bill van snorkle

If one of your options includes retaining the 205 x16 tyres, then serious offroading is not something you indulge in often,so the RR diffs or high ratio t/case conversion, both at around 30 to 33% higher may be your option. 7.50x16's give about 11%. From a reliability viewpoint,the problem with either high t/case or high ratio diffs for series landrovers used for towing and/ or offroad work is that you will be placing extra strain on what is already a fragile undernourished gearbox. The biggest killer of series 1,2 and 2A gearbox layshafts is excessive use of 2nd and first gears. On series 3's the same excessive use of the lower gears causes mainshaft and synchro hub failures. For a given amount of torque at the rear wheels, a gearbox driving to a higher ratio transfercase or diff must supply/transmit more torque than a gearbox driving into the standard lower ratio equipments. Bill.

All series steering arms that I have seen have a press in swivel pin. I have heard that they can bend, even driving in soft sand but there were at least 3 different thickness steering arms since 1948 and I have never bent the series 3 ones, even with the extra leverage of portals. Series front axles with UJ's are junk. The halfshafts are not properly heat treated and you can cut through them with a bread knife. The UJ's are 2 15/16'' ,not even as strong as the propshaft UJ's at 3 3/16'' and subject to up to 4.7 times more torque. No way are they as strong as Stage 1 V8 cv's and axles which can also be fitted to series 2 or three vehicles. I am not at work today, but I didn't think there was enough surface area on either the top or bottom of RangeRover outer swivel housings to drill and tap for series steering arms. I will check tomorrow. Bill.

The back diffs/axles/driveflanges are not as strong or long lasting as before.The CV joints and inner axles are not as strong as before. The propshafts and UJ's are the same size as series 1's. The gearbox by any other name is still a 77mm gearbox. compare that to 95mm for the original 4spd 110's or 85mm for the first 5 speeds.The LT230 transfercase looks the same on the outside but in the quest for quietness the gears that formerly had big beefy teeth have given way to gears with more fragile superfine mesh teeth. The bodywork and some of the chassis, particularly 130's are nowhere near as strongly built as say 1986 models for example.They don't galvanise anything anymore because they forgot the reason why you galvanise mild steel components that are in direct contact with aluminium. They barely paint any of the chassis components anymore. I have seen 1 year old Pretenders with almost bare rusting metal rear crossmembers. I would say that the lack of drivetrain strength would not be as big a concern in the relatively soft, damp conditions that you would get in the Falklands, or even in the UK for most part. But in the generally dryer, rockier and less manicured conditions of OZ and Africa etc, transmission strength has been LandRovers main failing,and IMO the reason why people and organisations that use 4wd's for work opt for Nissans and Toyotas. Bill.

Yes I am afraid that I am probably still living in the past a bit (1986) when 4wds were still built to work and placed function ahead of form. Apparently with current Pretenders you can no longer pull Patrols off things without the risk of pulling things(the rear crossmember) off the Pretender itself. Bill.

Better only whilst the diffs/axles/ cv's/gearboxes/driveshafts stay together. I am afraid that I can never forgive LandRover for dropping the Salisbury diff and substituting the P38 diff in later 110 Pretenders. Was that a final admission that LandRovers were never really intended for serious offroad use? Bill.

Maybe they can fish for Pumpkin as well. I feel the same way about pumpkin. If I had a choice between Pumpkin and death, then death would start to look pretty attractive. Bill.

