Chicken Drumstick
-
Posts
2,454 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
11
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Blogs
Posts posted by Chicken Drumstick
-
-
1 hour ago, ThreePointFive said:
I had 265/75s on my car before I went to 235/85. In reality the 235 was as wide if not slightly wider.
What brand, where they remoulds? A 235 should be distinctly narrower over a 265. Remould 7.50's can vary quite a bit, but 'new' no-remould brands should be fairly even with sizing. A 265 is substantially wider than a 235.
-
3 hours ago, mad_pete said:
Looking at the same thing for the same reason, what's a good size to go for on R16 with a slight lift ? I think I went a bit wide last time.
All/most of the reputable brands should be a good tyre. Really depends what your are after tread wise.
As for size. 235/85 or 7.50 x 16 are great sizes that work well on a Land Rover.
A 265/75 is about the same height but fatter.
If you want taller the 255/85 is a nice tyre. But expensive and very limited choice of tread.
285/75 not quite as tall but taller than the others. But a lot fatter.
That’s about your choice in 16” unless you want fatter again and arguably too big.
There is a distinct lack of tall thin tyres. A 9.00 x 16 would be nice if there was some choice.
-
3 minutes ago, TSD said:
I don't generally share my opinion of the Rover V8 here, as it runs the risk of being labelled as heresy on this forum.
Its a good simple unit used in 100's of different vehicles and well proven. It is no power monster, although back in the day it was pretty good compared to contemporaries. I currently have 3 of them and have owned more of them. They are a nice way to get 200hp and a smooth running awesome soundtrack. These days though you can have another 100 Horse Power+ and as good or better mpg from a more modern V8. In the USA it would be easy and cheap to pick up an LS/LQ Chevy engine for very low cost. Or even a 5.7 Hemi from a Dodge/Chrysler. But getting a 4.0/4.6 RV8 over shouldn't be all that hard being as they were sold there too. Which would make for a more factory and "Rover" setup.
-
14 minutes ago, TSD said:
Maybe it's just because I'm old and grumpy, but to me it seems a shame to go to all the effort of importing a nice 110 and then destroy a lot of its character by stuffing in a big V8 and a slushbox. Might as well go the whole hog and reproduce that rebodied Jeep monstrosity in the 'Pass the Bucket' thread
Obviously depending on legalities, I'd still be thinking hard about a tdi, (or of course a 2.8TGV from the South American spec Ford Ranger). If lack of power really is the problem, for $10k it might be easiest and cheapest to keep all that power in another vehicle parked next to the 110 and make the choice each morning ...
Auto box I agree, I'd personally prefer a manual. But a V8 goes with a 110 like butter goes with bread. The factory even sold them with V8's fitted
-
45 minutes ago, Happyoldgit said:
It’s a pity it is not available here, I might be tempted if they were.
I would too. I think the top spec is about 60k Aus$, which would be about £32k here.
-
9 hours ago, Snagger said:
By the same token, you could find a used diesel…. I think I recall the Cummins being 7-8k, still a lot of money. 12-15 would be way over the top.
Looks to be more than I thought.
https://shop.cummins.com/SC/product/cummins-r28-turbo-diesel-crate-engine-5467036/01t4N0000048ikGQAQ
For the UK/EU it'd be a really nice engine bar the price. In the US I can only see it making sense if you plan on doing big miles each year and need to watch the mpg. But anyone spending this kind of money on an engine is unlikely to be fussed about mpg and general running costs I'd have thought.
Looks like an LS3 crate engine has gone up in price, but still half the cost of the 2.8 Cummins....
I would think a 5.3 cast iron block LQ engine from a junk yard would be a nice engine and likely the cheapest route. Only real issue is what you do about the transmission. There are a few LT230 to GM auto options, but not much choice if you want a manual.
Doesn't look like the op has come back though
-
1
-
-
12 minutes ago, deep said:
The world of vehicle styling has long abandoned the concept of form following function and now it seems everyone is scrambling to convey an image, except they're mostly confused about what that image is!!
It's not all bad everywhere though. I had a look at a GWM Tank 300 yesterday. They're a mixed bag in photos but, in the flesh, they've nailed it. It genuinely looks like it's designed for its purpose, rather than for an image (it helps that this properly diff-locked display vehicle was actually fitted with decent mudgrip tyres). Despite the excess of computer trickery, I found it highly appealing and half the price of the vehicles we talk about here.
