Subject: LRO digest, Vol 1 #206 - 36 msgs

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 03:02:58 -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: Malingnat mail and spam (off topic but relevent?) (S. Vels Chr.)
   2. Re: was Me262 now B-17 (now 22% more LR content!) ([email-masked])
   3. Re: now B-17 (now 36% more LR content!) (Rich Williams)
   4. Alternative Fuel tank options for Lightweight? (brodie Pedersen)
   5. Re: ME262 restoration (no LR content) ([email-masked])
   6. Galvanizers ([email-masked])
   7. Re: now B-17 (now 36% more LR content!) (Hope Peter)
   8. Re: Galvanizers (Alan J. Richer)
   9. owners are a very different breed in most cases ([email-masked])
  10. Re: Series question for those of you that own 1971 trucks (Hope Peter)
  11. Re: was Me262 now B-17 (no LR content) (Hope Peter)
  12. Re: now B-17 (now 36% more LR content!) (Rich Williams)
  13. Re: Galvanizers (John Karlsson)
  14. Re: was Me262 now B-17 (no LR content) (Rich Williams)
  15. Re: Series question for those of you that own 1971 trucks (Mark Pilkington)
  16. Re: Alternative Fuel tank options for Lightweight? (Jim Hall)
  17. Re[2]: [lro] Series question for those of you that own 1971
       trucks (Hermen)
  18. Equal Tire Balancing at wholesale (Andrew H. Litkowiak)
  19. Equal Tire Chart (Andrew H. Litkowiak)
  20. Re: Hand throttles (C. Marin Faure)
  21. Re: Re: Hand throttles (Paul Quin)
  22. B-17 and B-29 (no LR content, sorry) (C. Marin Faure)
  23. Beware of Hand throttles (Adrian Redmond)
  24. Re: Malingnat mail and spam (off topic but relevent?) (Jim Laurel)
  25. Re: B-17 and B-29 (no LR content, sorry) (Andrew H. Litkowiak)
  26. Re: Paint in Spray Cans (James G.Wolf)
  27. RE: Beware of Hand throttles (Easton Trevor A)
  28. Re: Beware of Hand throttles (marko.cosic)
  29. RE: was Me262 now B-17 (now 42.7% more LR content!) (Easton Trevor A)
  30. Re[2]: [lro] Series question for those of you that own 1971
       trucks (G. Mugele)
  31. Re: Re[2]: [lro] Series question for those of you that own 1971
       trucks (Peter Ogilvie)
  32. Re: Paint in Spray Cans (Peter Ogilvie)
  33. Re: Galvanizers (Ben Pooley)

--__--__--

Message: 1
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 12:42:39 +0100
From: "S. Vels Chr." <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Malingnat mail and spam (off topic but relevent?)
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Adrian and others.

Relevant?. Yes, indeed. This is a mailinglist. ;-)

Trash W98 and get extra W2K for these machines. Never let anyone log on 
as administrator while doing productive work. Have personal og 
functional accounts on these machines and restrict these as much as 
possible. Use admin acc for maintenance purpose only.

Write down a corporate security strategy and have everyone follow it 
(including wife and daughter). Do the v-scanning on your own mail 
server. Do v-scanning on workstations when the boot and connect to the 
lan so that you don't need AV on them. Have an AV run on your storage 
server and be sure to update the DAT's every week and whenever an 
extraordinary malicious V is in circulation. Be sure that any unused 
port is closed in your router. Use a hardware firewall on the LAN or a 
software firewall on your workstations. Some of these will not only 
obscure the host's existence, but also qurantine malicious script 
attatchments.

If your organisation can afford it, you should contact a security 
specialist to evaluate your IT setup and make recommendations. Consider 
this an investment, not an expense.

I went straigt from DOS/W3.11 to NT4 and now W2K (NT5). I run McAfee AV 
and Zonealarm Pro firewall. What McAfee doesn't get, ZA will, and vice 
versa. I do get a little spam, but since i just delete it, the amount 
seems to have decreased to a little handful a week.

If you post in a public forum, scramble your address like 
[email-masked]. Even with the "junk" adress mentionend by others. Most 
people will know to remove the excess letters. Spammers usually won't, 
since they gather addresses with automatic scanners.

I too have always used Netscape. If the V-authors begins to write in 
Java, i will just change to Pegasus mail or something.

If only people knew that running W95/98/ME+IE+Outlook is like inviting 
the wrong folks over for the holidays. MS conveniently forgot to tell.....

rgds
sv/aurens

--__--__--

Message: 2
From: [email-masked]
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 07:52:21 EST
Subject: Re: [lro] was Me262 now B-17 (now 22% more LR content!)
To: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked],
  [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Rich & Peter,
My new work Mac has a built in DVD burner, i'd love to try it out. let me 
know when you get the tape  digitised. (i REALLY want to see this video) 

New LR content:
They had a B-17 at one of the Downeast rallies in the early 90's. I dont 
remember which model it was. I think it was a CAF plane. 

That really was a great rally, its such a shame that it died.

But wait, as an added bonus, even more tangential LR content:
Al, remember the time we saw the B-24 on the way home from marks's wrench 
party (we were dissasembling Series III number 6 or summat...)

rgds,
spenny
Arlington, VA

1965 Diesel LWB, The Ugly Truck
1965 Ex-MOD FFR LWB, pile'o'parts <- Just add bolts  :-0
1965 Ex-MOD LWB, Winnie
Land Rover - 4WD of choice for the Information Superhighway

Q. Why do they call it a kilt?
A. Because a lot of people got kilt when they called it a skirt.

>> As a side note, I have the whole thing on Hi-8 tape.  Is there any way
>> capture stills off of the tape?
>
>Rich,
>I can convert the whole thing to digital format and/or create stills. 
>The AVI or MPEG can be burned to a cd or placed on the web.  I do not have
>a DVD burner yet, but if you know someone with one, you could rip a DVD from
>the avi very easily.
>Pretty easy to do.  Have all the software and hardware, plugs into my laptop.
>Pete over in Silverdale

--__--__--

Message: 3
From: "Rich Williams" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] now B-17 (now 36% more LR content!)
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 07:18:54 -0800
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Rovers North catalogs - who keeps 'em year after year?

My 109 came with a few older ones so I kept them for the heck of it.