A couple of years ago I bought an old BJ40 Toyota for its deisel engine that I wanted to fit to my LandRover. The vehicle still had a couple of months registration (tax) so I used it as a daily driver for that period. The truck had square shouldered 10.50x 15 31 inch tyres and knackered tie rod ends. Not a good combination for directional stability, but these things considered it drove quite well even at 120 kmh. The approach angle of the front springs was terrible, but there is no law that says it has to be that way.CJ 2,3,5 ,6,7 and 8'jeeps had short springs. Having the front of the spring higher than the back would also improve approach angles and should provide a softer ride as the base of the spring is aimed towards direction of travel.Short springs as on Landeys can still be used with front shackles. OffRoad on tricky rocky hill climbs that are pretty common over here the truck felt much more positively hooked up than any leaf sprung LandRover I have ever driven, save for the old 1948 model previously mentioned. An example of the effects of antidive geometry of leading front shackles on climbing ability, is that I have found that even an unloaded leaf sprung Landey has so much more traction and climbing ability in reverse gear.. Due to the fragility of gearbox and front halfshaft universal joints this is not something I recommend experimenting too much with. To do a proper experiment without upsetting the chassis, first you must lock the shackles to prevent them from swinging. this can be done quite easily my making a couple of boomerang shaped pieces of 2'' x 3/8'' flat plate steel with a 9/16'' hole on one end and a 7/16'' hole at the other end. Undo the lock nut on the bottom shackle bolt and remove the top shock absorber bolt on the chassis. Obviously the 9/16'' hole of the boomerang goes onto the bottom shackle bolt and secured with the lock nut, and the 7/16'' hole is fastened to the chassis through the shock absorber mounting hole with the bolt. The reason for the boomerang shape is to clear the engine mounting chassis brackets. The shackle is now locked in place and is now the spring hanger. Next thing to do is to free up the front of the spring. You can simply remove the spring hanger bolt and let the wrapper leaf sit on the bottom of the spring hanger. It then is the same as a shackleless slipper spring as used on the rear springs of some trucks and older TransitVans. To prevent the front of the spring from dropping out of the hanger altogether, from flat steel you can bend up a ''U'' shaped stirrup (catcher) that goes under the spring and attaches to the 3/8'' hole in the spring hanger that is about 3'' behind the spring eye bolt hole. To perform the experiment I would suggest finding a suitable abrubt bank or cutting on the side of an unsealed track. First, with the standard Landey shackle arrangement, attempt to climb the obstacle at an oblique angle (articulating) and square on in 4wd low range without any difflocks engaged if you have them. Experience has shown that it doesn't take a very severe or high obstacle to stop a leaf sprung Landey and start the front axle hopping, pig rooting. Next fit the boomerangs, spring stirrups and remove the front bolts. try the obstacle again. I think you would be surprised at the difference. And if you like it you can do a proper permanent shackle conversion. If you don't like it, what have you lost? Bill.

That is Off Topic!!. Or is that On Topic ? Either way you broke the rules. Please report to moderator. Bill.

I haven't felt the urge to put on my new model LandRover clambering shoes since 1986. This one doesn't do it for me either. Bill.

I'll try to find and measure a Rover shaft in the morning. But pretty sure a cut and shut is the only practical option. Bill.

I rather like the low reverse for backing trailers etc, but it is a PITA if you miss a turn off and have to reverse a couple of hundred metres. The other thing is it's virtually impossible to roll start the engine in reverse gear. Combined with the Holden Stromberg carburator not liking steep hills and stalling due to fuel starvation this became more than just an inconvenience on numerous occasions. I have never really liked the look of the Holden bell housing. They are not full circle, so would be difficult to water/mud proof, and may not be strong enough to support the heavy gearbox/transfercase assembly. Bill.

It has just occurred to me that Ford input shafts are a bit short to work in a LandRover bell housing. I used the longer International input shafts shortened and resplined to Rover pattern. Or you could cut the Ford shaft short, and graft a section of Rover shaft to it. Even with the biggest engines there is very little torque at the input shaft relative to the rest of the driveline so a cut and shut job is quite acceptable. Bill.

