WesBrooks

Winches about 3kW? BMW i3 motor is 130kW.

Cheers, that gives me a bit more of an idea on what is going on!

Bought all my LED lights from Bower Automotive. http://www.bowerspartsonline.co.uk/vehicle-components/land-rover-parts/land-rover-defender-traditional-coloured-11-led-lamplight-complete-upgrade-kit-rdxwipac All e-marked but not fitted yet. Prices on site are ex vat.

Hi All, First things first, the field input to the alternator from the Alternator warning light. How much current does this sink? Can it be connected directly to an ignition switched live, or does the bulb act as a current limiter? Secondly I'm interested to know how you would go about completely shutting off an auxiliary alternator so that it doesn't add excess drag on the engine? I've heard people talk about cutting the supply to the field, but some also mention that some alternators self energise at over a certain rpm? It is suggested that just cutting the feed could cause a voltage spike that has the potential to damage internals of the alternator such as the rectifier section. Thanks for any input you can offer!

...it's also worth remembering that an MOT pass isn't a stamp to say the vehicle is thoroughly road legal. Many aspects of the Construction and Use regs aren't directly tested for by the MOT test as this is mainly intended to check for wear and tear and age related deterioration from a previously approved model or vehicle. Long and short of that is you may pass MOT but fail a more thorough road side check.

It wouldn't change from M1 to N1 class wothout you knowing about it. N1 are limited to 60 on dual carriageways and might be 50 on national speed limit roads. After around '95 if fitted with a cat originally it should keep the cat. Many get through ok but I think the mot can be failed now if the tester spots it is missing.

Working on an project that will need an IVA so I don't think there are any issues about using a second hand chassis. I would be looking for one with a V5 and either a Range Rover Classic or Discovery 1. Not bothered about a Q plate. I've a fair amount of rot on my chassis and it is bent. There are also mods I want to make to the rear of the chassis so think a solid second hand with V5 may be a reasonable plan? Anything to be careful of? I'd be looking to measure diagonals on the major mount holes, check for rot, and do a history check on the vehicle reg plate.

I'm just getting what work I can in on the Truck before my wife finishes the kid! :-D

Fair enough, perhaps it is just the tyres and lift then!

What have they done to achieve the same ramp brake over? Isn't this the tightest angle flat sided bump it can drive over without the vertex touching the chassis? Edit: Is it just bigger tyres and a lift?

Things are getting close to bill of materials stage. Fusing like a modern car does certainly stack up the number of fuses but on the plus side I have found suitably rated fuse boxes with bus bars which means less junctions and bus bars either before or after the fuse boxes. I'm planning for the bulk of the electrics to be between and slightly back from the driver and passenger. The batteries will be under the load bay between the axles. Down side is the starter cable needs to be more meaty but frees up space under the bonnet. If I can I'll build the main fuse boxes and relays on a removable panel so I can build and test it outside of the truck. With the loom being further back it is easier to have all of the switches switching to earth to activate relays. Not too challenging but did cause a little head scratching and the buzzer requirements for the fog lights and position lights being left on a little more, particularly with removable doors, and so no door switches to trigger the buzzer! Bit of a teaser post really. I hope to write up it and add a long overdue post to my blog. I've taken many of your comments into account (eg ditch 5v switching etc) and am now aiming for a reliable and easy to service loom (i.e. easy to fault find, not necessarily simple!) that doesn't suffer any significant voltage drops at expected loads. I've no illusions of the loom being cheap!

Going back to the original post is there enough movement on the master cylinder to be able to get the slaves to push the backing plates of the pads right onto the drums? Might be worth checking unless the master cylinder is a common part or was swapped at the same time.

