has apparently escaped American
>engine designers, at least those
>creating diesels for smaller vehicles.
>
>One of the best, albeit unsophisticated, marine engines ever made is the
>Ford Lehman
>120.  The base engine was designed and manufactured in England (known over
>there as the
>Dorset engine).  A few years ago, GM tried to market a marine diesel that
>was based on one of
>their light truck diesels.  It was far and away the worst marine diesel 
>ever
>foisted off on the public.
>Cummins is doing the same thing today with their 6-cylinder, and while 
>their
>engine is not nearly
>so bad as the GM attempt, it is far behind the offerings from Volvo and MAN
>in terms of reliability.
>Caterpillars aren't bad, and the John Deere's are improving.  But the best,
>most reliable marine diesels
>are not from this country.  A friend of mine runs a commercial fishing 
>fleet
>in Honolulu.  His boats
>are all equipped with Volvo diesels, and he gets about 35,000 hours out of
>each one with nothing more
>than routine oil changes and maintenance.  He tried running Caterpillars
>once, and got less than half
>that many hours.  He had one boat with a Cummins, and it needed a new 
>engine
>after 7,500 hours.
>
>The US has produced some outstanding powerplants, don't get me wrong.  But 
>a
>blanket statement
>that American engines are better than British engines is not correct.  Some
>of them are far better, some of
>them are far worse.  If you go back in history a bit, the Allison V-12 used
>in American fighters like the
>P-38, P-39, P-40, and initial run of P-51s was not such a great engine.  
>The
>German inverted V-12 Daimler
>was far superior, as was the Rolls Royce Merlin and later the Griffon. It's
>a not-too-well-known fact that
>the lackluster, Allison-equipped P-51 was on the road to cancellation until
>someone stuck a Rolls Royce
>Merlin in one to see what would happen.  The result was magic, and Packard
>was given the license to
>produce Merlins in this country for the Mustang program.
>
>C. Marin Faure
>(original owner)
>1973 Land Rover Series III
>1991 Range Rover Vogue SE
>Seattle
>_______________________________________________
>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: 15
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 22:40:17 -0400
To: [email-masked]
From: Lori Sickley <[email-masked]>
Subject: [lro] Land Rover search
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Oh! OH!

http://images.google.com/

Plug in landrover, land rover, land rovers, series land rovers, etc.....or 
any LR part  : )

Lori in NE PA

--__--__--

Message: 16
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 21:11:32 -0600
From: "Jim Hall" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] terminal shudder
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I had this happen on my right side also. Unfortunately, I didn't notice
until I couldn't steer when driving up a trail, as all 4 had fallen out.
I think my holes had worn in the arm, allowing the bolts to move enough
to slowly unbend the tabs slightly. I finally "fixed" it by putting 
studs in, and tack welding them from the inside of the housing. I did
this because the threaded holes had widened also. I would try studs and
locktite if I were you. Welding was a last resort.

Smokey Briggs wrote:

> About six months later, much to my dismay,
> shudder reappeared -- same symptoms -- bumpy ground (sometimes a single bump
> -- that applied forces to one wheel but not the other).
> 
> The source was a loosening steering arm. The four big bolts were working
> their way loose despite the new safeties installed with the rebuild. The
> kicker is that you can't tell the thing is loose till you jack the front end
> up and relieve the pressure on the sterring assembly. Retightened bolts and
> bingo, no more shudder. (No more dripping 90W either. I had refinished this
> swivel ball with JB weld during rebuild and assumed my fix had shredded the
> new swivel ball seal when it started dripping, not long before the shudder
> reappeared).
> 
> What I cannot figure out is why only one side is working loose? This is a
> LHD 5dr 109 NAS. Right side is loosening - left is fine. The safeties are
> hammered down in place.
> 
> My next idea is loctite but it seems like something must be wrong -- that
> loctite may treat the symptom but not the cause. Any ideas.

-- 
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: 17
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 20:14:17 -0700 (PDT)
From: Derek Pommerenck <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [LRO] Air Conditioning in a Series
To: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Call or email Creed Evans in Montana at Big Sky, he
has loads of Defender parts, and he has a kit he
installs on 109's and 88's for air conditioning. 
Serious, I talked to him today about it and I am
considering it next year or so.

Derek Pommerenck
'73 SIII 109 2.25l Diesel soon to be 2.5l Diesel

=====
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
DEREK A. POMMERENCK
1st Lieutenant, US Army Corps of Engineers
HQ, C/554th Engineer Battalion
104 Hickory Ridge Dr.
Saint Robert, MO 65584
Home: (573) 336-8469
Listen to your Yahoo! Mail messages from any phone.
http://phone.yahoo.com

--__--__--

Message: 18
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 22:08:16 -0400
To: [email-masked]
From: Keith Tanner <[email-masked]>
Subject: [lro] Burn baby burn!
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I've found a frame and bulkhead that are amazingly rust free. But they've 
been through a fire - the body melted. Should I run away, examine the two 
closely or consider them heat-treated? They look to be quite good, but the 
surface rust on the bulkhead (in particular) makes it look poor. Both of 
these are stripped, but there are still some bolts that would be a royal 
pain to remove such as those rear shock bolts. I can pick them up cheap.

I'm thinking it makes more sense to refinish a good bulkhead and install it 
than to start welding on Basil's. I need new footwells badly and the 
pillars have rusted through below the lower hinges. Basil's frame is also, 
umm, lightweight.

Comments?

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

--__--__--

Message: 19
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 22:17:39 -0400
To: "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
From: Keith Tanner <[email-masked]>
Subject: [lro] Re: The soul of a Land Rover (was fixing up a Land Rover)
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Quite an essay, and an opinion I've heard before from Marin. Apparantly I 
mis-worded my question.

If I take a Series Land Rover and replace the frame, the transmission, the 
suspension, the bulkhead and other sundry bits with parts from other Series 
Rovers to repair the vehicle, at which point does it become a different 
truck and not the one I started with? :)

I think Basil is still a Series Rover. Yes, he runs on RM parabolics and 
radial tires and has a GM alternator. Otherwise, he's made of Series parts 
new and old. I don't think anyone would mistake the vehicle for anything else!

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

--__--__--

Message: 20
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 21:39:05 -0700
To: [email-masked]
From: aaron <[email-masked]>
Subject: [lro] Fixing up a Land Rover
Reply-To: [email-masked]

If Mark Pilkington's 88 is the one I think it is, he is leaving out 
an important part of the story. From what I remember him telling me 
when I went to look at some parts, is that the 88 came from the 
dealership with the v8 as an option. The original owner bought it 
that way, so to use a big word it has provenance. You should see the 
sand tires it had on it, about 3 feet wide if I remember right. How 
do you argue now that it is not a Land Rover since like many other 
parts of the world there are regional variations as compared to the 
"stock" version.

Aaron
69 88 in a thousand pieces

--__--__--

Message: 21
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2001 07:41:37 +0200
From: Paul Oxley <[email-masked]>
Organization: AfricanAdrenalin Safaris
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] terminal shudder
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Smokey Briggs wrote:
 
> What I cannot figure out is why only one side is working loose? This is a
> LHD 5dr 109 NAS. Right side is loosening - left is fine. The safeties are
> hammered down in place.

Just a suggestion: Could it be worn swivel pins/railko bushes that're
bringing on the shudders, which is then causing the bolts to work loose?
 
Regards

Paul Oxley
AfricanAdrenalin.com

--__--__--

_______________________________________________
* 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