Chicken Drumstick

Maybe, I honestly don't know. I'd still have thought, by and large it would depend on the electronic controller. If you have regen capabilities or drag braking, the motor will spin down a lot quicker. Also if you have a flywheel of somekind, this will vary how the motor responds. In an IC car you don't really have to feel the revs, you can just lift off the accelerator and dip the clutch. Be smooth and it'll work fine. An electric motor can be programmed to behave massively differently with relative ease.

Thanks Daan. This is my 88 coiler. Arches are already heavily trimmed with wider wheel arch flares on. Looks a tidy job you've done there.

Not trying to not believe you. I know you know your stuff and are very knowledgable. Only I do a lot of trialling, I know how small the turning circle can be on a 90, I just really struggle to see a 109 having one only 2/3rds of the size. Unless you can get the front wheels with so much lock the the rears just pivot in place. But if that was the case, I'm sure you'd see more 109's trialling. And I'm not sure I've seen one for 25 years. I've seen lots of 88's with coiler front axles and leaf springs, they do turn well, but still not as good as an 86 coiler. And I wouldn't say significantly different to a well setup 90. My current 88 coiler allows full lock as far as the steering box allows (stops are removed for trialling) and doesn't rub on the radius arms with 235's. But amazingly the turning circle is only slightly smaller than that of an equally well setup 90. Maybe you mean lock like this though

I'd have thought it would depend on the electronics. As you'd still need a clutch and pressure plate. Would the motor hold it's revs, or would it drop to very low rpm? I suspect all possible, but maybe more than just slapping it onto the bellhousing... which I think was mentioned earlier.

Not sure how smooth it would be to change gear on the move with an electric motor though. I can see the benefit of gearing choices however. Especially if you want to haul or drive slow off road as well as at highway speeds. I'm not convinced a single gear or direct drive is the solution. In the RC world, the 'rock crawler' models use different spec motors and gearing. Some even have 2 speed transfer boxes. The fast racing buggies and trucks use completely different KV motors and gearing. I'd imagine it isn't so different when you scale things up.

Yes the transfer box is there. But putting a 5 speed in place of the 4 would likely cost you the points, so surely going from 4 gears to none would be exactly the same. As for PAS, sorry, had been reading about EV Defender conversions today as well, forgot this was Series.

Surely you'd loose a point for the gearbox too, as it simply wouldn't be there..... so has definitely been changed. Also, you'll have to do something to retain PAS, so might loose another point there. And unless you can make it all bolt-in, you run the risk of the welding clause, i.e. any welding = IVA (as per wording on the .gov site).

I'd need to see proof that your 109 out turns a 90, let alone 2/3rds the turning circle. I find that incomprehensible. Sorry not doubting you... well actually I am.

All those Nissans need new £5k batteries though for the most part, unless you only want a 16-20 mile. Plus I suspect a great many cars converted to EV in this manner would require an IVA and loose their identity anyhow, at least according to the regs.

That's all super minor. Remember Land Rover fitted 9.00 x 16's to a 109 with narrower axles and leaf springs. A 90/110 with 33's on or even a 255/85R16 which is actually going to be taller than most 33's are, will be perfectly acceptable for most people. Slightly wider offset rims will be needed, but nothing crazy.

Yes I'd say they are to a greater extent. At least with 33's, they are not so big to cause any real negatives, apart from somewhat more sluggish acceleration and poorer braking. But neither are extremes.

An interesting idea. I guess sourcing them might be the biggest hurdle. I'll have a poke round a couple of the 109's in the field and see. Thanks.

lol No, the tank is in the bed. The old filler leads no where and is blocked off. Cap is off as I was painting it and have put it back on yet.

