Subject: LRO digest, Vol 1 #203 - 33 msgs

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 03:12:09 -0500 (EST)

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: Me262 restoration in Seattle (way off-topic) (N Forbes)
   2. Re: Me262 restoration in Seattle (way off-topic) ([email-masked])
   3. Mechanic in .... (A. P. (Sandy) Grice)
   4. Clutch problems (William J. Rice)
   5. Re: Me262 restoration in Seattle (way off-topic) (Peter Ogilvie)
   6. Re: Me262 restoration in Seattle (way off-topic) (Rich Williams)
   7. Re: Me262 restoration in Seattle (way off-topic) (Russ Wilson)
   8. Re: Mechanic in .... (Nick Danger)
   9. Re: Clutch problems (David Scheidt)
  10. Spring over (Jean-Leon Morin)
  11. Re: Spring over (TeriAnn Wakeman)
  12. Re: Spring over (Jean-Leon Morin)
  13. Re: Spring over (Scott Wickham)
  14. Re: Spring over (Jean-Leon Morin)
  15. Interior concerns (Jean-Leon Morin)
  16. Re: Pilots and Land Rovers (C. Marin Faure)
  17. 2.25 redline (C. Marin Faure)
  18. RE: 2.25 redline (C. Marin Faure)
  19. RE: 2.25 redline (C. Marin Faure)
  20. Re: 2.25 redline (C. Marin Faure)
  21. Series Rover service in Denver? (Rich Williams)
  22. Merry Christmas-Clutch problems (C. Marin Faure)
  23. Re: Me262 restoration in Seattle (way off-topic) (C. Marin Faure)
  24. Re: RE: 2.25 redline (Hope Peter)
  25. Re: Series Rover service in Denver? (Jim Hall)
  26. Re: Spring over (Hope Peter)
  27. Re: Spring over (Jim Hall)
  28. Re: Series Rover service in Denver? (William J. Rice)
  29. Re: Series Rover service in Denver? (Rich Williams)
  30. Re: Series Rover service in Denver? (Jim Hall)
  31. junkyard wars (Jim Hall)
  32. Series Tcase Strength (Tim Czajka)
  33. Re: Interior concerns (Paul Oxley)

--__--__--

Message: 1
From: "N Forbes" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Me262 restoration in Seattle (way off-topic)
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 14:54:28 +0000
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Andy, there is a website: www.stormbirds.com

My Grandfather was a navigator for the Pathfinders and his Mosquito was shot 
down by one of the very first Me262's. He has since met the pilot who shot 
him down in the last year or two and the other day that fellow told him 
about the planes being restored (I think they're doing five of them). On a 
related note, if anyone knows of any similar projects with Mosquitos, please 
let me know.

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

_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: 
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx

--__--__--

Message: 2
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Me262 restoration in Seattle (way off-topic)
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 15:10:59 GMT
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Wed, 26 Dec 2001 14:54:28 +0000 made me spill my meths when I read:

>On a related note, if anyone knows of any similar projects with Mosquitos, please 
>let me know.

OK, not exaclty a 100% remanufactur but the Yorkshire Air museum near
York, UK is working on a Mosquito.

http://www.yorkshireairmuseum.co.uk/

HTH
-- 
               I raise a glass of fine meths to you all
            and say "Merry Christmas, All The Best"
                                 Before I fall

 Wayne Davies, Harrogate, N.Yorks.  Mobile Tel: 07932 081776

--__--__--

Message: 3
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 10:37:55 -0500
To: [email-masked]
From: "A. P. (Sandy) Grice" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [lro] Mechanic in ....
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Does anyone else find it weird (chilling?) that two folks would write about
the same problem within an hour of each other?

<[email-masked]> wrote at 22:13:17 Canada/Eastern
Subject: [lro] Mechanic in Ottawa

and Nick Danger <[email-masked]> wrote at 22:54:41 -0500
Subject: [lro] Merry Christmas - Clutch problems

Scarry, actually - a classic example of Nigel's Disease, pure and simple.
I just rebuilt my clutch hydraulic system, and with weird symptoms, I just
did it all (except the flex line).  Clutch was there sometimes, others,
not.  It turned out to be the 'domed' spring washer in the inlet valve
assembly.  The half that remained behind would prop the valve open
sometimes so there would be no pressure build-up in the master.  (Never did
find the other half....)  Took the opportunity to swap over to silicone fluid.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to all the Rovers out there....

	*-----"jeep may be famous, LAND-ROVER is legendary"----*
	|                 A. P. "Sandy" Grice                  |
	|    The Rover Owners' Association of Virginia, Ltd    |
	|     1633 Melrose Parkway, Norfolk, VA 23508-1730     |
	*------ 1972 Series III 88"------ 1996 Discovery-------*

--__--__--

Message: 4
To: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 10:03:58 -0700
From: "William J. Rice" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [lro] Clutch problems
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Forgot to mention this last night, but if you're finding that you don't
have enough pedal travel to actuate the clutch, but are not losing fluid,
you can always try multiple pumps to build up enough pressure.  Obviously
not a long-term solution, but one that can get you across town w/o having
to resort to driving totally clutchless.  

bill

--__--__--

Message: 5
From: "Peter Ogilvie" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Me262 restoration in Seattle (way off-topic)
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 07:15:31 -1000
Reply-To: [email-masked]

My Dad was a recon. pilot in Europe flying Mustangs.  He ran into a 
mysterious plane over France on one of his solo missions.  I believe it was 
early in 1944 but never paid attention to the exact date.  The other plane 
obviously saw him but turned away.  Probably a good thing because my Dad's 
plane didn't have any guns as it was stripped for quick in and out missions. 
  Being a typical fighter pilot, he couldn't resist following the other 
plane.  He firewalled the throttle and began to close on the plane rapidly.  
The next thing he knew, the plane accelerated away from him until it was 
well out of gun range and then slowed down.  Accelerating away from a 
stripped down, hot rod Mustang was no mean feat and further piqued my Dad's 
curiosity, so he  continued in pursuit.  The other plane played a cat and 
mouse game letting my Dad creep up on him and then accelerating away.  This 
went on for a few iterations until my Dad realized they had flown over 
Germany and he was getting drawn farther and farther from home.  He broke 
off the engagement and reported the incident when he got back to base.  He 
never got close enough to see that the plane had no propellor but He could 
tell that it was no known German plane.  Unfortunately, he never got close 
enough to see what it really was except that it had two wing mounted 
engines.  The intelligence people back at base told him he was crazy and 
pooh poohed the sighting.  He never found out if his report ever got 
forwarded up the chain.  Months later the existance of the Me 262 got out.  
My Dad may have had the first sighting of one by an allied pilot.