The Tank looks great, some good Oz coverage of them. Didn't think they were available in the UK though?
-
9 hours ago, Snagger said:
I don’t know that a Cummins would be so much more than a new LS - I haven’t looked it up. The 2.8 Cummins is pretty compact, though, so might be an easier fit. As to noise and smoothness, these are generations ahead of the Tdi and it didn’t seem too noisy, especially considering the 90 it was in had no interior linings and the tunnel cover was still absent. Most of the noise came from the big tyres. I do get your point, and yes, a V8 has to be smoother on the transmission, but most damage is from heavy feet rather than the crank impulses, and an LS is at least as likely to kill the transmission as a four pot diesel.
Isn’t the Cummins something like $12-15k? And would still need loads of parts and adapting to fit in a Land Rover.
A crate LS is I think around $5-6k. But tbh you’d just go to any junk yard and pick up a running 4.8 or 5.3 for $1000 if you are in the USA.
-
7 hours ago, Stellaghost said:
Surprised to hear that, have used ProComp ES9000 for the last 35 years or so, never had an issue with them, loved them, only swapped to Fox because of the weight of my mog axles
Regards Stephen
I had Rough Country shocks on my leader above and no complaints. But I used to run +2 ProComps on my coiler 88. I forget the exact model, got them from Llama4x4 iirc. They lasted well, never leaked. Did rust a bit, but not quickly. Only replaced because I eventually pulled the eye off the top of a rear one.
Replaced with Britpart Celluar Dynamic. The Britpart handle way better with loads less roll. But ride quite a bit harsher.
-
10 hours ago, JonathanCus said:
I have an 88" series 3 with fairly flat leafs (measuring 45cm from bottom of front bumper on 7.50x16 tires). So I want to fit parabolics and was wondering what brands give the best increase in lift and longevity (time before they start sagging). Also, what kind of lift should I expect to see? Ps. I am aware that I will need longer shocks. Thanks in advance
Lift will depend on which springs, brand, spring rate and how saggy your current ones are. I'd suggest some good modern gas or twin tube shocks. If you move the upper mounts you can get a much longer shock and more flex too. Although you may wish to do some other supporting mods too.
Not sure on brands these days, Heystee used to have the reputation, although I couldn't get on with them when I went to buy, so I bought from Rocky Mountain Spares. Biggest thing I'd say is, don't buy high spring rates unless you need the loading capacity, it'll ride rock hard and bouncy otherwise. Soft springs will give a good ride, but reduce how much you can haul without lots of suspension compression. Softer springs will give more body roll too.
Really miss my leafer.....
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Reggie87 said:
I just imported a 1987 Defender 110 Ex Military Diesel from the UK to the US. It's unmodified and has the 4 cylinder self aspirated non turbo diesel engine. It's 24v as it was the radio/comms vehicle. I am looking to do an engine conversion to a turbo diesel so I can use it and am looking for suggested shops in Florida that may do such work. Suggestions appreciated
Not sure how standard it is. Looks shiny and tidy for ex mil. Guessing those pics are of it in the U.K. as it doesn’t look much like Fl. It does look nice though.
You’ll probably want to change the tyres too. Those “Security” remoulds aren’t great on road or off road.
I think most NaD diesel Military 110’s have the 1.6:1 ratio transfer box. You may want to bear this in mind as it’ll give super short on road gearing and a low top speed due to gearing.
-
1
-
-
No idea why you’d want a turbo diesel if you are in North America. The only reason turbo diesel was popular in Europe was down to the fact we pay considerably more for fuel. The petrol (gas) V8 was better in every regard other than mpg.
It’s not as if the diesel units are comparable to a Cummins 5.9 or a 6.6 Duramax. The diesels are unrefined, small displacement, noisy and down on power and performance. Don’t get me wrong. I have a Tdi Land Rover myself. For the U.K. it is sort of ok, but access to much more affordable fuel and I’d personally think you’d be utter mad to want to fit anything like a Tdi in it.
