Re: [lro] Forward control question

From: Jean-Leon Morin (offroaddesign@softhome.net)
Date: Fri Feb 07 2003 - 14:32:36 EST

  • Next message: TeriAnn Wakeman: "Re: [lro] Forward control question"

    > >If this is a factory animal (ENV/101 brakes/5 bolt hubs) I've found the
    > >solution to my axle strength issue, while keeping the lug pattern I love.
    >
    > Even if they exist (I have no idea), aren't they likely to share the
    > normal 101 diff ratio? It's absurdly low, like 5.6 or something.
    >
    > David

    They would, however, the ENV looks to be manufactured by Eaton. Chevrolet
    used an identical diff in their 3/4 ton trucks. You can get 4.10's easily
    for these, and there is no gear split. These are relatively obscure however
    and pretty old (pre 1972).

    I'd really like to stay with rover axles. A salisbury rear is perfect for my
    uses, but the salisbury front is simply a heavier duty diff, but the
    halfshafts and CV's are all pretty small for 900R16s. I was thinking of
    perhaps going to an open knuckle (american) design but keeping the 5 on 6.5
    becomes a problem.

    However, now I'm thinking that even if the eaton (ENV) was available as a FC
    axle, it probably had 109 6 cyl brakes, because of the 5 bolt pattern. I
    doubt rover would design a completely different 5 bolt front end using 101
    FC brakes but with 5 wheel bolts. I figure it's either that early 101s had
    these axles and 109 brakes, or this is a special, or I'm dreaming. The 101FC
    brakes (6 lug) would have been adequate, but the smaller brakes might not be
    up to the task.

    The attraction of the 101FC axle is the brute strength of the CVs and the
    sprung over configuration. Perhaps a front salisbury 101 axle, redrilled and
    modified for discs, is the way.

    Hmm...

    J-L
    _______________________________________________
    LRO mailing list
    LRO@land-rover.team.net
    http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Feb 07 2003 - 16:01:57 EST