Aloha
Peter O.

>From: "N Forbes" <[email-masked]>
>Reply-To: [email-masked]
>To: [email-masked]
>Subject: Re: [lro] Me262 restoration in Seattle (way off-topic)
>Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 14:54:28 +0000
>
>
>Andy, there is a website: www.stormbirds.com
>
>My Grandfather was a navigator for the Pathfinders and his Mosquito was 
>shot
>down by one of the very first Me262's. He has since met the pilot who shot
>him down in the last year or two and the other day that fellow told him
>about the planes being restored (I think they're doing five of them). On a
>related note, if anyone knows of any similar projects with Mosquitos, 
>please
>let me know.
>
>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
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
>http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
>_______________________________________________
>LRO mailing list
>[email-masked]
>http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com

--__--__--

Message: 6
From: "Rich Williams" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Me262 restoration in Seattle (way off-topic)
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 09:50:59 -0800
Reply-To: [email-masked]

A close friend of mine was both a Mustang pilot and a B-25 pilot in WWII.
He also worked in the Final Assembly facility for B-17s here at Boeing.
Burt was up at the Boeing Everett facility a few months ago and told me that
he saw the 262's.  He didn't say much, but what piqued my curiosity was his
comment about what else was up there.  He wouldn't say anything more but
promised to take me up there to see for myself.  Apparently there are some
other planes in production as well as some unbelievable restorations going
on up there.  Next time I see Burt I am going to have to remind him of his
promise.  I will be sure to take my digital camera (aka - mysterious bulge
in my jacket pocket, wink, wink).

I'll bet Marin could probably speak volumes about this better than I can,
and expect him to once he chimes in on the list again.

----- Original Message -----
From: Peter Ogilvie <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2001 9:15 AM
Subject: Re: [lro] Me262 restoration in Seattle (way off-topic)

>
> My Dad was a recon. pilot in Europe flying Mustangs.  He ran into a
> mysterious plane over France on one of his solo missions.  I believe it
was
> early in 1944 but never paid attention to the exact date.  The other plane
> obviously saw him but turned away.  Probably a good thing because my Dad's
> plane didn't have any guns as it was stripped for quick in and out
missions.
>   Being a typical fighter pilot, he couldn't resist following the other
> plane.  He firewalled the throttle and began to close on the plane
rapidly.
> The next thing he knew, the plane accelerated away from him until it was
> well out of gun range and then slowed down.  Accelerating away from a
> stripped down, hot rod Mustang was no mean feat and further piqued my
Dad's
> curiosity, so he  continued in pursuit.  The other plane played a cat and
> mouse game letting my Dad creep up on him and then accelerating away.
This
> went on for a few iterations until my Dad realized they had flown over
> Germany and he was getting drawn farther and farther from home.  He broke
> off the engagement and reported the incident when he got back to base.  He
> never got close enough to see that the plane had no propellor but He could
> tell that it was no known German plane.  Unfortunately, he never got close
> enough to see what it really was except that it had two wing mounted
> engines.  The intelligence people back at base told him he was crazy and
> pooh poohed the sighting.  He never found out if his report ever got
> forwarded up the chain.  Months later the existance of the Me 262 got out.
> My Dad may have had the first sighting of one by an allied pilot.
>
> Aloha
> Peter O.
>
>
> >From: "N Forbes" <[email-masked]>
> >Reply-To: [email-masked]
> >To: [email-masked]
> >Subject: Re: [lro] Me262 restoration in Seattle (way off-topic)
> >Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 14:54:28 +0000
> >
> >
> >Andy, there is a website: www.stormbirds.com
> >
> >My Grandfather was a navigator for the Pathfinders and his Mosquito was
> >shot
> >down by one of the very first Me262's. He has since met the pilot who
shot
> >him down in the last year or two and the other day that fellow told him
> >about the planes being restored (I think they're doing five of them). On
a
> >related note, if anyone knows of any similar projects with Mosquitos,
> >please
> >let me know.
> >
> >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
> >
> >
> >_________________________________________________________________
> >MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
> >http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
> >_______________________________________________
> >LRO mailing list
> >[email-masked]
> >http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
> _______________________________________________
> LRO mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

--__--__--

Message: 7
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 10:04:29 -0800
To: [email-masked]
From: Russ Wilson <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Me262 restoration in Seattle (way off-topic)
Reply-To: [email-masked]

My Dad was a recon. pilot in Europe flying Mustangs.  He ran into a 
mysterious plane over France on one of his solo missions.

>   My Dad may have had the first sighting of one by an allied pilot.

-- 
Peter, Thanks for the great story!  I wonder if one of the Vet 
magazines, American Legion, VFW, would be interested in printing it?

Happy New Year!

RW

--__--__--

Message: 8
Subject: Re: [lro] Mechanic in ....
From: Nick Danger <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: 26 Dec 2001 14:01:48 -0500
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Wed, 2001-12-26 at 10:37, A. P. (Sandy) Grice wrote:
> 
> Does anyone else find it weird (chilling?) that two folks would write about
> the same problem within an hour of each other?

I decided that my problem is simply the constant 'r', the number of non
working items that must be present in my Rover at any time. Since I
managed to get my wipers working on Saturday, I figured it was only a
matter of minutes driving before something else would break. Either that
or the world as we know it would blink into non existance...