In the 1993 catalog with the teal colored cover...BRAKES section, page 33
there is a SII - IIa 109 pickup parked in front of a B-17.

FWIW - in this 1993 catalog you could get a Fairy OD for $695 and that
yellow lab that frequents the catalog is a little puppy.

A summer or 2 ago the Museum of Flying hosted an anniversary party
commemorating the Battle of Britain where they had period planes and an All
British Field Meet on the same grounds, with opportunities to photograph
your British vehicle in front of a Spitfire, Hurricane, whatever.  I wasn't
there but heard it was great.  I saw a group photo of a number of planes and
all car attendees and I could pick out a bunch of LRs, but they're not too
hard to pick out in a crowd.

Rich

----- Original Message -----
From: <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>;
<[email-masked]>
Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2001 4:52 AM
Subject: Re: [lro] was Me262 now B-17 (now 22% more LR content!)

> Rich & Peter,
> My new work Mac has a built in DVD burner, i'd love to try it out. let me
> know when you get the tape  digitised. (i REALLY want to see this video)
>
> New LR content:
> They had a B-17 at one of the Downeast rallies in the early 90's. I dont
> remember which model it was. I think it was a CAF plane.
>
> That really was a great rally, its such a shame that it died.
>
> But wait, as an added bonus, even more tangential LR content:
> Al, remember the time we saw the B-24 on the way home from marks's wrench
> party (we were dissasembling Series III number 6 or summat...)
>
> rgds,
> spenny
> Arlington, VA
>
> 1965 Diesel LWB, The Ugly Truck
> 1965 Ex-MOD FFR LWB, pile'o'parts <- Just add bolts  :-0
> 1965 Ex-MOD LWB, Winnie
> Land Rover - 4WD of choice for the Information Superhighway
>
> Q. Why do they call it a kilt?
> A. Because a lot of people got kilt when they called it a skirt.
>
>
> >> As a side note, I have the whole thing on Hi-8 tape.  Is there any way
> >> capture stills off of the tape?
> >
> >Rich,
> >I can convert the whole thing to digital format and/or create stills.
> >The AVI or MPEG can be burned to a cd or placed on the web.  I do not
have
> >a DVD burner yet, but if you know someone with one, you could rip a DVD
from
> >the avi very easily.
> >Pretty easy to do.  Have all the software and hardware, plugs into my
laptop.
> >Pete over in Silverdale

--__--__--

Message: 4
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 11:08:40 -0500 (EST)
From: brodie Pedersen <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [lro] Alternative Fuel tank options for Lightweight?
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Hi everyone,

My current employment offers many hours of contructive
ponderment time.  My thoughts usually revolve around
problem solving issues with my Lightweight project.

Last night's topic for internal discussion was how was
I going to get around the problem of fueling my truck
without having to use the stock military set up.  I
came up with the following options.

A) Use the military set up, and find a partner who
would be quite happy to stamp her feet in the cold,
while I topped up the under sqab fuel tanks. Whereupon
she could bask in the "Arome de Diesel" for the ride
home.
 
B) Adopt civvy type tanks and use the John Craddock
conversion which means that I have to cut holes in the
removable upper tub sides to accomodate the filler cap
and neck.  (I like the idea of having these sides
removeable so this is not an attractive option; Also
the inset piece that supports the tube is made of
really crude fiberglass and looks awful!!)

C)Use a Suzuki Samurai tank and mount it behind the
rear axle with the filler pipe exiting through rear
floor and immediatly through the right side into the
passenger side wheelwell. The filler would then be
hidden in the accesory box that some Lightweights are
equiped with at the inside rear of the wheel well.
This would keep the truck looking externally original
and give a locking flap facility as well.

The only problem is that the Suzuki tank is a small
37L verses the Land Rover's 45L

There is an aftermarket Suzuki plastic tank which
holds 56L which is an intriguing if not exspensive
possibility. I would retain the passenger side
military tank as a spare and keep the drivers side
open for other possibilities.

D) Lastly see if a Jeep TJ tank could be made to fit
without too much modification.

Any thoughts, comments concerns.  The truck is
currently undergoing a Peugeot Turbo Diesel engine
swap, which goes to show that while I like the idea of
the truck looking original, I am not afraid modify it
to suit my tastes.

Brodie

______________________________________________________ 
Send your holiday cheer with http://greetings.yahoo.ca

--__--__--

Message: 5
From: [email-masked]
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 11:23:51 EST
Subject: Re: [lro] ME262 restoration (no LR content)
To: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Bill Adams Posted:

<<There's a gen-yoo-wine ME262 right across the street from me at the NASM. >>

Thanks for rubbing it in!

Being so close to the Smithsonian, how do you get any work done? 

Only 8 examples remain. Four are in the US.  There is a good story about them 
to be found at www.stormbirds.com
  
Paul Donohue
1965 Land Rover 109
Denver Colorado

--__--__--

Message: 6
From: [email-masked]
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 11:29:57 EST
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [lro] Galvanizers
Reply-To: [email-masked]

AJR posted:

<< the People's Republic of Massachusetts has driven all of the small 
galvanizers out of business  >>

Al:

As I recall, you are not far from New Hampshire.  Are there no galvanizers 
there, or possibly in far-away Rhode Island?

Paul Donohue
1965 Land Rover 109
Denver Colorado

--__--__--

Message: 7
From: "Hope Peter" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] now B-17 (now 36% more LR content!)
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 08:26:51 -0800
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> In the 1993 catalog with the teal colored cover...BRAKES section, page 33
> there is a SII - IIa 109 pickup parked in front of a B-17.
> 

Ahhh, but can you identify what model B-17 it is?
No chin turret and no nose waiste guns.
Pete

--__--__--

Message: 8
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 08:40:05 -0800 (PST)
From: "Alan J. Richer" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Galvanizers
To: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

--- [email-masked] wrote:

> Al:
> 
> As I recall, you are not far from New Hampshire. 
> Are there no galvanizers 
> there, or possibly in far-away Rhode Island?

Not that I have been able to find. The big boys have
sucked up all the business, and I've found no one who
can do up what I need.