I actually adapted Warner T98's Simon, but much the same would apply to the NP435. I machined the spigot diameter (register) off the series bellhousing where it centres in the series gearbox case. I then step bored the input shaft bearing bore of the bell housing so that it centred on the T98 input shaft bearing and circlip. I drilled and tapped the front face of the gearbox to the landy pattern and for extra support drilled and tapped two more bolt holes through both the bellhousing and gearbox. I also opened up the 4 top holes in the oilbath clutch throwout bearing housing to 3/8'' and tapped the holes in the bell housing to 3/8 UNC. Unlike the T98 which has a flush front and rear face, the layshaft bearing housings on the NP435 protrude a bit, so you may have to clearance the bell housing. How are you compensating for the lack of tail bearing in the transfercase pto cover plate?For extra support my transfercase adaptor plate has a ball bearing spaced 12mm behind the gearbox rear bearing. Both bearings are separated by an oil seal. Bill.

I did fit a single central tramp bar running back from the winch bar to the axle on the previously mentioned sideways leaping stage 1 V8, and it did improve the situation somewhat re smashing dampers, leaping about etc, but it still reared up on steep climbs due to antisquat characteristics of rear shackles so it wasn't a complete solution for serious mountain goat terrain. Bill.

Mine bind first application after a damp night or I've hosed the undercarriage. My drums, shoes backing plates etc are very clean and I have oil catcher rigs around the hubs, so no contaminents. I developed the habit when starting off in morning of riding the brakes while accellerating in 1st gear before changing to 2nd. After that it's all good for the rest of the day. Bill.

I skimmed over most of the text covering interior appointments. was only mildly interested in engine /gearbox details, but was disappointed that there was no mention of diff/axle upgrades. So I assume its the same old carp again. or maybe they've gone back to ten spline axles. Bill.

Thanks Chris. Probably not something many of us in the Antipodes would have to worry about then. And being a tight arse I would probably rather spend five minutes adjusting the lights with a screwdriver and spend the hard earned fiver on fuel. Bill.

Some Toyota and Jeep guys in the US have swapped over believing that it improves the ride, but the trade off in offroad ability has seen quite a few of the serious players swap back. Because LandRover front springs are so damn short, any possible improvement in ride that rear shackles might provide is lost due to the axle wanting to move back so far when striking a bump. Back far enough on occasion for the dampers to get bashed to death against the swivel housing bolt flange.In 4wd the front propshaft slip joint torque binds, pushing the transmission back on its mountings, applying the handbrake slightly each time, wearing out the linings. This undamped movement of the engine/transmission assembly also contributes to a less than smooth offroad ride. If there are any good points about the LandRover setup that outweighed the bad points, I am unaware of them.Almost every 4wd suspension designer in the world is unaware of it either,and I think LandRover recognised this when they designed the RangeRover and put the front radius arms behind the axle instead of in front. It is dynamically similar to having the fixed end of the leaf spring behind the axle when you think about it. Bill.

It's all good Luke. It may be hard to find among the BS but the information you require is within the 4 pages of this thread. May I suggest another option ? one that is still used by one of the most successful competitors in offroad competition in Australia, Malaysia and New zealand. and that is to retrofit CV's, hubs and stubs from an early RangeRover classic. Mike Smith has tried all the previously suggested options ,ie Toyota etc in his old blue 2 door Rangey, They all break. And they found that the difference between winning and losing was in how quickly they could replace broken components during competition. With the plug in stub shafts of the early Rangeys being a dime a dozen and a reliable fuse, and with the aid of a rattle gun and strong magnet they can change a broken stub shaft in around 2 minutes. It also wouldn't hurt to do as I suggested in a previous post, and that is to spend a few minutes with a die grinder, deburring and removing the sharp edges that mass produced CV's all seem to have. Bill.

Me thinks you are a bit hard to please Luke. You got the answers to your original query and alot more besides. Bill.

Can't say I've ever driven an auto LandRover in anger offroad. But apart from my Landey I have two Isuzu Troopers, 1 manual and 1 auto ,and the comparison offroad is a bit of a mixed bag. Troopers have very limited to non existant suspension articulation but have a limited slip rear diff that can be induced to lock up tight by application of the foot brake. because of torque converter slip I can lock the diff with the auto, but doing the same with the manual will almost always stall the engine before the diff locks. When climbing wet,slippery hills I occasionally find that low in the auto is too low to maintain just enough momentum to keep going, but if I put the selector into 2nd or drive the trans will keep shifting up and down with savage gear changes that cause a loss of traction. With the manual version in such conditions I can simply put the gearbox in the highest gear that the engine will comfortably pull and make a smooth wheel spin free ascent. Bill.