-Nick

--__--__--

Message: 9
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 15:54:09 -0500 (EST)
From: David Scheidt <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Clutch problems
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Wed, 26 Dec 2001, William J. Rice wrote:

> 
> Forgot to mention this last night, but if you're finding that you don't
> have enough pedal travel to actuate the clutch, but are not losing fluid,
> you can always try multiple pumps to build up enough pressure.  Obviously
> not a long-term solution, but one that can get you across town w/o having
> to resort to driving totally clutchless.  
l

The other thing that can cause a sudden failure of the clutch release
mechanism is the the two pins that are on the tube that connects the clutch
slave to the throwout.  If one shears, the clutch will not disenggage
properly, taking more of the pedal stroke, or not disengageing completely.
(this is on the IIA, the III is different, but there may be a similiar
rfailure mode.)

David

--__--__--

Message: 10
From: "Jean-Leon Morin" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 16:32:55 -0500
Subject: [lro] Spring over
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Hi folks, progress update on my modifications... I figured some of you might
like to see how my project is progressing. If some of you find this type of
"non - stock rover specific posting" please let me know. If it is
unbearable, I'll simply go sit at my little table alone.

Couple of things I have noticed while putting range rover axles under a
Land-Rover in spring-over form...

- To retain decent tie rod angles and clearance I had to mill a steering arm
out of solid steel stock, that will anchor to the top kingpin (swivel pin)
and some other points. This will eliminate bumpsteer, as the tierod is
perfectly level. This problem is solved.

- I have a serious angularity problem with the front driveshaft. This was
expected. I have been thinking of simply getting a CV driveshaft made for
the vehicle to solve my problems, but I've been staring at the truck for a
few days and have thought of a few possible mods that would cure my ails...
Or at least some of them.

_____

The 109 has an extremely long rear driveshaft and a very short front one.
When the vehicle is lifted, the rear driveshaft has no problems coping with
the increased angle because of it's length. The front doesn't work. So, the
idea is to lengthen the front and shorten the rear driveshafts, to end up
with at least 8- 10"of front driveshaft length increase. Now, this seems
like a good idea, but how am I going to move the transfer case back? Moving
the whole engine and tranny back is not an option, I am NOT cutting all
those motor mounts off again ;-)

In the switch to 3.54 diffs, my major concern was the loss of a good crawl
ratio. The higher diffs mean I lose the gearing I really like, and this
coupled with bigger tires, and I might just have a problem with the engine
stalling on inclines - which is NOT good. So, I am currently thinking of
putting in a second transfer case, that would fit between the transmission
and the rover transfer case. This would be an NP203, which has a 2-1 drop to
it. This would mean my drivetrain combination would be - ford 300 six, T18,
NP203, rover T case, 3.54 diffs. The NP 203 transfer case is composed of a
few different parts bolted together, so I could separate it and use the
reduction box only, which is straight through. It's a beautifully square
casting with nice, big bolt patterns. Simple, and bulletproof. Perfect for
adapting to other transmissions.

>From the information I gathered on the Net, the second case would be quite
an undertaking, but would offer an additional length of about 8", and would
give a great crawl ratio off-road, perhaps only for bragging rights, but I
have found my current crawl ratio to be useful every day when just messing
around with my rover, pulling logs, etc, and I'm not really willing to give
it up, although 6.32 X 2.0 X 2.0 (?) X 1.14 X 3.54 = overkill LOW.

____

The other possibility that I have thought of is simply rotating the rover
transfer case on the transmission with some adapter trickery (which is much
easier than the idea of building adapters for a totally different transfer
case), to lower the height at which the driveshafts attach to the transfer
case. This presents some problems as the oil level in the transfer case
would be at an "angle" with where they were previously, and it defeats one
of the purposes of having a lift - which is increased ground clearance. The
transfer case mounts would also have to be modified, in fact the complete
transfer case crossmember would have to be modified to fit in at an angle.
Right now it fits flush with the bottom of the chassis, which means I can
literally drag the vehicle across a rock and not damage it. By lowering the
crossmember, I lose this valuable ground clearance, especially on a long,
long 109.

_____

So many ideas, so little time...

J-L

--__--__--

Message: 11
Subject: Re: [lro] Spring over
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 01 14:24:52 -0800
From: TeriAnn Wakeman <[email-masked]>
To: "LRO list" <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]

>Hi folks, progress update on my modifications... I figured some of you might
>like to see how my project is progressing. If some of you find this type of
>"non - stock rover specific posting" please let me know. If it is
>unbearable, I'll simply go sit at my little table alone.

Keep the updates coming.  Some of us like to see how others approach and 
solve design issues.

>- I have a serious angularity problem with the front driveshaft. This was
>expected.

Rover specs 26 degrees on it's 'U' joints (all standard Spicer yolks) as 
the maximum bend angle.  Let us know how you solve this problem.

>In the switch to 3.54 diffs, my major concern was the loss of a good crawl
>ratio. The higher diffs mean I lose the gearing I really like, and this
>coupled with bigger tires, and I might just have a problem with the engine
>stalling on inclines - which is NOT good.

But I'm sure you took this into account during your initial design?

>This would be an NP203, which has a 2-1 drop to it. This would mean 
>my drivetrain combination would be - ford 300 six, T18, NP203, 
>rover T case, 3.54 diffs. 

Let me know how this works out.  Having a T-18 into a Rover transfercase, 
I'm interested.

TeriAnn Wakeman               If you send me direct mail, please
Santa Cruz, California        start the subject line with TW - 
[email-masked]           I will be sure to read the message

http://www.cruzers.com/~twakeman   

"How can life grant us the boon of living..unless we dare"
Amelia Earhart 1898-1937

--__--__--

Message: 12
From: "Jean-Leon Morin" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Spring over
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 18:46:17 -0500
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> Keep the updates coming.  Some of us like to see how others approach and
> solve design issues.

