fmmv

In case you aren't familiar with it, it's on LH thread.

What they said. Or even the handbrake binding on.

The advice on here is to use a snidge of silicon on the P gasket, esp as the aluminium may have corroded slightly. Sounds like you have it under control!

....A fusion reactor uses Hydrogen and/or isotopes of it rather than producing it .... True. But certainly at one time it was thought relatively low voltage DC could be extracted directly from the plasma ( no messing with steam turbines and alternators) and could be used to electrolyse a handy lake.

Many years ago my (and another student's) final year uni project was to build and test a hydrogen fuelled engine. We thought fusion reactors would be running and producing hydrogen by now, as the oil was due to run out around 2000. A small block would have been nice, but with the budget we had we settled for a Suffolk mower engine. We used a dynamo to start and load it remotely, but measured revs and torque mechanically. This was very early days of computers so no electronic injection, and we knew it was reactive stuff and might explode in the manifold, so we took off the carburettor and made an inlet valve seat insert with an annular ring in the outside, and drilled fine holes from the seat to this ring, then drilled through the block to the ring. The air intake was open like a diesel. It was deemed too dangerous to run in a building so we had to use a test cell made from a wartime bomb store. We peered at it through 3" thick glass. We were warned of crankcase explosions so we hooked a nitrogen purge to the crankcase. Initially it wouldn't run. We were feeding it through a tap(needle valve) from a low pressure supply. We realised it wasn't running because we were feeding way too much hydrogen which was burning in a nice shimmery haze around it, so dropped the pressure and suddenly it was alive. It ran fine and produced the necessary tumbler of 'water'. The needle valve controlled it fine from tickover to full chat, so making use of the wide range of combustibility. So it is feasible to run ICE on it, but it needs careful handling, and storage is also a problem, hydrides look most promising, liquid hydrogen is worse than bottles for hazard and bottles are are very heavy and bulky But hydrogen can literally get where water can't, the molecules are so small it leaks where nothing else would. and it burns (readily) as we found with a colourless flame. And I think oxides of nitrogen and maybe embrittlement will be a problem still. Myabe fuel cells would be better use of it.

My Dad told me he had seen it done during WW2 with (aviation) petrol while in the RAF, and suggested it was like Russian roulette. But it did work. Petrol does have a relatively narrow range of mixtures with air where it is flammable. Hydrogen on the other hand has very wide limits, even 4% burns, so for those advocating as an alternative to electricity, eg for trucks, that too may be problematic.

Never mind grid capacity or charging points, there isn't enough generation capacity. Faster charging just frees up the car and charger more quickly. The energy needed is more or less the same . That said we all ( ok maybe not all) knew it has to be a gradual transition. As regards DIY conversions there has to be room for kits, for example, like we have crate engines today.

Just wondering why Britpart and JLR don't seem to do that. Back to the beer...

As a kid I used to have to 'start a bonfire' quite often. I liked the whooomp as the ( leaded of course) petrol hit. And the fireball Back to the frothy brown beer.....

Another bonus of the LEDs, seldom mentioned is that they consume much less current. Hardly important with the engine running, but with engine off they drain the battery much more slowly, I think they are 1W as I recall, the fog might be 2 or 3, but if you need to leave the lights on for a while, much less battery drain than the 5W or 21W of incandescents.

If I was restoring say a Series 1 that would be essentially a museum piece or driven on sunnay days but needs to look original, I wouldn't go LED. But for a working Defender that might go out and be used, maybe in dark and wet conditions, to me they make sense. Especially now more modern cars have lights that are so much brighter. But they definiitely look different. In any case it has to be a personal choice. I am pleased with mine.

And aesthetically I have doubts, but the improvement in lighting is very marked, and personally (!) I think outweighs the looks aspect for a working vehicle.

If you do have to swap polarity, ie in the econoseal connectors, there are some youtube videos on how to do that. I ended up hammering flat and filing a piece of welding wire to make a tool, like a very narrow flat screwdriver. Its a bit fiddly but have patience and wiggle the tool, they suddenly come apart. Edit:Ah but of course you are still on the bullets

As I recall I had to swap polarity of the two rear indicators. But in a 97 300 tdi the dash light works fine, to my surprise. Boltonbits do the dashlight fix if you need it. I have the side indicators to do but got acute cba- itis; it is on the todo list.

They work. I have recently done exactly what you are planning with a Wipac kit. If you tow, you'll need to adjust the flasher relay to work with your trailer, otherwise just replace existing stuff.. If your trailer has led flashers you will need to add load resistors to the trailer otherwise the trailer indicator light circuitry can't detect absence of the small current led indicators take. The filament side indicators will work the same as always. I think your sidelights in the headlights will also work fine. Just make sure the polarity is correct if one of the led lamps doesn't work.

Crikey, that sounds like a close call for both of you. Best wishes for your recoveries

If you do decide to do the swap and retain the original engine position, I believe the oil filter will clash with the right side engine mount. There is a bracket design on this forum to circumvent that problem.

Get yourself a set of new waterpump bolts, the old ones tend to corrode. I smear the shafts with Duralac which seems to help. Maybe replace the P gasket too while its apart, very little extra effort.

I think the manuals, video etc assume that the cam is already in line with the marks when you take the old belt off.

If Mr @steve b is correct in his concern re the keyway, you would be wise to pull off the pulley and check it out before running it again.

When you replace the oil seal, dont forget to also replace the big O ring behind the crank pulley as well.

To move the camshaft pulley just put a spanner on the big nut, with the belt off I am assuming. You can adjust the pump position by loosening the 3 small bolts.

I would get crank pulley and cam pulley in correct positions, ie flywheel pin in and cam pulley opposite the mark. Then put the the teeth of the belt on the cam pulley first and go round the idler and crank pulley with a bit of tension on the belt. It should all fit, there may be very slight movement needed as the crank lock may be slightly sloppy. That should get cam and crank correct without fighting with the rest. Then fit the belt as normal without moving the cam. It looks to me from the pic the cam isn't timed right A new belt can be a bit of a swine to fit, they can be quite tight to slip on, but persistence pays. You got the crank pulley off so you've got this.

Have you tried moving the belt a tooth on the crank pulley and seeing if it lines up with camshaft at the mark?Don't worry about the rest till you have the crank and cam as near correct as you can. I bought a vehicle that looked similar, it ran but when timed right the difference running was night and day

I had a Saab 900 T16, FxxxMMV. We had it years and it was so quick, I was asked was it tweaked as it was quicker than the Saab dealer's Carlsson. It was one of the 2 cars I have ever had which I bitterly regret selling, the other being a Mini 1275GT. So fmmv in its memory.