I don't know whether they serve really dodgy food, but there is a Chinese restaraunt down the road from me called the SHA TIN RESTARAUNT. Bill.

It has been several years now since I converted my series 2A to coil front suspension, but before that I had always meant to have a go at doing a front spring shackle reversal. About 30 years ago I owned two almost identical series 1 80 inch Land Rovers .One was a 1948 with front shackles, the other was a 1950 with rear shackles.Both vehicles were in good condition with near new springs and dampers. In various cross country comparison tests, ie steep rocky hill climbs and surmounting short vertical obstacles etc the 1948 was always superior and just got on with it ,whereas the 1951 model would hop up and down or the front end would rear up causing the truck to slew sideways to the slope in a single bound, which can be pretty scarey on any vehicle let alone one with such a short wheelbase and narrow wheel track. Anyway, many years of offroad travelling in my series 2A in company with Toyota LandCruisers, Nissan Patrols, Jeeps etc has convinced me that for mountain goat type offroading, Landeys have got their front shackles at the wrong end of the spring. I'll give an example of what I have observed happens on a steep climb. When a leaf spring LandRover is climbing a steep difficult slope some of the front end weight is transferred to the rear axle by gravity so the front springs are unloaded slightly and the front of the vehicle sits higher on its springs. Due to torque reaction, the front diff pinion wants to rotate downwards causing the shackles to swing forward, lifting the front of the vehicle even higher. The spring now has alot of camber (arch) both for and aft of the axle assembly, so now the front axle is even less positively located to the chassis. Any forward thrust that the front axle assembly can develop merely cambers up the spring even more until the stored energy in the spring is greater than the thrust of the axle, then it releases this energy, sometimes so violently that the front end can leap into the air. I have witnessed a Stage one V8 front end literally leap sideways 6 feet due to the release of this pent up energy resuting in two broken springs, snapped propshaft and both expensive Koni dampers destroyed. Now let me attempt to explain what happens when a Toyota Landcruiser with front shackles attempts the same climb. Gravity is gravity so weight transfer to the rear still occurs, so the tendency of the front end to sit higher is still the same,The front diff pinion due to torque reaction still wants to rotate downwards, but because the shackles are at the front of the spring, they swing forward and actually pull the sprung mass down, counteracting weight transfer. Because the spring is compressed, the spring is also relatively flat and straight giving the axle a more positive location to the frame to transmit forward thrust thus increasing traction, The more forward thrust the front axle can develop, the more the front end pulls down compared to vice versa with the LandRover setup. This makes the vehicle both more capable and safer to operate in steep and offcamber terrain. Another advantage which I won't go into much detail about is that the front propshaft slip joints last a heck of alot longer. Is anyone reading this convinced enough by my argument to give shackle reversal serious consideration ? By fabricating a few simple parts you can experiment with the principal without disturbing your chassis . If anyone is interested I will explain how in a later post. Bill.

Yes they are rated much more highly than Rovers,and for good reason,but because they tend to be mechanically more bulletproof,with the possible exception of Birfields, the price of used components is generally lower than for Rovers due to lower demand. ie at swap meets you can struggle to give away GQ/GU nissan gearbox/ transfercase assemblies, rear Toyota/Nissan diffs etc, wheras LandRover parts get snapped up faily early. Your experience in Queensland may be different but in the larger capitals this is the case. Bill.

That Nissan appears to be an MQ which is leaf sprung and narrower than a coil sprung Rover and from memory has smaller diameter cv's than Rover. Unless the Toyota axle is off an 80 series it will be too narrow as well. Bill.