As for suitable engines. Depends what you want to do with the vehicle at the end of the day and what you are planning on doing with the transmission and driveline. Land Rovers are not designed for huge Bhp. You could swap out the axles, gearbox and transfer case for non LR items, but by the time you’ve done this and swapped the engine. You’d have to ask why bother having a Land Rover if you have nothing really left of it?
If you want to keep it "Land Rover" swapping in a 4.0 or 4.6 Rover V8 from a p38 Range Rover or a Discovery 1 or 2 should be fairly straight forward.
-
You really need to crawl under and take a look or maybe take a photo and post here.
In theory I'd guess it probably would have had a drum equipped Salisbury axle, but it is possible that it has a basic Rover axle. As you just don't know what has been done to it in its lifetime. you might also want to check the front diff. It isn't unheard to find out people have fitted a Range Rover/Ninety 3.54:1 to only one axle, ignoring the fact a Series would be 4.75:1 as standard. Which then often results in breaking one diff or another.
-
On 2/23/2024 at 10:43 AM, Harry m said:
Terrafirma or Britpart or should I just go ome if I can get them std hight
-
5 minutes ago, Stinkfloyd said:
Hi Vulcan bomber,
Out of curiosity, are you saying to avoid all the modified boost pins? (Even the ones with a good rep?) If so, why? I'd have thought they'd work well with your timing advance kit? Is there a specific issue they cause?
Cheers
In the past lots were made from soft cheap metal and would wear a groove in, messing with the fuelling and making them worse than not tampering at all. Also, you should be able to see the gains just by using the stock pin and changing its position, but you need to spend time setting it up. The modified one is just more of a generic setting. So yes, they can work. But could come with longer term risk of performance dropping off. And ultimately are a bit like applying a generic map to an ECU controlled engine. Meaning with a little more effort you can probably get better results not using one. All IMO and others may have different views.
-
3
-
-
12 minutes ago, FridgeFreezer said:
"What I Would Fix On The New Land Rover Defender, A Car I Helped Design"
That is a very challenging read, the tone is dreadful. Had to close the tab in the end.
-
2 hours ago, Green200tdi said:
After a bit of advice,
who’s brought a box from Ashcroft can you talk me Thu it in sending and receiving old and new box,
when you buy a gear box from Ashcroft transmission you pay for gear box plus surcharge think it’s called vat bla bla bla
is sending the old one back part of their price do they arrange to pick it up when new one is delivered?
Its quite simple, things like gearboxes have a surcharge. If doing this online, you pay the surcharge, but once you send them your old unit, you'll get the refund on the surcharge amount. Its this way round, as historically people just wouldn't send in the old unit or it wouldn't be of the expected condition. I'd recommend phoning them up if you are unsure or maybe even come and visit. Should be easy doing there and back in a day from Wiltshire. Dave is very good, my Uncle knew his Dad Ian Ashcroft. They are only down the road from us. So I'd highly recommend them as a business.
-
1 minute ago, Def88 said:
I think the consensus is to change to the 1.4, next job is finding one and fitting. Realistically I don’t do a huge amount of motorway miles and even if I do use the motorway my 1988 won’t be sitting at 70mph.. more like a casual 55-60. I’d rather have an overall better driving experience for those A Roads and the 200tdi will never be a quiet car, if anything.. it’s a bit strange being in a defender that prefers the motorway?!
I’ve never had a problem with the engine at all either, it’s had a new turbo and hoses too and serviced every 6000 miles just to stay on top of it. I’m unsure of the mileage on the actual engine but the car shows 156000 but the conversion was done around 8 years ago.
thank you everyone for the help! And anymore advice on sourcing and fitting the 1.4 would be great!
Swapping over should be quite easy and perfectly DIY'able if you have tools, space and a mate to help. Or look at swapping the internals over. If you get somewhere to do either job it is at max 1 days effort, but really more like 1/2 day. So don't let them overcharge you on labour. Any half decent mechanic should be able to do, nothing specialist about the job. Although if it is an LR place doing it. Then transfer box and new one in should be more like 1.5 -2 hrs.
-
1
-
-
I'd guess the only risk with a 1.3:1, you could go to the cost and expense of buying and fitting, only to find it is a halfway house and doesn't solve the problem. A 1.4 would normally be a lot cheaper to try out.
