daslandroverman

Wouldn't a variant of the Merc box from an ML be easier to adapt? Take the merc transfer box off the back and you've got a splined output shaft and a flat rear face that's ideal for attaching an adapter plate to.

I don't see why it wouldn't at that, just be sure the new idler is in line with the crank and water pump pulleys. From experience, if it looks right by eye then it's good enough as the belt will deal with some misalignment.

I don't see any way you could run a Serp V8 without the PAS pump without at least adding in a selection of extra idlers.

Pretty simple really. As an ideal you'd want to make a bellhousing for a short LT77, or maybe an R380 with a short LT77 input shaft to get the length down, but otherwise -especially if you already have a PAS conversion- you could fit everything in with relative ease, and replace the entire vehicle wiring loom with the Td5 setup -it's all plug and play- with the added bonus of the later type light connections and more than four fuses. It's a bit of work to get it all fitted up, but nothing you could call difficult.

I'm sure I mentioned a BMW engine earlier in the thread... The M47 -a 2 litre turbo engine- as found in the Rover 75,MG ZT, Freelander along with BMW 320, 520, Z3 etc that in Rover tune kicked out 114 bhp and 195lb/ft or 134bhp and 207lb/ft at similar rpm to which the 200 Tdi gives its 111bhp and 195lb/ft with the added advantage of being a rather nice compact unit which could be made to fit a Series gearbox with a fairly simple adapter ring should you feel so inspired. Wiring is available to make them run with 6 wires to connect to the vehicle. The six cylinder M57 is an option, but would be better suited to being attatched to an R380 or ZF auto.

The big problem with many electronic controlled engines is making them run outside of the host vehicle. It has to be something that can be fairly easily made to run without a myriad of expensive electronic additions before it stands much of a chance of being considered.

The BMW M47 has potential as a fairly readily available lump with suitable power/torque output.

How's that going?

Just Google imaged sums, confused myself further. Memory is bloody useless... Anyways, I stand by my original statement that GEMS should have a separate cover plate, every one of them I've encountered has.

Gems have a separate plate over the bottom of the bellhousing, as in your picture, the Thor sump covers the lot. A while since I've seen under a GEMS engine so couldn't remember exact details. What does the pickup ring for the crank sensor look like? If that's damaged then it will cause erratic running, along with quite a few other things in there. I doubt it's something rattling around in the sump, especially if it was running on 8 when it first came to you. Hard to say much more without physically being there.

Looks like a GEMS engine, they had the cover plate, the cast ally sump came with the 'Thor' engines.

Thought experiment. Would it be classed as commercial use of the vehicle if you were to charge for 'loading' whatever you were transporting, but then took it to its destination and dropped it off as a 'favour'? I have suspicion it probably wouldn't hold up in court, but on technicality it almost makes sense?

There's a few been done, but not much said about them. Jeremy Fearn used to do conversions, but has been out of business for a while. I would suggest that a call to RallyRaidUK would be a good start, they seem to know quite a bit about fitting the 3 litre engine. However, my basic understanding of the conversion is that the engine will bolt in where the 2.5 comes out, and the wiring plug and play with the rallyraid loom. You may need to do a little custom pipework for the water, intake and exhaust, but I believe everything pretty much falls where it needs to to link up to all the original bits on the car.

From experience, a linger front prop seems the best way to eliminate the rumble. The longer front prop on the auto conversion on my old GS never rumbled, contrasting with the manual box which did it regularly above 50mph. Sitec found similar on his 101 with the cummins conversion. Your other option is to fit a set of 4.7 crownwheel/pinion gears, and if so desired a set of lower ratio high range gears (stage 1 perhaps) in the transfer box to lower the rotational speed of the props for a given road speed, as noted above, my GS only did it above 50mph (80kph). Worth asking Andrew what he thinks with the current setup on his truck, as from memory he's got a set of 0.9:1 high range gears, 4.7 diffs and overdrive with a fairly chirpy 3.9 engine. Might be a good comparison if you're thinking on building a reasonably trick 4.6 for it.

Pull the lower cover plate off the front of the bellhousing (about 5 bolts) and see what, if anything falls out. You'll also be able to have a bit of a look in and see what sort of condition the flex plate and associated parts are in. They can make some bloody awful noises when stuff comes loose in there. There's not much could come loose in the engine internals that would be rattling about like that unless it had dropped a big end cap and there was a rod hanging, banging about on the crank with the engine turning, but it doesn't sound anything like I'd expect that would. bellhousing cover plate is the simplest place to start.

Clicky link £325 plus VAT, but not bad when you think it let's you fit then engine and plug all the wiring in. All up I reckon you could buy a Rangie and do the conversion for less than the cost of a warmed over top hat 4.6 from Turners.

Get one with a dead engine and swop in the 3 litre M57 lump from a BMW 330d. RallyRaidUK do a plug in wiring harness to make it all work with the BMW ECU and the Rangie BCM. Bolts in where the M51 comes out, similar power/torque outputs to a stick 4.6, and 30 mpg quite achievable, I would.

Correct, 4 master splines, so you can only rotate it in 90 degree increments.

Stick a P38 steering box on it, cheap enough, tough enough, and eliminates 33% of the ball joints from the system. The main causes of vague steering on a Defender etc is box wear, knackered UJ's in the column, ball joint wear and knackered bushes on the axle locating arms, most commonly the panhard rod. Put it all together on a series chassis and if all the wearing parts are new it'll be a long time before it gives trouble. You'll need a steering damper as an ideal too.

Excellent news.

At present my 110 has solid discs on the front brakes. It needs a set of discs and pads doing fairly soon, whilst the callipers would probably benefit from replacement after 208,000 miles. I've got a new set to suit vented discs, and was thinking on using them. Would I be right in thinking that if I put a set of vented discs on then they'll bolt up without any issues? Or have I over simplified it some?

This one? It's an LT77, works well enough, no less vague than a standard series box anyways.

A wonderful autocorrect fubar. Quite a lot of knowledge about the weaknesses of the LT230 http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/land-rover/1626818-i-blew-up-my-lt-230-koh-took-me-out.html'>here. You may have seen it already, but it does explain why the centre diff will sieze up and die.

The notable side effects on a series motor are heavier steering, and feedback through the wheel when doing full lock turns. Both problems that will become somewhat less noticeable of you're running power steering also. In general it's it a good idea to run an LT230 at road speeds with the diff locked for prolonged periods, as they tend to sieze solid due to lack of lubrication, whilst there's nothing wrong with doing a 'selectable' 2WD conversion by welding the diff gears if you do it properly. It doesn't take away one of the bigger strengths of the LT230 in that you can run low range 4WD with an open centre diff, which is quite beneficial in examples such as maneuvering on hard ground with a large trailer.

Turbo T Series engine would be excellent in a 90, would need the drive train beefing up a little for a Series motor. BMW M30 seems a good option for something bigger.