Annoying - it's getting to the damn point you'll need
a license to buy a damn screwdriver in a few
years....at which point I emigrate elsewhere.

         ajr
> 
> Paul Donohue
> 1965 Land Rover 109
> Denver Colorado
> _______________________________________________
> LRO mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

=====
Please ignore the following advertising.....
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com

--__--__--

Message: 9
From: [email-masked]
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 11:40:59 EST
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [lro] owners are a very different breed in most cases
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Our local Land Rover club has a working relationship with the local Pinzgauer 
club. We have been invited on some of their rips and they have showed up for 
some of ours.  

At our August rally in Ouray, someone in a Haflinger went along on a trail 
run and earned the respect of our LR crowd.

At the same time and in the same town, the Power Wagon club was having their 
anual run.  Not as many trucks, but interesting folks none the less.  

The more we can find in common with the other clubs, the better off we all 
are.

Paul Donohue
1965 Land Rover 109
Denver Colorado

--__--__--

Message: 10
From: "Hope Peter" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Series question for those of you that own 1971 trucks
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 08:46:44 -0800
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> Hi everyone, 
> 
> Anyone out there have 1971 LR's?  Bryan Hoult - you copy?
> 
> When was the change made from IIa to III?
> 
> What were the differences from the last IIa's and the first III's

Wasn't the swap made in 72?
III has a plastic gril, plastic dash, all synchro tranny.
Pete

--__--__--

Message: 11
From: "Hope Peter" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] was Me262 now B-17 (no LR content)
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 08:47:43 -0800
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> Pete,
>
> Let me take you up on this.  I've got about 40 minutes of this B-17 flight
> on Hi-8 tape and would love to extract some stills from it.
>
> We'll have to get together one of these days.
>
> Rich
>

Let me know when you are spending the day working on the Rover and I will
come over.
Pete

--__--__--

Message: 12
From: "Rich Williams" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] now B-17 (now 36% more LR content!)
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 08:53:40 -0800
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Saw that and wondered about it too.

>From what minimal features that photo shows I would guess that it is B-17D.
But then again, there were/are a bunch of B-17Gs w/o chin turrets.  Does
anyone know what specific plane is in the RN catalog and more importantly,
where?

Rich

----- Original Message -----
From: Hope Peter <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2001 8:26 AM
Subject: Re: [lro] now B-17 (now 36% more LR content!)

>
> > In the 1993 catalog with the teal colored cover...BRAKES section, page
33
> > there is a SII - IIa 109 pickup parked in front of a B-17.
> >
>
> Ahhh, but can you identify what model B-17 it is?
> No chin turret and no nose waiste guns.
> Pete
> _______________________________________________
> LRO mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

--__--__--

Message: 13
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 11:53:53 -0500
To: [email-masked]
From: John Karlsson <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Galvanizers
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I have a friend here in Rhode Island who is a marine welder.  When he needs 
something galvanized, he piggybacks with someone he knows that regularly 
has large quantities galvanized by a company in or near Boston, I think.

John

At 11:29 AM 12/29/01, you wrote:

>AJR posted:
>
><< the People's Republic of Massachusetts has driven all of the small
>galvanizers out of business  >>
>
>Al:
>
>As I recall, you are not far from New Hampshire.  Are there no galvanizers
>there, or possibly in far-away Rhode Island?
>
>Paul Donohue
>1965 Land Rover 109
>Denver Colorado
>_______________________________________________
>LRO mailing list
>[email-masked]
>http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

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

--__--__--

Message: 14
From: "Rich Williams" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] was Me262 now B-17 (no LR content)
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 08:55:27 -0800
Reply-To: [email-masked]

10-4

----- Original Message -----
From: Hope Peter <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2001 8:47 AM
Subject: Re: [lro] was Me262 now B-17 (no LR content)

>
> > Pete,
> >
> > Let me take you up on this.  I've got about 40 minutes of this B-17
flight
> > on Hi-8 tape and would love to extract some stills from it.
> >
> > We'll have to get together one of these days.
> >
> > Rich
> >
>
> Let me know when you are spending the day working on the Rover and I will
> come over.
> Pete
> _______________________________________________
> LRO mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

--__--__--

Message: 15
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 09:05:58 -0800
From: Mark Pilkington <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Series question for those of you that own 1971 trucks
Reply-To: [email-masked]

My 72 Dormobile is a Series IIa and it has the metal center dash but has
the lights on the fenders like a series III.  the grille is a big metal
galvanised thing like a Series II but bigger where the lights arn't.
Have a look at the photos, it is on Ebay.
Kind regards,
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=599446549

Mark Pilkington

Hope Peter wrote:

> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > Anyone out there have 1971 LR's?  Bryan Hoult - you copy?
> >
> > When was the change made from IIa to III?
> >
> > What were the differences from the last IIa's and the first III's
>
> Wasn't the swap made in 72?
> III has a plastic gril, plastic dash, all synchro tranny.
> Pete
> _______________________________________________
> LRO mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

--__--__--

Message: 16
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 09:59:38 -0700
From: "Jim Hall" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Alternative Fuel tank options for Lightweight?
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Not knowing lightweights well, could you use a civvy tank and fuel from 
the wheelwell? Could you add or use an existing outrigger and move the
tank to the drivers side? Could you use a civvy tank and run a hose
behind the passenger seat to the center and put a filler there? Just 
some thoughts...

brodie Pedersen wrote:
> 
> Hi everyone,
> 
> My current employment offers many hours of contructive
> ponderment time.  My thoughts usually revolve around
> problem solving issues with my Lightweight project.
> 
> Last night's topic for internal discussion was how was
> I going to get around the problem of fueling my truck
> without having to use the stock military set up.  I
> came up with the following options.
> 
> A) Use the military set up, and find a partner who
> would be quite happy to stamp her feet in the cold,
> while I topped up the under sqab fuel tanks. Whereupon
> she could bask in the "Arome de Diesel" for the ride
> home.
> 
> B) Adopt civvy type tanks and use the John Craddock
> conversion which means that I have to cut holes in the
> removable upper tub sides to accomodate the filler cap
> and neck.  (I like the idea of having these sides
> removeable so this is not an attractive option; Also
> the inset piece that supports the tube is made of
> really crude fiberglass and looks awful!!)
> 

-- 
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: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 18:05:15 +0100
From: Hermen <[email-masked]>
To: Hope Peter <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[2]: [lro] Series question for those of you that own 1971
  trucks
Reply-To: [email-masked]

>> Hi everyone,
>> 
>> Anyone out there have 1971 LR's?  Bryan Hoult - you copy?
>> 
>> When was the change made from IIa to III?
>> 
>> What were the differences from the last IIa's and the first III's

Hope> Wasn't the swap made in 72?
Hope> III has a plastic gril, plastic dash, all synchro tranny.
Hope> Pete

S III also had flat doorhinges, which accommodate the mirrors. The
mountingpoints for the windscreen were moved from the sides to a more
inward position. Somewhere in the transition to series III the sills
got shallower.