Discos would have had something like a 235/70 tyre or equiv, all about 29" tall. A 265/75R16 is 31.7" tall with the same gearing would be over geared. I'd guess the 1.4 would bring them pretty close mph per 1000rpm. I'll have a look on the Ashcroft gearing calculator now.
....
The Ashcroft calculator only shows one gear set for the ZF 4-speed auto, so I'll assume they are all the same.
235/70R16 - 1.2:1 - 60mph = 2172rpm
265/75R16 - 1.2:1 - 60mph = 1987rpm
235/70R16 - 1.4:1 - 60mph = 2528rpm
265/75R16 - 1.4:1 - 60mph = 2313rpm
I'd image a 1.4 would drive a heck of a lot better than the 1.2 with the only trade off being slightly more noise at motorway speeds. 50mph is only just over 1600rpm with the 1.2 and big tyres, so right on the boost threshold or just off boost, so no wonder it struggles to maintain speed at this rpm.
-
2
-
-
What sort of exhaust are you after? Cheap mild steel, stainless, quiet, loud etc?
btw you shouldn’t have noticed any power loss with a broken exhaust. Probably the opposite as most exhausts are restrictive.
-
6 hours ago, jason110 said:
This is sound advice. You could discuss tdi vs td5 all day long and then some.
buy on condition
Certainly not saying don't consider condition. But as you can buy all the bits relatively easily to repair, I'd probably opt for a tatty Td5 over a tidy Tdi if they were the same money and both solid vehicles. But it does come down to your longer term plans. Which I admit for the op may be less of a concern if it is a first vehicle. Few people stick or get to keep their first vehicle, although many wish that they had!
But a for instance. You can fairly easily swap a Td5 (or even something like an M57) into a 300Tdi. But it is still a fairly major project for most people and will come at a cost that typically involves 4 figures. It would also be a modified vehicle. A Td5 should go well in 100% stock form and as mentioned, if you plan to off road, the traction control is quite a game changer in some situations.
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, ekh said:
Thank you for all the information, I'll try and drive a few and see which I prefer. The only defender I have driven so far is a 2013 110 with the 2.2 puma which I imagine is a pretty different experience from both the Tdi and Td5.
The Puma (also known as a Tdci) is still very much a Defender to drive. But yes, they are a step on again. And generally are more refined and go better stock for stock. The obvious differences are the dash and you don't have the traditional vents that open up to the outside. Plus the 6 speed gearbox and Ford Transit based engine. The Puma's go well and can be tuned for a similar 150-190hp as the Td5's. The 6 speed box is a mixed bag. 6 gears are good, but the gear change is very clunky and jerky compared to the older 5-speed transmissions. In reality you can't go wrong with any. And if you plan to keep, Defenders are easy to mod and swap different or later engines into.
Personally I think the Td5 is the sweet spot. I like the older dash and vents. But you get a good blend of performance and refinement. Also, if you plan to off road, the traction control is quite a game changer in some situations. Note, traction control was optional on a Td5 though, so not all have it. Condition is important too and tidy vs tatty or solid vs rotten might also play a part in any decision. Although worth bearing in mind, you can replace every single part on a Defender. Which is a rare thing compared to other cars. This means that no matter what is broken, worn or corroded, it can be replaced and normally is a fairly easy job to do.
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
42 minutes ago, ekh said:Hello everyone,
This summer I am looking at buying an old defender 90 as my first car, and the choice is between a 300Tdi and TD5.
Looking online, TD5s seem to be more expensive than 300Tdis, however have higher MPG and more power than the 300Tdi.
My question is, is it worth spending extra to buy a TD5? Does anyone have any experience driving a 300 Tdi economically or can anyone who has owned both comment on the difference in running costs? Does the extra power of the TD5 really make a difference driving in the UK?
Also as it is my first car I am expecting insurance to be astronomical either way, but is there a difference in insurance cost between them?
Any insight from owners would be appreciated as I am really unsure of what to go for.
Thanks in advance.
While both vehicles look similar, there are some evolutionary differences.
