Landrover17H

The exhaust fitting seems familiar? Filled mine with a heap of exhaust paste, sorted. Off the shelf in stainless, likely you’ll be look at offerings by Double S. Custom exhausts systems (I hasten to add, without manifold) are not as pricey as you'd think. A decent S/S by Double S is not cheap, whereas by virtue of ease of welding, your local custom-zhorst boy will be using far heavier-grade stainless than you'd meet in any pressed-up Double S. Be clear, tubing won't be thicker out of the goodness of his heart, more that it's easier to weld, and the cost difference over labour-increase and 'come-back' reduction makes heavier tube ‘all-in’ cheaper. Yes it'll be 50% more, but it's twice the system. But... if you're talking one-off manifolds, things get very pricey. I can't see how Big666’s £1300 quote could be a true custom job, more likely a preset design, already set-up to 'dial-in' to a tube-bender. That is not to make light of the skills and general nouse required to do this. Making a tubular manifold, and doing this well, is no easy task. With heaps of pricey scrap tube just staring at you, it's very simple to get wrong. Being the V8, £1300 is too cheap for a one-off, but it promises to be the better job for it. The 4-pot is a different animal, I get the impression, others think a 4-pot should be cheaper? How so? Without the hard bit done, it needs to be a true, ‘custom’ one-off, rather than a stock ‘V8 custom’. This, we can’t just 'dial' in. Decent manifolds are difficult to produce. Hence they tend to be amongst the pricier ‘tuning’ add-ons. Because they’re visible and the easier concept to grasp, every man-jack fits such things. If they gave the same power increases as free-flowing cylinder-heads, that’d be grand, but they don’t. At least not in the four-pot. And because their cost is high, they carry a burden which has them failing to deliver bang-for-buck. It’s not clear where you’d like to take this, be aware it’s easy to be on the path of diminishing returns. Boy-racer science can set-in. Me? Find yourself a stock twin-box behind your ACR pipework - it’ll be quieter with no appreciable loss in power. A twin-box is less restrictive than the stock single, and, without the noise of ACR’s single straight thru’. Can’t speak for the 88, but my Double S 109 twin-box contains a silencer and resonator, much as modern practice. It's a hotch-potch of proper one-off custom-made, and Doube S. In hindsight, I wish I'd had it all done 'custom'. The 'custom' parts are piece-of-art in themselves. The head, inlet bottleneck, and cam is where the big gobs of gain sit, and you've done all that.

Well there's a surprise? Seems the last eBay 17H, by the standards of others, went fairly cheaply. Poor hiding-something pix, timing and an 'Arthur Daleyesque' moniker wouldn't have helped, but even so. Near half-price? Seller deserved a mild kicking, and he got quite a severe one. The vagaries of eBay, eh? You know what this means, don't you??? There's still hope. The return of heaped-up 17H lumps - with 'knuckle-draggers' begging us to take them away - is but days away.

Oh, as I said I've never had one, and never played with such. Not knowing what I'm talking about has never stopped me before? I have it that a PDWA is a 'shuttle', thus in proper working condition would reset as soon as pressure equalises? If it won't even reach to that, these things are junk. I see you point, in normal use it won't be moving. If a PDWA has been sitting in tired, and thus acidic fluid, it'll be seizing very quickly. A brand-spanker could be 'done for' inside 3-4 years whereas MCs and slaves, simply because they move, will be more tolerant to poor upkeep. An aside: I've had experience of seized calipers not moving with my foot hard down. The pressure must have been vast. I've had to force them to 'let-go' by connecting my scuba-compressor. The sound is nothing less than a 'gunshot bang' when they finally let go. I find it easy to see a PDWA seizing under far less. I can undestand that maybe these things need more than 40psi (2-3Bar) to fire in normal -operation. We've 70Bar (ish) under light braking, to play with. If the other circuit is only starting to weep, there might only be a differntial of 10Bar (150psi), and if the PDWA is part-seized it won't be going anywhere. However if the failing-circuit is weeping, we've likely still got some kind of brakes, and here your float-switch would fire first. Which again rather condemns the PDWA? Snagger, you've experience of these things, do I get this right? Are you saying a PDWA won't reset in correct operation? If they don't, my attempt to Myth-bust is on very shaky ground. But, if fitted, I take you point on leaving them in. Removed, there's a sharp-eyed loss-adjuster waiting to have us for breakfast. Whereas, adding a sensor isn't likely to be an issue. I don't know why I care, I just like to know this stuff.

I have my self-respect.