Hermen

--__--__--

Message: 18
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 11:34:29 -0600
From: "Andrew H. Litkowiak" <[email-masked]>
To: Land Rover List <[email-masked]>
Subject: [lro] Equal Tire Balancing at wholesale
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Hearing no objections, I present the following for your consideration.

I use Equal in all my light truck applications, on and off road. It
gets a little pricey buying it retail. After getting a run around and
bad info from a local dealer, I contacted the company directly.

I can't get a direct deal, but I was able to hook up with several top
level distributors. If I buy by the case, I can get a decent price. At
40 bags per case, I can't justify it.

Here's what I'm doing.

I've offered to front the money for my compatriots on the Land Cruiser
List and re-package and re-ship at reduced prices. The response has
been good enough to proceed. I figured I would offer the same deal
here on the LR list.

If I break even, I'll be happy. I'm basically doing this to a) get a
better price for myself, and b) to have some fun and provide what I
believe to be a decent product to my fellow 4x4
fanatics.....errr....hobbyists.

Equal is a polymer powder that is placed into a tire for the purpose
of eliminating the need for spin balancing and exterior wheel weights.
It can be used in tubes or tubeless. The technology was originally
developed for big rigs, and has now been perfected for light truck
applications.

In most cases, once the powder is inserted, you will never have to
balance a tire again, for it's life span. The powder adjusts
automatically in response to speed, lateral force, tire wear, etc.
Most questions you have can be answered at
http://www.imiproducts.com/imi_htmlcode/imi_frame/imi_fs_equa.html

Powder bags can be dropped directly into a tubeless tire. Simply break
the bead, drop it in and air up. The bag rips open within 5-10 miles.
For tube tires, or in cases where it is not practical to break down a
tire, I have devised a handy little insertion tool out of a modified
horse syringe (no needle).

For virtually all of the applications in the tire size range we run, 3
bags sizes will suffice. 3 oz, 4 oz and 6 oz. Each bag includes a
specially designed valve core that prevents the powder from lodging in
the valve guts (no slow leaks). Bag/core combo is priced as follows:

3 oz, 3.75 per tire
4 oz, 4.50 per tire
6 oz, 6.00 per tire

My hypo device is 1.00

I will post a tire sizing chart separately.

If this interests you, please e-mail be directly at
[email-masked]. Include your shipping address and I will get
you a quote. Business addresses save $1 in shipping.

Andy Litkowiak

--__--__--

Message: 19
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 11:36:46 -0600
From: "Andrew H. Litkowiak" <[email-masked]>
To: Land Rover List <[email-masked]>
Subject: [lro] Equal Tire Chart
Reply-To: [email-masked]

This chart was developed for "Mudder" tires. If you are running big
old knobby tires, go with the high end. If you are running a multi use
or highway tire, use the "start" figure.

Tire Size               Start   Range
28x8.50-14              3 oz.   3 oz.
29x8.50-15              3 oz.   3 oz.
29x10.50-15             3 oz.   3 oz.
29x10.50-15WL           3 oz.   3 oz.
30x11.50-15             3 oz.   3 oz.
30x11.50-15WL           3 oz.   3 oz.
31x10.50-15             3 oz.   3-4 oz.
31x10.50-15WL           3 oz.   3-4 oz.
31x12.50-15             3 oz.   3-4 oz.
12x15                   3 oz.   3-4 oz.
32x9.50-15              3 oz.   3-4 oz.
32x11.5-15              3 oz.   3-4 oz.
32x12.50-15             3 oz.   3-4 oz.
33x10.50-15WL           3 oz.   3-4 oz.
33x11.50-15WL           3 oz.   3-4 oz.
33x12.50-15             3 oz.   3-4 oz.
33x12.50-15WL           3 oz.   3-4 oz.
39x15-15                6 oz.   6-8 oz.
39.5x15-15              6 oz.   6-8 oz.
18x39.5-15              6 oz.   6-8 oz.
40x17-15                8 oz.   8-10 oz.
15x42-15                8 oz.   8-10 oz.
18.5x44-15              8 oz.   8-10 oz.
19.5x44-15              8 oz.   8-10 oz.
30x11.50-16             3 oz.   3 oz.
LT255/85B-16WL          3 oz.   3 oz.
31x11.00-16             3 oz.   3-4 oz.
31x12.50-16             3 oz.   3-4 oz.
9/32-16                 3 oz.   3-4 oz.
10/32-16                3 oz.   3-4 oz.
33/11.50-16             3 oz.   3-4 oz.
13/33-16                3 oz.   3-4 oz.
9/34-16LT               3 oz.   3-4 oz.
34/12.5-16              3 oz.   3-4 oz.
35/14.50-16             4 oz.   4-6 oz.
35/14.50-16             4 oz.   4-6 oz.
13/36-16                6 oz.   6-8 oz.
14/36-16                6 oz.   6-8 oz.
33x14.00-15             3 oz.   3-4 oz.
33x15.5-15              3 oz.   3-4 oz.
34x9.50-15LT            3 oz.   3-4 oz.
34x12.5-15              3 oz.   3-4 oz.
35x12.5-15              4 oz.   4-6 oz.
35x14.50-15             4 oz.   4-6 oz.
35x14.50-15WL           4 oz.   4-6 oz.
15x35-15                4 oz.   4-6 oz.
16x35-15                4 oz.   4-6 oz.
Q78-15                  4 oz.   4-6 oz.
36x12.50-15             6 oz.   6-8 oz.
36x14.50-15             6 oz.   6-8 oz.
36x15.50-15             6 oz.   6-8 oz.
36x16.50-15             6 oz.   6-8 oz.
38x12.50-15             6 oz.   6-8 oz.
38.5x11.00-15           6 oz.   6-8 oz.
38.5x15.5-15            6 oz.   6-8 oz.
16x38.5-15              6 oz.   6-8 oz.
38.5x11.00-16           6 oz.   6-8 oz.
40x14.5-16              8 oz.   8-10 oz.
33x12.50-16.5           3 oz.   3-4 oz.
33x14.00-16.5           3 oz.   3-4 oz.
33x15.50-16.5           3 oz.   3-4 oz.
34x9.50-16.5            3 oz.   3-4 oz.
35x12.5-16.5            4 oz.   4-6 oz.
15x35-16.5              4 oz.   4-6 oz.
16x35-16.5              4 oz.   4-6 oz.
35x14.50-16.5           4 oz.   4-6 oz.
36x12.50-16.5           6 oz.   6-8 oz.
37x12.50-16.5           6 oz.   6-8 oz.
38x12.50-16.5           6 oz.   6-8 oz.
38.5x11.00-16.5         4 oz.   4-6 oz.
15/38.5-16.5            6 oz.   6-8 oz.
16/38.5-16.5            6 oz.   6-8 oz.
15/39.5-16.5            6 oz.   6-8 oz.
18/39.5-16.5            6 oz.   6-8 oz.
42/15-16.5              8 oz.   8-10 oz.
18.5/44-16.5            8 oz.   8-10 oz.
19.50/44-16.5           8 oz.   8-10 oz.