I figured at least you would be interested in my developements ;-)

> Rover specs 26 degrees on it's 'U' joints (all standard Spicer yolks) as
> the maximum bend angle.  Let us know how you solve this problem.

There are many ways around this that have been developed by other 4x4
enthusiasts, but all of them cause all kinds of driveline problems. When
looking at most techniques employed on other 4x4's during lifts, they seem
to disregard the engineering side of everything, just to end up with
something scary-high. Running either diff with the pinion angled up is NOT
an option, it is completely brainless -  even with a "CV" driveshaft. I
would not be interested in cooking my differentials as the pinion bearings
melt due to lack of oil. I'm going to drop the transfer case as a last
possible option as I don't want anything hanging below the framerails... I'd
like to think I'm doing this right.

Speaking of "CV" driveshafts, I don't particularly like these as they are
costly and it just means another U joint to destroy. Besides, they're not CV
at all.

What I have been thinking of is building a real CV driveshaft, using two
CV's taken off the front end of a Chevy 3/4 ton 4x4. Some of these trucks
have IFS which means there is a massive CV joint that allows the wheel to
turn. This isn't a U joint, it's a CV like is found on a front wheel drive
car, or inside the front axle of a Range Rover at the swivel ball. It is
sealed in a CV boot, which means you never have to grease it. It is
perfectly constant in its rotation and works at 45 degrees as it does
straight through. Using two outer cases modified (drive flanges welded to
the joints, or something like this - still thinking about this one) and a
long spicer slip joint, I could theoretically have a driveshaft that is
running at a 25-30 degree angle on flat ground, and upto 45-50 degrees in an
extreme. This would basically solve the problem completely, and it is rather
simple to execute.

I just spent the day investigating this possibility, and have come up with a
few design "points to ponder".

- Because of the gear reduction through the diff and the fact that Front
Wheel Drive cars have the CV directly connected to the wheel, it is assumed
that the torque would be divided and RPMs multiplied by the diff gear ratio.
Of course the wheel is much larger (35") than a Honda wheel, (175/70R13 )
but the fact remains that the torque encountered by my driveshaft would be
less than a shaft on a small car, but the RPMS would be much more.

Figures -

Torque -

Small car - 20" wheel. 10" moment arm.
Rover - 35" wheel. 17.5" / 3.54 = 4.94" moment arm.

So in reality, the driveshaft doesn't "feel" as much torque as the one on
the little car. Hopefully using a good large CV from a high powered car
would give enough strength...

RPMS -

small car -

    Engine RPMS as speed ( from memory - my old Civic) 4000 rpms, 60 mph in
4th. (1-1).
    This means 4000 divided by diff ratio (assume 3.5) equals... 1142 rpms
at speed.

Big rover -

    Engine 3000 rpms at 60 mph. 1.14 T case ratio in top gear. 3420 rpms.

This is almost 3 times the RPMS. So, the CV driveshaft would definitely feel
the extra RPMS. This may cause the driveshaft to burn out. Fortunately, the
vehicle operates in 2wd on the highway, so it would spin at this speed
totally unladen.

I have some design to do for this one, I'll post an update once I have more
research done.

> >In the switch to 3.54 diffs, my major concern was the loss of a good
crawl
> >ratio. The higher diffs mean I lose the gearing I really like, and this
> >coupled with bigger tires, and I might just have a problem with the
engine
> >stalling on inclines - which is NOT good.
>
> But I'm sure you took this into account during your initial design?
>
Well, yes and no. The type of off-road around here is primarily mud and
forest crawling. I very rarely need my first low. The engine I have puts out
hilarious amounts of torque, and it is common to see me in 3rd high
off-road, creeping along at 400 rpms, while series trucks are in 2nd low.
On the other hand with the increased articulation and traction offered by
the new tires, I'm probably going to find I'll get into much more trouble
that I usually do...

I am willing to give up my 80 ish crawl for 65 ish numbers, as I think this
will be a small difference and I'll still be able to drive over most
obstacles without using the gas pedal. Of course, the twin T case swap would
be really nice as I'd end up with about 130-1 crawl, which is rock monkey
territory.

> Let me know how this works out.  Having a T-18 into a Rover transfercase,
> I'm interested.

I am still very much in the design stages of the drivetrain side of things,
but I will definitely keep you (all of you)  posted. The main idea I have
now is to go for a CV driveshaft and start designing the second transfer
case swap now, to have it in for the summer...

J-L

--__--__--

Message: 13
From: "Scott Wickham" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Spring over
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 19:01:39 -0500
Reply-To: [email-masked]

JL, good interesting stuff.  I was kicking around the idea of building a
hybrid as well.  I have a really H/D frame from a SIII 88" to start with.
Someone else had welded a 3" lift to the spring mounts so I was thinking
maybe I can get 35" tires under it.  I've been thinking about this for
months.
  BUT, everything I would want to upgrade, bigger engine (probably non LR),
better brakes, more supple suspension, the Rangie already has.  So now I'm
thinking I'll just keep hopping up the RR to be my #1 Rover.  I want at
least 33" or 34" tires.  I was thinking about putting in 2 Series diff's to
get that nice low gearing.  I already have a +2" spring kit (OME), and would
probably do a body lift of 1" or 2", no more.  Series diff's and an auto
tranny out of a '87 or '88 RR to get the OD 4th gear.
   I've had a Series diff in the rear, front 'shaft off, with 32" tires and
took it for a spin on the highway.  Just like the Series truck, 55mph is
really pushing it.  So I think with the OD tranny and some bigger tires I'll
be in good shape.  Oh yea, some GBR H/D rear half shafts with a locker of
some sort.
  I would so much rather have a manual tranny off road but, oh well.  The ZF
seems to hold up well.  Roll cage, winch, custom Scooter Bumpers too.  Maybe
a new light weight roof rack design.  I just got some new tools for
Christmas so I'm ready for some more metal fabrication.  New chop saw,
tubing bender, tubing notcher, drill press.  I ready to make some sparks ;)

Scooter

--__--__--

Message: 14
From: "Jean-Leon Morin" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Spring over
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 19:34:40 -0500
Reply-To: [email-masked]

>   I would so much rather have a manual tranny off road but, oh well.  The
ZF
> seems to hold up well.  Roll cage, winch, custom Scooter Bumpers too.
Maybe
> a new light weight roof rack design.  I just got some new tools for
> Christmas so I'm ready for some more metal fabrication.  New chop saw,
> tubing bender, tubing notcher, drill press.  I ready to make some sparks
;)
What's stopping you from going manual? If you are going to start modifying
the vehicle like this, it would be really cool to have a 5 speed in it.
You'd be the only one on the block, that's for sure... It would be quite the
undertaking though... The only problem with having a range rover is having a
range rover ;-) The complexity and technology is both a blessing and a
curse.

