Retroanaconda

Yes, that will bolt up and fit. It’s how I had it all mounted in my chassis. You’d need the corresponding 300Tdi gearbox side brackets though (the one that came with it is one of them) and the rubber thingies too. And there may be exhaust clearance issues. I don’t think extra holes would be needed, it uses a few of the ‘standard’ triangle set that your old mounts used, plus the rearmost pair of the ones used to mount the plain crossmembers that don’t include gearbox mounts, like the one Bowie69 posted.

That looks good Phill - your offset gearbox mount from the Disco looks correct. You just need to sort the pair out for other side and then you’ll be able to drop the whole lot in and see where your engine mounts end up - hopefully just where you’ve planned them. Disco 1 V8s from 1994 to 1998 would have used the R380 same as the 300Tdi ones did.

The R380 in Phill’s photos is a late Defender Td5 box that was rebuilt to V8 spec. There we’re numerous bellhousings over the years, for example P38 ones look quite different to disco ones. As long as the dimensions are correct it will make no difference. He can check it against the one that came with the box, which looked the same as your picture - except for the chunk I cut out of it of course. Here it is in my chassis. As long as Phill’s new one is the same length it’ll be fine.

There were plenty of V8 discos with R380s. The V8 bellhousing for R380 are shorter than the very similar looking ones for the LT77 by about an inch. They will bolt up both ends but the input shaft ends up hanging in mid air. If Phill’s bellhousing puts the input shaft properly into the back of the crank then it is the right one. The one I modified that came with the box is the right length, so it could be checked against that. When I get home on Tuesday I can take some measurements from the V8 chassis in my workshop, but here are two poor photos showing the engine mount position.

I believe so yes. That was what I was planning on doing, and I was working on the assumption that an LT230 and R380 bolted up to a 300Tdi crossmember (the way I chose to go) would mean that the 300Tdi floor etc. would all fit fine and line up as it’s no different from a 300Tdi car. I had a pair of 300Tdi props that certainly fitted perfectly.

Out of interest Jamie - what makes the drivetrain not technologically appropriate for your application(s)? The vehicle strikes me as about as back-to-basic in that respect as it’s possible to achieve in the modern world, with the exception of the gearbox where a manual option would have been beneficial. Outwith the drivetrain they didn’t really need to have a silly Top Gun interior and a big touchscreen but that will all be market appeal driven as you allude to.

Assuming you want everything as per a factory V8 then you’ll need to use mounts that put the transfer box in the V8/300Tdi/Td5 position. If you use mounts for the 2.5NA/TD/200Tdi application then the whole thing will be two inches or so too far aft. Use the correct position and then standard V8/300Tdi/Td5 seatbox, floor plates, tunnel and props should all more or less fit. There are two ways of getting the right positioning, either use the bolt-on V8 mounts from the parts book or use a 300Tdi crossmember with built in mounts. Just watch for exhaust clearance if doing the latter.

Which transfer box mounts are you using?

I can get you some photos of the V8 chassis in my workshop Phill but not until middle of next week.

Yes compared to a Land Cruiser or a new Defender it’s about the same, starting at slightly more than both. Doesn’t stop it being a fair wedge of cash though. There was an awful lot of crowing when the new Defender was released about the price compared to the old one, despite the fact that it is a whole lot more car for the money. This is the same - if it lives up to the hype then the engineering and quality will be far better than the old Defender and so it should command a higher price. I’m looking forward to trying one out. I’m not sure what the lead time on one will be if you joined the order queue now but I wouldn’t bet on it being much quicker than that other new car like the Defender.

The technical spec is fairly good, but it is a very expensive vehicle for sure. No info on VAT that I can see yet but if you assume the tax is reclaimable it puts a base spec utility wagon at £41k or so. The weight is a surprise too - 2.7 tonnes kerb weight puts it at 400kg heavier than my 110. Which I suppose goes some way to explaining the rather poor fuel economy. My spec (base USW with locking diffs, tyres, a colour and a towbar), comes to £51,760 plus whatever VED fun and games gets added on. Strong money.

Price list INEOS Grenadier_MY23 Price List_UK_Version 1.0_April 2022.pdf

Enjoy: Specifications and prices

Good news indeed, and news that I had missed. Have put an order in for a few bits anyway so hopefully all back up and running

They were Zeus ones. The seal retainers corrode and seize up the pistons, and the pistons themselves get a tarnish on them which still causes them to stick like rust does.

That’s a very good question. I had originally thought it was commercial users, and Ineos are still promoting it as such, but I think in reality it’s likely to be more leisure use. It could sell very well in the USA’s very large recreational 4x4 market.

Personally I wouldn’t bother, they still corrode up and seize the same as normal pistons - though I concede probably at a slower rate.

Loose joint in the fuel system somewhere. The leak off lines on the injectors are a classic for this.

Not sure how many commercial buyers will bite at nearly twice the price of a normal pickup, but it depends more on the residual values and overall cost of ownership which won’t be apparent straight away. I’m looking forward to trying one out though, if someone can come up with an aftermarket option for a less silly front bumper that would be good too!

Yes I think that’s about right and in line with what I last paid.

New AP calipers are still cheap enough that rebuilding is not really worth it in my opinion. Additionally stainless pistons may not corrode but the seal retainers still do and then that rust still seizes them up.

It’s a fairly ghastly thing and very American, not to my taste to be honest. Hopefully it’s more reliable than the normal Ford Ranger which is the biggest load of rubbish masquerading as a work vehicle that money can buy.

I think WQB100440 is the 110 ROW-spec (and later 2.4 Tdci) sender/pickup unit that doesn’t have a pump in it, though is confusingly listed as one in the parts system. There are also different pumps for 90 and 110/130 due to the different tank depth.

That’s the standard 300Tdi spring, which is much lighter than the other type fitted to earlier and later vehicles. The green one is an aftermarket version designed to be lighter still.