--__--__--

Message: 20
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 11:37:50 -0700
To: [email-masked]
From: "C. Marin Faure" <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: [lro] Re: Hand throttles
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 23:38:02 +0000
To: [email-masked], [email-masked]
From: Elwyn FS <[email-masked]>
Subject: [lro] Hand Throttles
Reply-To: [email-masked]

>How easy is it to set up/install a hand throttle on a Series. I actually
have a lightweight, but the cab is similar to a series 2 with the flat dash?

I should think it would be extremely easy.  The factory-installed hand
throttle that came on my new SIII is a very simple device consiting of a
lever that moves through a partial quadrant that's mounted on the driver's
side of the firewall just above the transmission tunnel.  All this lever
does is move a vertical rod inside the engine bay that pushes up on a tab
welded to the throttle rod, the rod that runs across the front of the
firewall and has the accelerator pedal and carburetor throttle linkages
connected to it.  The hand throttle rod is not connected to the transverse
throttle rod, it only pushes up against the tab.

So installing one should just be a matter of obtaining the hardware,
drilling the required holes in the bulhead, and attaching some sort of tab
to the throttle rod for the hand throttle rod to push against.

There is nothing fancy about the operation of the stock hand throttle.  You
simply move the lever to the desired notch in the quadrant for the amount
of rpm you want.  To return to idle, you move the hand lever back to its
"rest" position at the left end of the quadrant.  You can add power with
the regular throttle if the hand throttle is at some setting, but when you
take your foot off the gas the engine will return to the hand throttle
setting, not idle.  The only way to get the engine back to idle is to
physically move the hand throttle back to idle.

I've used the hand throttle as a poor-man's-cruise control on long runs on
relatively flat highway, such as from Oakland, CA up the Sacramento Valley
to Redding on my trips north in the 70s.  It's also recommended in Land
Rover's little exedition booklet that came with my vehicle that if you are
traversing rough terrain, say a plowed field or heavily rutted road in
4wdLO that you set the speed with the hand throttle instead of using the
pedal.  Your foot might bounce on the pedal, making the lurching even worse
in such a low gear.  The hand throttle will keep the engine speed constant,
and will eliminate any lurching and jerking caused by an unsteady foot on
the pedal.  I've done this a few times and it works as advertised.

The ony way you can get into trouble with the hand throttle is if you move
it to a high power setting with the engine off, say in installing it or
cleaning the interior or whatever, and then forgetting it.  When you next
start the engine, it will roar right up to the power setting on the hand
throttle, which if it's at the maximum setting, is not good for the engine
at all.  So always remember to return it to neutral after moving it, or get
in the habit as I have of taking a quick glance at the lever before
starting the engine to make sure the handle is at the idle position.

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

--__--__--

Message: 21
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 12:02:40 -0800
From: Paul Quin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Re: Hand throttles
To: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Marin Writes: It's also recommended in Land
> Rover's little exedition booklet that came with my vehicle that if you are
> traversing rough terrain, say a plowed field or heavily rutted road in
> 4wdLO that you set the speed with the hand throttle instead of using the
> pedal.  Your foot might bounce on the pedal, making the lurching even
worse
> in such a low gear.  The hand throttle will keep the engine speed
constant,
> and will eliminate any lurching and jerking caused by an unsteady foot on
> the pedal.  I've done this a few times and it works as advertised.

This makes sense.  My SII has a hand throttle.  I've always wondered what
uses it might have.  In operation it really just works like the idle speed
adjustment on the carb, only with a much broader range.  I always though
that it was intended for use when operating PTO equipment like my winch,
allowing me to set the speed and then go up front and watch how the cable is
spooling onto the drum...

I've read about an optional engine governor that keeps the engine at a
steady rpm under varying loads when running PTO equipment like saws and
generators.

Paul in Victoria.

--__--__--

Message: 22
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 12:08:02 -0700
To: [email-masked]
From: "C. Marin Faure" <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: [lro] B-17 and B-29 (no LR content, sorry)
Reply-To: [email-masked]

From: "Rich Williams" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: [lro] was Me262 now B-17 (no LR content)
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 14:21:51 -0800
Reply-To: [email-masked]

>> Marin wrote:
>> There is at least one B-17 under restoration (rumored to belong to Paul
Allen)

>This is one of only 5 surviving 'E' airframes and the only one to fly until
the other rumored 'E' is finished (somewhere in the upper mid-west).

Most of the still-flying B-17s are G models.  The G was characterized by
the small chin turret that held two .50 cal guns, but after the war these
turrets were usually removed when the planes were used for fire bombers,
air-sea-rescue, etc.  So the fact that a B-17 doesn't have a chin turret
doesn't automatically mean it's not a G.  The B-17 that belongs to the
Museum of Flight in Seattle is an F model, which like Paul Allen's E model
is quite rare.