Too much braking sounds like bad set up to me, or only just swapped in from driving a vehicle with much less assistance. The perceived rate of braking vs foot pressure is the result of a balance mechanical advantage and servo assistance. Move the pushrod for the master cylinder closer to the brake pedal pivot will increase pedal travel, but reduce required foot pressure. Increasing servo assistance will drop required foot pressure without significantly changing travel. Reducing the master cylinder piston surface area and/or increasing the total area of slave cylinders will have the same effect as moving the master cylinder pushrod toward the brake pedal pivot. Pedal travel can also be increased by over flexible hoses, trapped air, or moisture in the brake fluid. So, quite a scope for home builders to end up with something they think is over or under braked, just by getting the ratios wrong. There is also the intended vehicle weight. As people have said you are limited by the tyres grip on the road. More weight means more grip, which means the braking force generated by the pads acting on the discs/drums can be increased. As your vehicle is heavier you'll probably stop in a similar distance, but take that braking system and apply to a lighter vehicle and they'll tend to lock up easier. What's my point? Notice no mention of discs or drums above? A lot of what is being debated here has little to do with drum verses discs and more to do with the design of the whole system including the suspension/vehicle dynamics under braking, tyres, weight, and driving style. Brakes system design (inc brake balance) is a complex subject and to draw conclusions from Joe Bloggs who switched from drums to discs or visa versa isn't easy either. Unless the whole braking system had been lifted from a near identical vehicle then achieving a balanced system with good feel would be more luck than judgement unless they put significant effort in. Would you notice the swap from good drum system to good discs? If driving like the a typical Mrs Daisy then probably not. If you are in competition, drive fast with frequent stops, tow heavy loads, or change your own pads the yes. Will you stop quicker? I predict on average yes because discs are more predictable and consistent. They also shed heat faster keeping away from brake fade for longer on stop from speed or frequent stops. Would it be worth it financially? Erm, what cars are we here for? Those eastern imports are good value aren't they? ;-) Unless you want discs, or are fortunate enough to fall on the whole system cheap then probably not. Slight foot note, there is a good chance that Land Rover did size components so that they could use the same master cylinder for drums and discs where there was an option for both on the same model. Doesn't necessarily mean the brake feel will be to your liking though.

Thanks for the comments guys all very fair, particularly around availability. I had a cursory look for the toyota v8 too but that is in limited supply. I want a petrol, and would love to stick with a V8 almost purely for nostalgia, the rumble, and it's kinda been passed down in my bones along with brewing my own beer! Any how I digress. If I could get a more recent engine in and mega squirted then I'd consider that but realistically the cut off is around £5k for something that is do-able. The conversations going on here imply more like £10-15k for the LS then all parts shipped over which would be a ball ache.

What sort of money are the adaptors to fit an LS onto a ZF box? I'm 80% set on a cross bolted RV8 route but should at least have an idea how much this route would take. I'm guessing £3k for a crate engine ish? Pain to get in and running but once in I'm guessing it'll be a much easier life than running a RV8?

Don't tin, use crimp on ferruls as in the following link. Tinning screw terminals is not great for long term reliability. I used to tin for neatness too. http://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/29861/tinning-wires-that-will-be-screwed-in-to-a-chocolate-block-terminal-strip

....then after sorting out camera you've somehow got to discourage the person I'm not that keen on spiders! :-D Edit: He he! 'the person I'm not keen on'! Just testing the forum's Language auto correct.

Yeah, that's what I feared and put it back in to a 'jobs for later' pile! :-D Failing ONVIF my next approach was going to be raspberry pi (or similar) + web cam. At least I would know what it was doing then.

I've been looking into something similar recently and ended up returning some cameras as I didn't trust them. I wasn't happy about the active-x software that was needed to configure the camera. Technically there is little reason why you should need to do this but the one I returned and another I'm using at home couldn't be set up fully with the Onvif viewers. I'd say avoid DBPower cameras from Ebay. I'm still looking for a HD night vision pan - tilt - zoom that can be set up without it needing to be connected to the internet, ONVIF compliant, and linux friendly.