Thank you. That bloke Lr17H. He's not real you know? Ah but yeah, the length of the job-title's a clue? "Director of Quality Assurance". I 'kin ask you? Some spineless cnut whose greater achievement is a CV made to plead for his very existence? And you, you appear to want me to validate this apologist? Jeez, he refuses to recognise his mother-tongue, now he bows and scrapes, nay simpers to an American? To an American? Now, let's have this straight: when their boss comes to 'Buck Pal', he's the social inferior... AND we make damn-sure he knows it. Never should we let them forget this. Be a Brit for chrissakes. “People think there's a rigid class system here, but dukes have even been known to marry chorus girls. Some have even married Americans." - Prince Philip

I would have thought the pressure-differnetial was more than "quite large", nay, I'd have it as vast? I'm truly struggling to name one place we routinely come across greater pressure-differentials? 70+ Bar (very light braking) in the working circuit is quite a bit, as against 1 Bar in the failed circuit? That's up at 100Bar (1500 psi) under hard-braking. How much pressure-difference did we want? Enough to push the diddy-switch anyhow? I have a paint-ball/scuba-compressor here, it'll do 250Bar, (300Bar at a push - 4300psi) but not too many have one of those. It had occurred to me that rather than the goodness of any bean-counter's heart, the PDWA fitment smacks of 'Chapter 4 - subsection iv' .Fitting it would not have been a light decision. When LR buys for a production-run, even £4-5 per part, becomes a lot of cash where you don't have to spend it. The cynic in me sees the regulatory requirement secured a bureaucrat's pension, but you'd hope it also pushed manufacturers to a level-playing field. The big issue for me is that you can't check PDWA operation easily - Snagger, you have one, but short of cracking-off a bleed-nipple, there's no easy way to know if it works? It is a device you have to 'hope' works? A float-switch is easier to see and check for operation. Other than neglect, and tight-fistedness, with a heap of non-comprehension for its correct operation, I've not seen the argument to withstand any scrutiny to support herd-wisdom, ie: Our PDWA device should be removed. I claim 'Myth Busted'.

I ask you? Looks great. And to think, some damn-fool suggested a cable...

Ah, NRC5494 - It's a bit drastic, but better in the finish. I threw the lot and went with a Defender V8 cable. It has a clevis pin which will fall onto what we see here. You'll need the pedal-assy with it, used, they're cheap enough. The rod set-up takes so much space too. Space you can use for swirl-pots, relay boxes, Mega-ECU, coil-packs etc? De-clutters - you'd think you've got lots of space under there, but it soon runs out. This set-up makes for less ON or OFF 'feel' over the rods on my SU. But then, you don't have an SU... Looking to the standard you've set for the rest of this job, reckon you could be persuaded? Likely you want not just the throttle-box, but the coiler brake pedal-box in there too? Stonking great servo et al. This assumes you're going to discs?

I thought you did? You want a 'deepset' and know I get these measurements somehow. That thread is at 45000 hits all-in. Sadly near all 45000 adopt your approach. I apologise, but rather than carp, I was thinking you'd see the irony, and get your ruler out. You have an ANR1534, but which, I can't tell.

If talk of that Yank made pipe comes together, I'd think, if your mucker has issue with £560, be minded that Stateside, it'll be £90 to get it here. Put me down for one, I might have a face for two.

Really? You've no rims variants of your own? No straight-edge? No metric-ruler? I'm forced to believe you? Your honour, I rest my case.

Now you might see the problem. It's very rare for any to supply precise 'deepset' for their own rims, Steve ^^^ is that decent rarity. It's ony happened once or twice. Most times to write that thread, I had to track the rims down myself. Yet many will be quick to ask for info on the other rims. It's taken years to get the info, it should be simple, but it isn't. 272309? I'll dig it out.

Thanks young Steven. This is an confusing subject which the uninitiated wades into by quoting part numbers. With identical numbers used on up to three differing pressings, this quickly becomes a fool’s errand. This is why for period rims, those ET tables won’t work. All this wouldn’t matter if it were not for the intense interest the numerous deep rim variants get, and the stratospheric values outwardly small differences make. It’s a subject set in rivet-counter heaven. You’re set to pay £2000 for the rarer sets. £400 for lesser stuff. The only way to separate one pressing from another, is by the technically incorrect measurement, ‘deepset’. Not much else works. There’ been heaps of tables, all of which have been wrong. CD’s ET table is new in the ring. I've put the standard entrants below. They look good, but in practical identification, amount to a pretty part number list with errors. Example: We won’t know which variant Big66 has with only the number ANR1534 to go on. I count 21 variants out there. And here’s a tragic fact, the anoraks amongst us know, and value accordingly. As said, thanks Steve: Do we have this correct…. NRC569690 5.5 LWB Rim Deepset = 46mm NRC7573 5.5 SWB Rim Deepset = 47mm 231601 5.0 Deepset = 31mm

I admit defeat.

Your deepset is known (72mm), I wrote a thread on it years back, all in hope of shattering the nonsense on this very confusing subject. But I don't have a precise deepset for the stock SWB & LWB rims, and never have. It's the last piece of the puzzle to evade me. As here, I get a something near, and lucky enought to score heaps of the deeper variants when they were given away, I've not had my own stock sets for years.

Our posts have crossed. Do you know how long I've battled to get Deepset in mm for a 569690!! I can do a rewrite if I had that info. I seem to get every which way, but deepset. So close, but so far. What I'd like is the photo above in 569690. I weep, it shall never be! You're both at it, 'kin Imperial sh8t, just shy, about, somewhere south of Dover etc etc. It is my deep shame we inflicted it on the world.