I did a movie for Boeing back in the mid-1980s commemorating the 50th
anniversary of the B-17 (Model 299 in Boeing numerics), and got to ride
around quite a bit in "Sentimental Journey," the Confederate Air Forece's
restored B-17G.  I also took it up into the Cascades for an air-to-air
filming session, which I did out the rear door of an old Twin Beech Boeing
had at the time.  I like the B-17, but it didn't really doesn't do that
much for me as an airplane.  It was actually a rather old-style design by
the time WWII came along, and most of the other US bombers were more modern
in design and technology.  While the B-17 gets all the glory as far as WWII
bombers go, there were, I believe, more than twice as many B-24s built and
used during the war.  The B-24 is sort of ugly (the box the B-17 came in,
was what some people called it), but it arguably did more to win the war
than the B-17.  Incidentally, the name "Flying Fortress" was not coined by
Boeing or the US Army Air Corps.  When the press was invited down to Boeing
Field to see one of the first Model 299s fly, some reporter in his article
called the plane "...a veritable flying fortress," and the name stuck.

But the plane that really impresses me is the B-29.  I knew virtually
nothing about it until Boeing had me do a 30 minute video commemorating its
50th anniversary in the early 90s.  Although I wrote the video as a
fictional story about a B-29 flight engineer (narrated by John Cullum from
Northern Exposure), who experiences the development and service of the
plane, everything he talks about is taken from interviews I conducted with
dozens of B-29 crewmen and the airplane's designers at Boeing.  After
learning all this, to me the B-29 and its development makes the B-17 look
like a paper airplane contest.  The B-29 was the first "high-tech"
airplane, and it's systems were pretty amazing for the day.  I had a chance
to fly and film in "Fifi," the CAF's restored B-29, the only one flying at
the time, and I thought it was way cooler than flying in the B-17.  The
B-29s flight deck is sort of like being on the Millenium Falcon, with the
all-glass nose and panoramic view.  We did an air-to-air session with it,
too, over Puget Sound.

The B-17 is certainly a prettier airplane in terms of its classic lines,
but the B-29 is a far superior machine.  The B-29 crews out of India and
China flew the longest missions of the war, 16 and 17 hours.  The plane
stood up to battle damage even better than the B-17, although it flew so
high that it was not until they started low-level bombing during the last
year of the war to improve accuracy that it began taking lots of hits.

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

--__--__--

Message: 23
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 21:54:53 +0100
From: Adrian Redmond <[email-masked]>
Organization: Channel 6 Television Denmark
To: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Subject: [lro] Beware of Hand throttles
Reply-To: [email-masked]

One thing to be aware of if you have a stock 2.25 rover engine, is that
the hand throttle - by preventing the engine returning to lowest revs
when you remove your foot from the pedal - also prevents the brake servo
getting full suction - which normally happens when you remove revs.

So whilst the hand throttle is a useful "diesel choke", farmer's
chauffxr, and lazy pedal, it's not the best friend in heavy traffic
where you want full braking power the first time you tread on the brake
pedal.

:-)

Adrian Redmond

---------------------------------------------------
CHANNEL 6 TELEVISION DENMARK
Foerlevvej 6, Mesing, DK-8660  Skanderborg  Denmark
---------------------------------------------------
telephone (office)                  +45 86 57 22 66
telephone (home)                    +45 86 57 22 64
telefacsimile                       +45 86 57 24 46
mobile GSM                          +45 40 54 22 66
e-mail                       [email-masked]
---------------------------------------------------
Visit our homepages!                www.channel6.dk
---------------------------------------------------

--__--__--

Message: 24
From: "Jim Laurel" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Malingnat mail and spam (off topic but relevent?)
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 13:00:33 -0800
Reply-To: [email-masked]

One other thing for those of you using Outlook Express to access your
Hotmail account.  If you have your layout set up with a preview pane
(default configuration), when you click on a hotmail message that has an
embedded web page link, Outlook is actually going out to that site to
retrieve the page for display in the preview pane area.  Often, these
embedded links contain a primary key that identifies the database record
which generated the spam in the first place.  So, when Outlook goes to get
the info for the preview, you are in effect accessing the web page, just as
if you opened the message using Hotmail's web interface.  Be careful of
this, since once you hit the spammer's page, you are identifying yourself as
a real person potentially interested in whatever they're selling.

It's unfortunate that Outlook (and Express) are so often the target of virus
writers.  People complain that it should be made more secure and you can bet
that Microsoft knows how to do that.  Making operating systems and
applications secure is not particularly difficult.  What is extremely
difficult, however, is making the tradeoff between security and usability,
two factors which are always at odds with each other.  No matter how secure
you make an OS, when someone is logged in with administrative privileges and
downloads an executable or other infected file, there will be problems.

Hackers attack the vulnerabilities of Microsoft products because in large
part becuase they are the most pervasive and therefore present the best
opportunity for spreading thier malignant code.  In addition, the very fact
that Microsoft is the industry's dominant player generates alot of
resentment.  If Apple held Microsoft's market position, you can bet that
alot more security flaws in MacOS would be exposed.

--Jim

--__--__--

Message: 25
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 15:46:23 -0600
From: "Andrew H. Litkowiak" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] B-17 and B-29 (no LR content, sorry)
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I would tend to agree with all you say (and you obviously know a
darned bit more than I), but you may have missed one essential point.

A substantial part of the B-17's notoriety came from its ability to
absorb punishment and still return its crews to base. I suppose it
could be a biased idea based on old footage and lack of similar
material on the 24, but I doubt it.

The B-17 may be an old design (early-mid 1930's, I believe), but the
US had no sturdier airframe in combat during WWII. The 17's often came
home with damage that would and did knock the 24's out of the air.

I'm not sure how to compare the B-29 in this debate. Comparatively
speaking, they saw much less time under hostile fire than either the
17's or the 24's. I'll claim ignorance on battle damage "miracle"
stories with the 29's.