The only source of information that I've found is the enquiries@dvsa.gsi.gov.uk email address. With these I've found that unless you ask a question that could be answered by reading the text in the IVA test guides then you'll get a response a month or two later (even if replying to a previous email) that starts with something along the line of 'Sorry for the delay, due to the technical nature of your enquiry it was passed to me...'. I did ask to visit a test station to get a feel for the test but was declined that or a meeting. If you have got direct communication with a tester you are fortunate, and they are going above and beyond. Talking of which there is a help to pass document going around which is a better first read than the test guide to get a feel for things. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/individual-vehicle-approval-iva-for-cars-help-to-get-a-pass The locost forums are a massive help for getting your head around the IVAs and getting an idea of common stumbling points. In essence you need almost OCD levels of attention to detail to get through on first pass, or be super routine and run it through a mock test where you or a mate (a favour in such a magnitude that could only be repaid in copious amounts of real ale!) test it against the guide. I'm on the same side regarding the IVA. I've only been balancing on the fence because my project wouldn't have needed one originally (re-body of a discovery) but since the work now includes engine and I'm thinking of moving engine back a bit, going under seat fuel tanks and cutting overhang then all of a sudden it is well and truly IVA territory. In the past I've worked in the design and development of machines that were potentially harmful (laser processing very low oxide aluminium and titanium powders can get 'interesting') and it was always reassuring to have a framework to work to which could get signed off to say you've paid due diligence. The grey areas were always appreciated by finance and project leaders as a route through was generally cheaper, but on who's head are those choices on when it goes tits up with your own car? It does have the opposite effect of stopping you going overboard too. This also provides a marker down for what is deemed an acceptable build standard and taking the design significantly past this is unnecessary spend unless it is for the vehicles dual purpose of the 4x4 use. The IVA is after all only intended to test for suitability for the on road section of it's life, not the private land (green lanes are technically on road I believe) off road adventures and play. Edit: Here are the locost forums - https://www.locostbuilders.co.uk/forum/

I've read through it a few times and it is great if you are making a fairly standard saloon or locost/seven style car. It does however get particularly confusing when it appears to be more restrictive than both C&U and EC regulations around issues such as lighting. I tend to focus on specific sections that I'm currently working on rather than the whole lot in one shot. At least one read through cover to cover is a good move though just to ensure you have a decent feel for what is passable.

I hadn't twigged the type approved exemption thing extended to external and internal projections. The commercial IVA test is the light goods or N1 class that I referred to. The links are to the websites hosting the most up to date copy of the guides.

According to the following site the date modifications need to be older than to avoid the need for an IVA test is 1998. This is the date the SVA test came in, which has now been replaced by the IVA test. http://www.rodsnsods.co.uk/forum/licensing-legal-section/old-modifications-chassis-368130 Acceptable evidence might be quite tough though!

My comment on the age limit being 10 years is wrong, I'm not sure how long ago the modifications have to be before it passes under grandfather like rights but it's more than 10 I think. I'll add a comment on my original post. In a nutshell the point system is the way they decide whether a car is the same car or not following modifications. The more you change, the more it is different to the original that passed type approval and more into a grey area where there is complete reliance on competence of the people doing the modifying. They give a little play room but also draw a limit where they are effectively saying the proportion of people that are modifying their cars who are either clueless or just have a far more generous idea of acceptable risk presents too much of a risk to the general public.

The points system determines whether a modified vehicle retains the exisiting registration plate, needs a new age related registration plate, or needs a q plate. If the registration plate needs to change then you need an IVA. As your engine is a factory reconditioned unit if it is the same spec as the original for the chassis then it counts as the original. Likewise if you change the chassis like for like with no modifications it counts as original. https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-registration/radically-altered-vehicles As others have said if the chassis has been modified within the time limit then an IVA is required regardless of the point score. This time limit will relate to when changes occurred to either the points system or sva/iva. It's unlikely to be a rolling exemption meaning if you stay quiet and it's not spotted for 10 years I don't think it effectively gets rubber stamped. Have a look at the IVA test guides for M1 and N1 vehicles to see what you'd be up against. Getting a landy through an N1 would be easier, but restrict you to van speed limits and may effect insurance premiums. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/iva-manual-for-vehicle-category-m1 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/iva-manual-for-vehicle-category-n1 Major gotchas are likely to be internal and external projections and if you've raised your suspension then the self centering of the steering maybe a little weak if you've not also had castor corrected arms fitted. Beyond that if you do go for a test then everything needs to be super neat. They for example are very prescriptive on acceptable securing of wiring, fuel, and brake lines. Fuel lines would need to be marked. With many aspects where you can show the item under test is the same as a type approved vehicle it may pass. These cases are normally highlighted in the guides. Edit: I've got the 10 year figure wrong. I think for modifications to be exempt from IVA they need to be older than that and there needs to be reasonable evidence of the modifications being that old such as pictures in magazines or show reviews. I'll have a dig around and comment if I do find out the true figure.