Lucky son of a gun. I can only dream of the day I lay my hands on a tubing
bender that works. I've started dreaming up my rollbar as I don't want to be
sitting roofless in the rover, on 35" tires... without at least a rollbar to
save my noggin.

J-L

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

--__--__--

Message: 15
From: "Jean-Leon Morin" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 20:07:03 -0500
Subject: [lro] Interior concerns
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Hello folks,

I painted the rover this fall with a brush, but failed to do the interior
because of dropping temperatures. I have been driving around with a green
rover with a nasty, dirty, scratched up sand interior for a while now, and
it has NOT grown on me.

There are also a ton of small holes in the rear tub and the seatbox that I
would like to plug. Naturally, when someone mentioned spray on bedliner, I
thought it was a great idea - it would be tough, and plug all the little
holes that are in the rear tub. Great. Of course, when I priced such a thing
out, I fell on my back.

So, I've been thinking of doing the entire interior (including bulkhead)
with roll-on home-applied bedliner like Durabak. I've been wondering how
exactly to proceed because of how the seatbox and floorboards are removable.
This means I'd almost have to coat all the panels individually and then
assemble it afterwards. This sounds the only alternative.

Has anyone ever used Durabak specifically? I'd be interested in hearing of
any insights on exactly how to apply this stuff....

J-L

--__--__--

Message: 16
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 17:46:07 -0700
To: [email-masked]
From: "C. Marin Faure" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [lro] Re: Pilots and Land Rovers
Reply-To: [email-masked]

From: "N Forbes" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Re: Pilots and Land Rovers

Marin said:
>>Here's another one to ponder.  Most of the pilots I know,
>and almost all of the really good pilots I know, are
>left-handed.  1.  Why is that? and 2. Are the majority
>of Land Rover owners left-handed?

>Well duh! You live on the left coast. Over here everyone is right-handed!!
;-)

That would be an acceptable theory except that some of the really good
pilots I know who also happen to be left handed are in the UK and France
(at Airbus), and in Asia.  So that sort of dilutes the left coast
theory....:-)

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

--__--__--

Message: 17
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 17:56:31 -0700
To: [email-masked]
From: "C. Marin Faure" <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: [lro] 2.25 redline
Reply-To: [email-masked]

From: "Hope Peter" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 14:56:06 -0800
Subject: [lro] 2.25 redline--ashcroft tranfer
Reply-To: [email-masked]

>All of this begs a question, what is the redline for a 2.25 petrol 8:1 stock
engine?

The actual redline (the exceed-this-and-it-blows-up-rpm) of the 2.25 engine
seems to be unknown outside the minds of the Land Rover folks who developed
the engine, so the best figure to use is the "max horsepower at X rpm"
figure in the operator's manual.  The rpm for max horsepower for the 8:1
engine is 4,250.  This is not a very high rpm as engines go.  I never take
my engine above 3,000 rpm excect occasionally when accelerating into
traffic, and then I might get to 3,500 for a few seconds.  But I think
anything over 3,000 rpm on a continuous basis noticeably shortens the life
of the engine.  Yes, it will sustain higher rpms, but based on what I've
heard from longtime Series owners, and even from what I've gleened from
this list, it seems that people who drive around at 3,500 to 4,000 rpm on a
continuous cruise bases suffer a much higher number of burned valves, head
gasket failures, etc.  Every engine is different, of course, but mine seems
"happiest" at about 2,500-2800 rpm for continuous running.

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

--__--__--

Message: 18
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 18:28:28 -0700
To: [email-masked]
From: "C. Marin Faure" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [lro] RE: 2.25 redline
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Someone mentioned valve float on the 2.25 engine.  I can add that I have
been told by ex-Land Rover factory people that the 2.25 engine is VERY
susceptible to valve float as the rpms go up.  The valve springs used are
relatively weak as valve springs go,  the valve mechanism itself is fairly
sloppy, and they also said the mass of the roller followers helps dampen
the reaction of the valves as the rpms build toward the redline.  I don't
know any of this for a fact- it's merely what I was told by people I figure
were in a position to know.  It's in essence an industrial/agricultural
design, and within that category it's a pretty good engine.

But trying to get more pep by making it turn faster is not a particularly
viable thing to do.  The basic engine simply isn't designed for that unless
you want to get into changing the valve springs, cam, followers, etc.  I'm
sure you could get the thing to turn faster by changing the carburetion,
valve timing, etc.  But at heart it's still a clunky tractor engine, and
unless one is willing to change virtually everything that isn't designed or
built to stand up to the speed, heat, and stress of higher power and rpm,
eventually one of the "stock" components will fail under these loads.
Given the amount of work necessary to turn the 2.25 block and head into a
"performance" engine, I would think it would be money better spent by
simply changing the engine altogether.

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

--__--__--

Message: 19
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 18:21:31 -0700
To: [email-masked]
From: "C. Marin Faure" <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: [lro] RE: 2.25 redline
Reply-To: [email-masked]

From: "Peter Ogilvie" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] 2.25 redline--ashcroft tranfer
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 15:09:46 -1000
Reply-To: [email-masked]

>I'd keep the Rover under 4,000rpm for any extended cruising though very
occasional forays up to 5,000rpm should be okay.  Personally, I try to live
at 3,500 rpm and not go above the equivalent of 4,000rpm.