Andy Litkowiak

"C. Marin Faure" wrote:
> 
> From: "Rich Williams" <[email-masked]>
> To: <[email-masked]>
> Subject: [lro] was Me262 now B-17 (no LR content)
> Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 14:21:51 -0800
> Reply-To: [email-masked]
> 
> >> Marin wrote:
> >> There is at least one B-17 under restoration (rumored to belong to Paul
> Allen)
> 
> >This is one of only 5 surviving 'E' airframes and the only one to fly until
> the other rumored 'E' is finished (somewhere in the upper mid-west).
> 
> Most of the still-flying B-17s are G models.  The G was characterized by
> the small chin turret that held two .50 cal guns, but after the war these
> turrets were usually removed when the planes were used for fire bombers,
> air-sea-rescue, etc.  So the fact that a B-17 doesn't have a chin turret
> doesn't automatically mean it's not a G.  The B-17 that belongs to the
> Museum of Flight in Seattle is an F model, which like Paul Allen's E model
> is quite rare.
> 
> I did a movie for Boeing back in the mid-1980s commemorating the 50th
> anniversary of the B-17 (Model 299 in Boeing numerics), and got to ride
> around quite a bit in "Sentimental Journey," the Confederate Air Forece's
> restored B-17G.  I also took it up into the Cascades for an air-to-air
> filming session, which I did out the rear door of an old Twin Beech Boeing
> had at the time.  I like the B-17, but it didn't really doesn't do that
> much for me as an airplane.  It was actually a rather old-style design by
> the time WWII came along, and most of the other US bombers were more modern
> in design and technology.  While the B-17 gets all the glory as far as WWII
> bombers go, there were, I believe, more than twice as many B-24s built and
> used during the war.  The B-24 is sort of ugly (the box the B-17 came in,
> was what some people called it), but it arguably did more to win the war
> than the B-17.  Incidentally, the name "Flying Fortress" was not coined by
> Boeing or the US Army Air Corps.  When the press was invited down to Boeing
> Field to see one of the first Model 299s fly, some reporter in his article
> called the plane "...a veritable flying fortress," and the name stuck.
> 
> But the plane that really impresses me is the B-29.  I knew virtually
> nothing about it until Boeing had me do a 30 minute video commemorating its
> 50th anniversary in the early 90s.  Although I wrote the video as a
> fictional story about a B-29 flight engineer (narrated by John Cullum from
> Northern Exposure), who experiences the development and service of the
> plane, everything he talks about is taken from interviews I conducted with
> dozens of B-29 crewmen and the airplane's designers at Boeing.  After
> learning all this, to me the B-29 and its development makes the B-17 look
> like a paper airplane contest.  The B-29 was the first "high-tech"
> airplane, and it's systems were pretty amazing for the day.  I had a chance
> to fly and film in "Fifi," the CAF's restored B-29, the only one flying at
> the time, and I thought it was way cooler than flying in the B-17.  The
> B-29s flight deck is sort of like being on the Millenium Falcon, with the
> all-glass nose and panoramic view.  We did an air-to-air session with it,
> too, over Puget Sound.
> 
> The B-17 is certainly a prettier airplane in terms of its classic lines,
> but the B-29 is a far superior machine.  The B-29 crews out of India and
> China flew the longest missions of the war, 16 and 17 hours.  The plane
> stood up to battle damage even better than the B-17, although it flew so
> high that it was not until they started low-level bombing during the last
> year of the war to improve accuracy that it began taking lots of hits.
> 
> ________________________
> C. Marin Faure
>   (original owner)
>   1973 Land Rover Series III-88
>   1991 Range Rover Vogue SE
>    Seattle, WA
> _______________________________________________
> LRO mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

--__--__--

Message: 26
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 16:51:59 -0500
To: [email-masked]
From: "James G.Wolf" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Paint in Spray Cans 
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On this subject has anyone used the refillable CO2 charged spray can that
is in the JC Whitney catalogue? I have been tempted several times to order
one when they are on sale. They have been selling them for quite a few years.
Jim Wolf

--__--__--

Message: 27
From: Easton Trevor A <[email-masked]>
To: "'Adrian Redmond '" <[email-masked]>, "[email-masked] '"
  <[email-masked]>, "[email-masked] '" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [lro] Beware of Hand throttles
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 17:44:24 -0500
Reply-To: [email-masked]

 A good idea with the hand throttle is a solenoid that disengages the
ratchet. Connect this solenoid to the brake light circuit. Then when you
apply the brakes the throttle is closed too. 
After market cruise controls make a good hand throttle too. Connect the
magnet on the crank pulley instaed of the drive shaft and you have an RPM
dependent throttle. These also incoporate the brake contreol to for throttle
release.

-----Original Message-----
From: Adrian Redmond
To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
Sent: 12/29/01 3:54 PM
Subject: [lro] Beware of Hand throttles

One thing to be aware of if you have a stock 2.25 rover engine, is that
the hand throttle - by preventing the engine returning to lowest revs
when you remove your foot from the pedal - also prevents the brake servo
getting full suction - which normally happens when you remove revs.

So whilst the hand throttle is a useful "diesel choke", farmer's
chauffxr, and lazy pedal, it's not the best friend in heavy traffic
where you want full braking power the first time you tread on the brake
pedal.

:-)

Adrian Redmond

---------------------------------------------------
CHANNEL 6 TELEVISION DENMARK
Foerlevvej 6, Mesing, DK-8660  Skanderborg  Denmark
---------------------------------------------------
telephone (office)                  +45 86 57 22 66
telephone (home)                    +45 86 57 22 64
telefacsimile                       +45 86 57 24 46
mobile GSM                          +45 40 54 22 66
e-mail                       [email-masked]
---------------------------------------------------
Visit our homepages!                www.channel6.dk
---------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
LRO mailing list
[email-masked]
http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

--__--__--

Message: 28
From: "marko.cosic" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Beware of Hand throttles
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 22:48:34 -0000
Reply-To: [email-masked]

 A good idea with the hand throttle is a solenoid that disengages the
ratchet.

---

Better still a solenoid that ENGAGES the ratchet. Two normally closed switches
on the brake pedal wired in series to feed the solenoid which normally keeps the
thrtoole engaged. Then when the brake is pressed it cuts the power to the
solenoid which disengages the ratchet. This way should the solenoid burn out or
the pedal switch become disconnected/one of them get damaged, the throttle will
drop out, failing-safe.

--__--__--

Message: 29
From: Easton Trevor A <[email-masked]>
To: "[email-masked] '" <[email-masked]>, "[email-masked] '"
  <[email-masked]>, "[email-masked] '" <[email-masked]>,
  "[email-masked] '" <[email-masked]>,
  "[email-masked] '" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [lro] was Me262 now B-17 (now 42.7% more LR content!)
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 18:22:45 -0500
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Speeny wrote

New LR content:
They had a B-17 at one of the Downeast rallies in the early 90's. I dont

remember which model it was. I think it was a CAF plane. 