Deepset...

That's a stock LWB rim, yes?.. don't happen to have part No. do you? Stamped on top of hub/nave face (as pic above), usually filled with paint. 1 and 5/16th is 1.3125 inches which converts to 33.33mm. Which is not near 2 inches. I'm confused. I hate Imperial. As a Brit we did many things I'm proud of, that system is not one of them.

I take your point, this device is not perfect and if I'm expecting it to report all brake-faults, in an instant I'm set for disappointment. You're correct, a weepy cylinder won't instantly fire the switch, yet will when we need it to, one or two prods, away from critical. Not ideal, but that's not a bad thing is it? This device does add further 'risk' with more joints etc, but these risks would be less likely, and indeed if a joint failed will probably throw the switch anyway? On balance I still can't see how, working as intended we're worse off with a PDWA? However, if I'm not prepared to trouble with repair of my now corroded and non-functioning PDWA, the "Mine's never had one, managed for 40 years without one." logic stands. Better removed.

I take on board FF's comments re set-up. I'm sure he's right. I have to say I guessed mine for a long while, and it worked well enough. A wideband helped a lot, but I'm sure I could have coped with less. It's just easier, rolling-roads don't come cheap, A WB will pay for itself in less RR time. And you've always got it. As FF says, not essential, and even a small leak will make nonsense of it all. They're around £130-140 (Innovate), which in RR time is peanuts. Roland at ACR put me up to this idea, and I say he was right to. No regrets at all. You can't keep RR time? If you've got the pennies... A manifold? Ah, now you're talking. I hope he comes back, he may be working on things, but my first source owes me nothing, he's certainly not my servant. Despite cash inducement, he's gone quiet. Put me down as number 3. If in S/S, that'll be one difficult thing to produce, I'd expect to pay rather more than £560. Make it known, I kid not. One-offs are dear and time-consuming, very happy to subsidise another. Cash awaits. As I said, I'm fighting off buying another in M/S, the ACR version is made to a price. I kid not. If this is serious, I assure I am.

Oh dear, this thread is becoming a caricature of the very myths and folklore busted years back by the 900 thread. It's no longer open to public gaze for the reasons already stated, but until we all speak the same language, and measure the same way, we'll never get there. Register on 900, if we're allowed in, we'll get the full SP. For kick-off, keep to metric. I'll tell you now, that XLS thing might be technically correct, and very fine, but in practical application, utter garbage. No doubt it'll get pasted from forum to forum all the same. Correct - Deepset is distance: Very top face of the hub/nave to very outer edge of rim. To compare like-for-like, keep to mm. Carry on Sgt. Major.

It uses ET, which for our purposes, whilst technically correct, is pretty useless. If you have ANR1534, they're the 'hooky' FC rims, actually 130 rims, and likely came from the MOD ex 'Norn Iron'. You're measuring 'deepset'. On ANR1534 6.5 Deepset measures: 72mm Why do you need LWB deepset? Can you explain what you're trying to achieve? You wrote: If they have ANR1534, they are not 1 ton rims, but they are 6.5.

There's been several performance exhaust manifolds produced for the 4-pot over the years. I've had the Lukey system, this gave little gain, and only made things louder. But it was stainless. The Ashley system in M/S, looks identical to the Lukey job. Which I don't know, but I suspect one copied the other? The ACR pipe does work, I don't think it adds much to the top-end, that might be the way I drive.I don't drive top-end. It moves the power down a few hundred rpm. This I like. I consider it a worthy gain, and I've had mine 15-16 years. More because of elements of my own making, it's been a rocky road. I was rather more affluent at the time thus had the ACR fitted, unfortunately this was done poorly (that shackle-bolt again) and by time the monkey-job was sorted the damage was done. It's been on and off my 109 a lot. Not knowing that tie-rods where even a 'thing' by the time I had it all sorted my pipe was suffering the effects of bad treatment from shackle-bolts and gearbox movement. Mine sat around with a hole punched in it, and it's all a bit of a sorry story. I only had it doing all it should for about two years in its life. But as I said, that's more about a sloppy install than the pipe. It's a good product, and if I had a spare £450 I'd buy another. But I'd want it in stainless. Mine's got a stock set-up on there now, and it's definitely taken a fair hit in power. In fact, for stainless i'd pay rather more. There's a fella I know looking to sell these (in S/S), he has my ACR pipe now. I'd be very surprised if he's not found reading this thread That's quite a task, watch this space. Young Gary, love your thread. I'd be very keen to see it continue where you're setting up the Mega end to this, and anything 'engine-related', but all this must be a burden to do. I count near 20,000 hits... jeez?! However you've gained too, a collective eye over your 'doings' has moved you on. If you stopped soon, few could blame you. Well done.

Ah, I wrote, "coupling is a force-fit because of bend right near it" By clocking open side of clamp, to the bend-side, it goes, just.

Ahem. You won't find it in there. Sounds like Steve is your man, and mine. I'll add the info.