I think a handful of forays up to 5,000 rpm with the stock 2.25 engine will
find you being a VERY appreciated customer at Rovers North or whatever shop
you buy your engine components at.  The max horsepower rating for the
engine is listed at an rpm of 4,250, so it's a pretty safe bet,
particularly with this relatively crude engine design, that the true
redline isn't much higher than this.

Even running at 4,000 rpm is only 250 rpm away from the "in practice"
redline.  Start your engine, shove in the clutch, and run it up to 4,000
rpm and listen to what it sounds like.  Then ask yourself if you want to
run it that way continuously on the road.  Probably not.

I think you have to accept the fact that this is an engine that was
designed in the 1950s for a utility/agricultural vehicle which was not
expected to be driven by its operators at road speeds much higher than 45
mph.  Don't forget, this was about the same cruise speed as the Jeeps of
the same era.  No one was thinking "someday this vehicle will have to
cruise at 70 mph to keep up with traffic, so let's design the engine
accordingly."

While you can drive a Series faster, and you can force a modicum of extra
performace out of the engine, it all comes at a price.  In the case of the
engine, it's reduced engine life and a much higher risk of component
failure.  You're looking at valve float, much higher temperatures than the
metalurgy was designed to hold up under, greater strain against the head
gasket, greater pressures against the underside of the rocker arm, and so
on.

While the stock engine does fine for the purposes for which I use my SIII,
if I absolutely had to have a Series vehicle, and I absolutely had to have
more power and higher road speed, I would not even consider trying to
improve the stock engine but would concentrate on finding and installing a
more modern powerplant that was designed and built from the outset to
handle the power, heat, and pressures of more horsepower and higher
roadspeeds.

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

--__--__--

Message: 20
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 18:27:39 -0700
To: [email-masked]
From: "C. Marin Faure" <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: [lro] Re: 2.25 redline
Reply-To: [email-masked]

From: "Hope Peter" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] 2.25 redline--ashcroft tranfer
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 17:14:09 -0800
Reply-To: [email-masked]

>So up the steep grade to Snoqualmi pass I am
only doing 35mph, which is 3000 in 3rd gear.

You may very well be running larger diameter tires than my 7.00X15s, but I
go up the last steep part of Snoqualmi Pass in 4th at about 2,500 rpm with
no problems.  This is straight fourth, not fourth overdrive.  I don't have
a speedometer in my SIII anymore, so I don't know how fast I'm actually
going.  However, I'm pulling pretty much maximum manifold pressure to do
this, so so the last steep bit up to the summit is about as long as I want
to hold this kind of mp before shifting down.  But I've never had to drop
down into third over the pass.  If your tires are considerably taller than
mine, however, then that could make the difference.

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

--__--__--

Message: 21
From: "Rich Williams" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: [lro] Series Rover service in Denver?
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 18:43:11 -0800
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Does anyone know of an outfit in the Denver, Colorado area that works on
Series trucks?

--__--__--

Message: 22
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 19:08:27 -0700
To: [email-masked]
From: "C. Marin Faure" <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: [lro] Merry Christmas-Clutch problems
Reply-To: [email-masked]

From: Nick Danger <[email-masked]>
To: LRO <[email-masked]>
Date: 25 Dec 2001 22:54:41 -0500
Subject: [lro] Merry Christmas - Clutch problems
Reply-To: [email-masked]

>I just checked the fluid and all seems well (1/2 between min and max,
where its been since every other time I've checked). The Haynes manual
says the clutch should only need adjustment when its changed.Maybe I'm
leaking fluid? I checked around the engine compartment and I didn't see
any leaking fluid. Its dark and I was not dressed for crawling around
under but I'll check that tomorrow.

First, the Haynes manual is not worth the paper it's printed on.  Use it to
start a nice Christmas/New Years fireplace fire and get a copy of the Land
Rover Factory Service Manual for your particuarl Series model if you don't
already have one.

Second, the fluid level should ALWAYS be at the full mark of the reservoir
(on a Series III, anyway.  If there is a difference with the older models I
appologize).  The reason it should always be full is that it doesn't hold
much fluid to begin with, and if it isn't full and you get a leak, you're
not going to get much clutch operation before the fluid is gone.  The more
fluid is in the reservoir, the longer the clutch will operate even with a
(minor) leak.

Finally, I wouldn't be surprised if you find a problem with the slave
cylinder.  A seal leak on the master usually results in clutch fluid
running down and dripping off the clutch pedal, a pretty obvious indicator.
The symptoms you describe sound like a possible slave cylinder problem.
Try this-

A.  Fill the clutch reservoir to the full mark (make sure you use Castrol
LMA fluid or the equivelant Dot 4 spec fluid.  If you use "US-type" fluid,
you'll be replacing all your seals in short order).

B.  Sit in the drivers seat and apply medium but continuous pressure to the
clutch pedal.  Not as much pressure as you probably use when you're
shifting, just an easy but continuous pressure against the pedal.  It
should just sit there resisting your foot.  If it slowly sinks down toward
the floor, you have a seal leak somewhere.  When you let the pedal up, it
will suck fluid out of the reservoir, which is why you want to make sure
it's full before you try this.

C.  Determine if there is fluid leaking out around the master.  If not, the
problem is in the slave.  On an SIII you won't necessarily see the leakage
from the slave because it will be going into the bellhousing.  On an
SII/SIIa I believe the slave cylinder sits in a bracket alongside the
clutch housing and pushes on an external lever, so you should be able to
see if the slave is leaking.

You can rebuild the cylinder(s) or you can replace it.  Personally, I never
rebuild hydraulic cylinders, especially the crudely made, soft metal ones
used on the Land Rover.  They tend to ovalize slightly over time, and even
if you hone them smooth, the ovalization may still be there, and the new
seals might not seat correctly, in which case you're back where you
started.  I'm not saying brake and clutch cylinders can't be successfully
rebuilt, but the risk of them not working right, or right very long after a
rebuild is too great to be worth my time to find out.  So I always replace
with new.  But that's just me- others on this list swear by rebuilds.