That really was a great rally, its such a shame that it died.

The B17 at the Down East was the City of Memphis sponsored Memphis Belle. I
have video of the plane from Ground and air (I managed to bum a ride in one
of the Stearmans) . Rides in the B17 were available for $400. Anyone want a
Lancaster ride? The Canadian Warplane Heritage gives rides in the Lanc for
$4000 Canadian. One of only two flying. The flight is Hamilton to Niagara
Falls, couple of circuits of the falls for photos and back to Hamilton,
along the Lake.

Anyone heard or seen the infamous Myles Murphy of Down East Fame( notoriety)
? I wonder if he's been incarcerated, deported or just hiding?

--__--__--

Message: 30
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 16:13:40 -0800
To: [email-masked]
From: "G. Mugele" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[2]: [lro] Series question for those of you that own 1971  
  trucks
Reply-To: [email-masked]

At 6:05 PM +0100 12/29/01, Hermen wrote:
>
>S III also had flat doorhinges, which accommodate the mirrors. The
>mountingpoints for the windscreen were moved from the sides to a more
>inward position. Somewhere in the transition to series III the sills
>got shallower.
>

I think the change was "official" in the US with the 1972 model year.

No one has mentioned the change to the cylinder head; wasn't the 8:1 
cylinder head first introduced in the SIII?  My 69 late IIa was 7:1 
and my 72 SIII was 8:1.

The SIII also got a fully Synchronized box, the plastic dash and 
grill, and,  for the NAS market it got seat belts for the rear 
benches.  The door and windshield hinges changed and seat belts in 
front were much improved.

The sills on *most* late IIa 88s were 5 inch and *most SIIIs got 3 
inch but that seems to be variable.  Weren't most pre 65 88s 
delivered with the 3 inch sills?  From what I can recall nearly all 
the 109s had 5 inch sills.

I think that the RHD v. LHD dash was virtually the same in the SIIIs. 
The difference was the placement of the instrument nacelle.

Cheers,
Gerry Mugele    --  ("Peat" '95 D90 SW)

***  They say  "Great Discoveries are made by not following 
instructions."   Does this explain Land Rover assembly line practices?

--__--__--

Message: 31
From: "Peter Ogilvie" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Re[2]: [lro] Series question for those of you that own 1971
  trucks
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 15:32:48 -1000
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Both My '66 and '65 88's and the '66 109 all had the deeper sill.  My 1970 
88 had the narrow sills.  Changed to the skinny sills sometime after 1966, 
possibly with the introduction of the late 2A in 1969.

Aloha
Peter O.

>From: "G. Mugele" <[email-masked]>
>Reply-To: [email-masked]
>To: [email-masked]
>Subject: Re[2]: [lro] Series question for those of you that own 1971  
>trucks
>Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 16:13:40 -0800
>
>
>At 6:05 PM +0100 12/29/01, Hermen wrote:
>>
>>S III also had flat doorhinges, which accommodate the mirrors. The
>>mountingpoints for the windscreen were moved from the sides to a more
>>inward position. Somewhere in the transition to series III the sills
>>got shallower.
>>
>
>I think the change was "official" in the US with the 1972 model year.
>
>No one has mentioned the change to the cylinder head; wasn't the 8:1
>cylinder head first introduced in the SIII?  My 69 late IIa was 7:1
>and my 72 SIII was 8:1.
>
>The SIII also got a fully Synchronized box, the plastic dash and
>grill, and,  for the NAS market it got seat belts for the rear
>benches.  The door and windshield hinges changed and seat belts in
>front were much improved.
>
>The sills on *most* late IIa 88s were 5 inch and *most SIIIs got 3
>inch but that seems to be variable.  Weren't most pre 65 88s
>delivered with the 3 inch sills?  From what I can recall nearly all
>the 109s had 5 inch sills.
>
>I think that the RHD v. LHD dash was virtually the same in the SIIIs.
>The difference was the placement of the instrument nacelle.
>
>Cheers,
>Gerry Mugele    --  ("Peat" '95 D90 SW)
>
>***  They say  "Great Discoveries are made by not following
>instructions."   Does this explain Land Rover assembly line practices?
>_______________________________________________
>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: 32
From: "Peter Ogilvie" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Paint in Spray Cans
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 15:49:08 -1000
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I used a refillable spray can gun years ago.  It had a cannister with 
compressed gas for the power and a cup for the paint.  Was painting hard 
coat anodized cast aluminum hatches with linear polyurethane.  Surface of 
the castings was not the smoothest but the kit worked great for this 
application.  Don't know how it would work on a surface that would allow for 
a high gloss finish.

Aloha
Peter O.

>From: "James G.Wolf" <[email-masked]>
>Reply-To: [email-masked]
>To: [email-masked]
>Subject: Re: [lro] Paint in Spray Cans
>Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 16:51:59 -0500
>
>
>On this subject has anyone used the refillable CO2 charged spray can that
>is in the JC Whitney catalogue? I have been tempted several times to order
>one when they are on sale. They have been selling them for quite a few 
>years.
>Jim Wolf
>_______________________________________________
>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: 33
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 22:59:37 -0400
To: [email-masked]
From: Ben Pooley <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Galvanizers
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Time to visit Halifax, Nova Scotia for galvanizing........

I think I remember the rates correctly at $45.00 for the first 100lb,
plus 26 cents per pound over 100lb.  Plus our 15% sales tax, but
remember that's all in shrunken Canadian dollars.

As a guide, I think we got a new bumper with overriders which a
friend built for my ex-mil 109, and front bumper and grille for my
S1 in the 100lb.

Plan your Nova Scotia vacation around your Land Rover galvanizing!

Ben Pooley
Lockeport NS

At 08:40 AM 12/29/01 -0800, you wrote:

>--- [email-masked] wrote:
>
> > Al:
> >
> > As I recall, you are not far from New Hampshire.
> > Are there no galvanizers
> > there, or possibly in far-away Rhode Island?
>
>Not that I have been able to find.........

--__--__--

_______________________________________________
* 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