Lets take a step back. The 200Tdi and 300Tdi are very similar, so if thinking of one, worth considering the other. The 300Tdi is IMO a more productionised (aka cheaper to build) version of the 200Tdi. As the Discovery and Defender had slightly different variants of the 200Tdi. The development of the 300Tdi let them have a single engine type for both vehicles. There where some advances with the 300Tdi being a serpentine belt. But power, torque, mpg and performance are pretty much the same (technically the Defender 200Tdi was less powerful than the Discovery variant, the 300Tdi has the same specs as the Disco 200Tdi engine). In practice however, I'd say a 300Tdi seems to be a little more refined than a 200, but it is very close. The only difference is the gearbox. The 200Tdi uses the older LT-77 5-speed, while the 300Tdi uses the R380 5-speed. In theory the R380 is stronger and reverse is in a different location. In practice there is very little real world difference. And I've driven more nicer shifting LT-77's than R380's.
Overall a 200 and 300 are both good vehicles. I had an L-Reg 300Tdi hard top as my first vehicle way back in 1997.
The Td5 brought in a number of changes. The Td5 engine is more powerful (although the standard tune for the Defender sucks, the engine goes a lot better in the Disco 2 in standard tune, but lets come back to this later). so the Td5 is quicker than a Tdi and has more tuning potential that the Tdi will never match. However by modern car standard both vehicles are pretty slow. The Td5 uses the same R380 5-speed as the 300Tdi. Other changes include things like a digitally controlled speedo instead of cable, optional traction control (for off road use to simulate limit slip differentials, it isn't a road bias stability system). And the likelihood to find factory air con and central.
All in all the Td5 is dynamically a better vehicle. Faster, more refined and maybe better specced.
Downsides. Well as you've said, a Td5 might cost more to buy. And I think the thickness of some of the body panels was reduced. So a Td5 is more prone to panel damage and corrosion. Not a major thing, but something you might notice more so when looking at examples. Such as corrosion around the rivets on the side of the rear tub. Something you'd see less often on a Tdi model. The chassis also underwent some revisions on the Td5 with an ever so slightly larger tank at the rear of the vehicle instead of under the drivers seat. Think it is only a gallon or so bigger of usable capacity.
The Td5 engine is a lovely engine and arguably one of the best "Rover" designed engines. It has a few quirks, but overall is a solid and reliable engine. They also sound lovely with an aftermarket exhaust and can quite easily get to 150-190hp with a few mods (that you'd need to declare insurance wise). A Tdi is good for more like 120-135hp mod for mod. But there is a difference in how they drive. The Td5 has less low end and a strong mid and more revs. A very noticeable boost threshold and arguably more laggy feel to it. A Tdi pulls like a steam train off idle, but won't rev the same.
The Tdi's can sound nice too, more gruff than a Td5 and not as musical. Really the biggest difference is refinement or lack thereof with the Tdi's. Good stout engines, but a Td5 should be more refined at any and all speeds.
MPG wise. I'd say neither are likely to be great. It'll depend how you drive and where. I'd say a sensible expectation would be 25-28mpg with either engine. Although both can see over 30mpg and both capable of nearer the teens if modded. Overall I'd probably say the Tdi is the more frugal. But really too close to call it.
As for maintenance/complexity. They are pretty similar, the Td5 you might want a code reader, while the Tdi is purely spanners. But both are simple and easy to work on.
Not sure if that helped or not.
I'd say try and grab a drive with both engines and see what you think. Might be worth checking some insurance quotes too, as I don't know if they will vary between engines.
As a conclusion - A Tdi & Td5 are similar enough that either would be as good as the other for almost anything. So it may not matter which you went for. But both carry advantages and disadvantages depending on budget and what you want from the vehicle and what you plan to do with it in the future.
-
5
-
I really like the idea of a PS-10. However when I looked at them a number of years ago. The brake discs were no longer available. Being something bespoke by Santana. For overland this might be an issue unless there is now a supply (I haven’t checked for ages). I’d guess with work and money you may be able to adapt to Defender brakes, but didn’t investigate this enough.
The PS-10 is also based on the Series 109. So you may want to check some dimensions against a 110 as they may differ slightly if you wanting to try and retro fit body parts.
Thoughts and Musings on the Ineos Grenadier
in The New Ineos Grenadier
Posted
Haven't seen this one posted. Pretty good write up IMO and some interesting points.