If you find that the problem is a leak in the master, DO NOT
replace/rebuild the master by itself.  ALWAYS rebuild/replace the slave as
well.  The reason is that the new master will put out more pressure than
the old, weepy one.  Assuming both master and slave are about the same age,
the chances are good that the seals on the slave are getting tired, too,
but not enough to start leaking or cause problems.  But that new master
with all its hydraulic oomph will blow out the tired, old slave seals in a
big hurry, and then you'll have to replace it, too.  Better to replace
everything, put in new fluid, bleed it, and be done with it.  I learned
this lesson the hard way on a trip to the Yukon in the 1970s.

If you find the problem is a leak in the slave, you don't run quite the
same risk of problems by replacing only the slave and leaving the master
alone.  You can probably get away with it, although depending on the
condition of the master seals, the "tighter" slave may put a little more
strain on the seals in the master, and they could start to leak sooner
rather than later.  But I've changed slaves while leaving the master alone
and had no problems, at least not for quite awhile.

It's also a possibility that you have air in your clutch line, although if
this were the case, I would have thought you'd have had this problem for
some time.  If air has just started getting into the line, then it stands
to reason that fluid is starting to get out.

In addition to the master and slave cylinders themselves, the other things
to check are the clutch line connections, paying particular attention to
any flexible lines that may be in the system.  As these get old, they can
soften, swell, and eventually leak.  Have someone operate the clutch as you
check the line, connections, and flexible hoses.  The problem most likely
will exhibit itself only under when the system is under pressure.

If a thorough inspection fails to show any problem, then forget it, stick
your Series on e-bay for an outrageous sum (there are lots of 4wd
super-status wannabees who will pay big bucks for a Land Rover without a
clue as to what it is) and buy something decent with the money, like a Jeep
CJ-6 if you can find one or a rust-free Toyota FJ-40 if you can find
one.....:-)

I hope this will give you at least a starting point in your
troubleshooting.  But do get rid of that Haynes manual and get a genuine
factory service manual- you can buy reprints.  It will be the best money
you ever spend on your Land Rover.

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

--__--__--

Message: 23
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 19:20:42 -0700
To: [email-masked]
From: "C. Marin Faure" <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: [lro] Re: Me262 restoration in Seattle (way off-topic)
Reply-To: [email-masked]

From: "N Forbes" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 02:46:02 +0000
Subject: [lro] Me262 restoration in Seattle (way off-topic)
Reply-To: [email-masked]

>Marin, do you know anything about the Me262 restoration being conducted in
Seattle? I think it's being done at Boeing.

I have heard that the Museum of Flight (not Boeing), has acquired, or is
thinking of acquiring, two Me262s.  I heard this project mentioned in a
meeting I had with the museum curator on an unrelated subject six months
ago.  I seem to recall that, at that time, that the museum was still
debating on whether or not to buy the planes, or plane.  Since then, I have
heard one or two fleeting references to this project, so perhaps the museum
has indeed gone ahead and acquired them or it.  I heard it was two planes,
but whether that means they got two carcasses and were going to make one
complete plane or have two complete planes to restore, I don't know.  I'm
sure the museum has a website, and they may talk about the project there.
I don't know the URL, but it's probably something like
www.museumofflight.com or www.mof.com.  The museum is a non-profit
organization, so maybe it isn't .com.  Maybe it's .org.

Anyway, whatever they have will be up at their Paine Field (Everett)
facility.  This is where they do their restoration work.  As this is where
the  Boeing plant is located that makes the 747, 767, and 777, perhaps
that's how you got the impression the project was being done by Boeing.

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

--__--__--

Message: 24
From: "Hope Peter" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] RE: 2.25 redline
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 19:53:52 -0800
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> >So up the steep grade to Snoqualmi pass I am
> only doing 35mph, which is 3000 in 3rd gear.
>
> You may very well be running larger diameter tires than my 7.00X15s, but I
> go up the last steep part of Snoqualmi Pass in 4th at about 2,500 rpm with
> no problems.
I have had the same response from a couple other 88" owners.  I have a CO
analyser and have the 2bbl set up right on.
1. I have an 8:1 head but compression is only 120lbs. And I am noticing
about 1qt of oil every 500miles.  It's not leaking.
2. My home made frame and other add ons.  When the rover is loaded with gear
she is pushing 4500lbs.

So I need to fix the lower end, loose some of the rotational mass from the
tires (tire and home made rim weigh 100lbs), and she should be able to make
the pass.

Ooooooor get the diesel rebuilt....bwaaahaaaahaaaaaaaaaaaa
Pete

--__--__--

Message: 25
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 21:17:31 -0700
From: "Jim Hall" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Series Rover service in Denver?
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Kats British Car Service 303-761-2700. Find one already? I won't have 
time to take the pics of the one here until Sat, assuming the owner will
be home.

Rich Williams wrote:
> 
> Does anyone know of an outfit in the Denver, Colorado area that works on
> Series trucks?
> _______________________________________________
> 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: 26
From: "Hope Peter" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Spring over
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 20:18:14 -0800
Reply-To: [email-masked]

J-L
Simliar to the dual t-case idea have you thought about getting a teradrive
or klune-v?
they go between the tranny and t-case.  The one I was looking at was a four
speed 3:1 2:1 1:1 1:1.25.  So you have 2 ultra low speeds and an overdrive
and the thing is 6-8 inches long.  Seems like just the ticket for a 109.
Pete

--__--__--

Message: 27
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 21:27:07 -0700
From: "Jim Hall" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Spring over
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Don't discount the "CV" driveshaft. I have one stock on my Bronco and
have
replaced the single rear u-joint many times, and even replaced the
driveshaft
itself, but never touched the "CV" part other than to grease it. You
could
center the wheels in the wheelwells and get a slightly longer shaft, and
that
would reduce the angle slightly.

Jean-Leon Morin wrote:
> 
> > Keep the updates coming.  Some of us like to see how others approach and
> > solve design issues.
> 
> I figured at least you would be interested in my developements ;-)
> 
> > Rover specs 26 degrees on it's 'U' joints (all standard Spicer yolks) as
> > the maximum bend angle.  Let us know how you solve this problem.
> 
> There are many ways around this that have been developed by other 4x4
> enthusiasts, but all of them cause all kinds of driveline problems. When
> looking at most techniques employed on other 4x4's during lifts, they seem
> to disregard the engineering side of everything, just to end up with
> something scary-high. Running either diff with the pinion angled up is NOT
> an option, it is completely brainless -  even with a "CV" driveshaft. I
> would not be interested in cooking my differentials as the pinion bearings
> melt due to lack of oil. I'm going to drop the transfer case as a last
> possible option as I don't want anything hanging below the framerails... I'd
> like to think I'm doing this right.

-- 
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: 28
To: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 21:32:30 -0700
Subject: Re: [lro] Series Rover service in Denver?
From: "William J. Rice" <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Does anyone know of an outfit in the Denver, Colorado area that works on
Series trucks?

Hmmm, normally me (50 miles north), but I'm on vacation in NJ and so not
much use at the moment.  Several other lro listers in the area though who
will probably pipe up soon, and there is some British car repair place in
Boulder that I heard of someone taking his series truck to.  All the guys
I know well in the area fix their own, though, so I'm unable to be
terribly helpful.
Wait!  Sean Gorman (not sure on the last name--maybe Gorham or something
like that), Solihull Society (our club) pres, works in the svc. dept of
one of them thar rover dealers in the area (Flatirons?--in Boulder), and
he's got a SII as well as a D90.  I believe he's mentioned servicing
series trucks at the dealers, and if they can't do it, I'm sure he can
refer you to someone who can.  Ditto for Charlie Haigh, of RN fame--but
again I'm unsure which dealership in the Denver area he works at.
Sorry to offer so much almost-info.  I seem to be doing a lot of that
lately.  In short, call the Land Rover Flatirons and see if Sean or
Charlie work there and ask 'em.

bill

--__--__--

Message: 29
From: "Rich Williams" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Series Rover service in Denver?
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 20:50:58 -0800
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Jim,

Nope, still looking.  But there was a website for business in the Denver
area, something like Safari 4x4 or something, but I can't seem to remember
what it's called and I don't think they go by that name anymore.

Don't go out of your way, but if you do get a chance, I'm still interested
in hearing more about the 88.

Thanks,

Rich

----- Original Message -----
From: Jim Hall <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2001 8:17 PM
Subject: Re: [lro] Series Rover service in Denver?

>
> Kats British Car Service 303-761-2700. Find one already? I won't have
> time to take the pics of the one here until Sat, assuming the owner will
> be home.
>
> Rich Williams wrote:
> >
> > Does anyone know of an outfit in the Denver, Colorado area that works on
> > Series trucks?
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> _______________________________________________
> LRO mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

--__--__--

Message: 30
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 21:51:54 -0700
From: "Jim Hall" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Series Rover service in Denver?
Reply-To: [email-masked]

NOOOOOOOOOO, don't go there. The guy who is selling his truck got
screwed by them. Charlie works at Land Rover Superior, Sean works at
Denver South I think.

Rich Williams wrote:
> 
> Jim,
> 
> Nope, still looking.  But there was a website for business in the Denver
> area, something like Safari 4x4 or something, but I can't seem to remember
> what it's called and I don't think they go by that name anymore.
> 
> Don't go out of your way, but if you do get a chance, I'm still interested
> in hearing more about the 88.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Rich
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Jim Hall <[email-masked]>
> To: <[email-masked]>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2001 8:17 PM
> Subject: Re: [lro] Series Rover service in Denver?
> 
> >
> > Kats British Car Service 303-761-2700. Find one already? I won't have
> > time to take the pics of the one here until Sat, assuming the owner will
> > be home.
> >
> > Rich Williams wrote:
> > >
> > > Does anyone know of an outfit in the Denver, Colorado area that works on
> > > Series trucks?
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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

-- 
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: 31
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 22:00:20 -0700
From: "Jim Hall" <[email-masked]>
To: "lro" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [lro] junkyard wars
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Not only do they use a 109, but one team drives all series in the intro.
-- 
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: 32
From: "Tim Czajka" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 22:21:04 -0700
Subject: [lro] Series Tcase Strength
Reply-To: [email-masked]

With this talk about various gearing options and low range
gearboxes added upstream of the tcase, which would increase
the torque input into the tcase, I am wondering if anyone
has info on the strength of the stock Series tcase?  Over
the years I have heard people state that the Series tcase
is fairly strong, but no hard data on this.  Does anyone
have torque input rating figures on the tcase?  How about
owners who have subjected their Series tcases to increased
torque input through engine conversions - how are the tcases
holding up?

I have recently read that older style Toyota Land Cruiser
side drive tcases have been known to develop cracks in
the aluminum case, when subjected to increased power input.
Anyone find this to be a problem with the Series aluminum
tcase housing?

Tim Czajka
1972 Series III 88

_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com

--__--__--

Message: 33
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 08:01:44 +0200
From: Paul Oxley <[email-masked]>
Organization: AfricanAdrenalin.com
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Interior concerns
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Jean-Leon Morin wrote:
 
> Has anyone ever used Durabak specifically? I'd be interested in hearing of
> any insights on exactly how to apply this stuff....

Just paint over everything, but leave markers (panel pins are good)
sticking slightly proud wherever you may need to cut through to access
an inspection plate later. The Durabak is great (but smelly). I now use
a polyurethane based stonechip which doesn't smell at all, and is about
a tenth of the cost of Durabak, but the stonechip doesn't have the
gritty texture of the Durabak.

BTW: 'Dura' is from Duram (the manufacturer), any guesses as to where
the 'bak' is derived from?
 
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