My rig isn't the most modded. And I'm restricted to what I can do, due to competing in ALRC events. However I'm pretty pleased with how the suspension performs, given the constraints. I run a mix of tyres depending on terrain/location/weather, I like to trial on some super narrow 7.00 x 16's more often than not though. They are tall for their width (these examples are almost as tall as a 235/85). However I have other tyres, sold some big Simex tyres last year that I want to replace and I'm currently sporting a "classic" set of Bronco Grizzly Claws in 285/75R16. This is the first time I've run them since messing with springs last year I think. And I've noticed an issue. They now impact the seat boxes under compression on the rear tub. The tub is slightly lifted from the chassis already. I know the easy fix is longer bump stops, but it kind of goes against my theories in suspension. I like the up travel and don't really want to reduce it. So I was thinking I could cut the seat boxes and allow for more tyre clearance. I could re-box them in. Only downside is making the bed less usable. Ideally I'd like to create enough space for some 35's, so at least and inch or two taller than what I'm running at the moment. Bit of a crappy picture, you can see the trimmed arch and the tyre stuffed into the bottom of the rear seat box. Just to give the above photo some context:

They are an improvement. But a bit like saying being hit with a cricket bat isn’t as bad as a baseball bat, kind of thing. Even in a 90 the Tdi’s are loud and unrefined. The 2.5 TD is much nicer in this respect. Although it is the only thing the 19J is better at. I’m not anti Tdi’s. if you have one in already in a vehicle. They are good power plants and I love the power delivery when tuned. But I’d personally not swap in another. I’d do something else.

I wouldn't bank on it being cheaper than an OD. You'll have to decide where to mount the gearbox, as it'll alter the engines position, i.e. you won't be able to keep the box and engine in the Standard Series locations. It'll be one or the other, or neither. There may be some interior trim to consider for the levers. Custom or different Props and a decision on if you want a 2wd conversion on the LT-230, so as to match a normal Series on road. I know you have the Tdi, but I'd seriously consider another engine if you are planning this amount of work. Having done a Tdi conversion, I wouldn't do another. In fact I'm looking at maybe swapping my current Tdi engine to something else in my 88 coiler. The Tdi is just unrefined and noisy and gets on your wick after a while.

Thanks. Just curious, but you know for certain the Ironman one is just a generic Chinese winch, or is it a guess? Not doubting you, I just like to be certain Going by the pics the winch in your link looks a lot bigger physically than the Ironman one, don't know if it will fit the bumper. The winch tray is enclosed.

Just wondering if anyone has any experience with these? Got an Ironman bumper on one of my vehicles (not a Land Rover) and thinking about a winch for it. Obviously the Ironman one will fit the bumper perfectly, but I don't know if they are a bit pricey or how they compare to others? http://westcoastoffroad.co.uk/product/ironman-9500lbs-monster-winch-with-synthetic-rope/

Google Steve Parkers. All the info is on there, as well as conversion kits for the bits. IMO: 1. Don't go down the Di route (no turbo) it is one of the most pointless conversions IMO 2. Consider PAS at the same with a p38 box. If you don't go PAS you'll have to do more work to remove the pump etc anyway 3. Lots of options for an intercooler, the Steve Parker solution is pricey. The Tdi will function fine without one however, although a stock Td5 or generic ebay intercooler could probably be reto fitted with relative ease 4. Consider not doing this. I love the Tdi as a power plant, in terms of performance and power delivery, but they are probably the least refined and most noisy engine built by Land Rover. In a Series they are not overly pleasant. The perform well and offer pretty good mpg. But if you aren't doing many miles, a Rover V8 would make for a much better conversion. Or if you are looking at a 5 speed upgrade too, then the Td5

Where are you getting the weights from? Wouldn't have thought anything like that had been released yet.

4” lift! Wow. Are you in Iceland building an Artic style truck? If not I’d look at lowering it a lot. A stock Defender is like running a 2” lift kit on other 4x4’s. ie they are already pretty high.

Indeed. The problem you have is, the Discovery has a 100" wheelbase vs 92.9" for the 90. So the rear prop on a Discovery will be longer. Do you know who put the gearbox in? The might have just shortened and balanced the Disco prop. Also did you say you need a wide angle prop? Any particular reason?

What you need to know is if your gearbox is mounted in the stock location. If it is, then the transfer box will be too. If the gearbox isn't, then the props will likely need to be different lengths. Maybe another off the shelf item for another model year. Or worse case a custom prop. You might need to crawl under and have a look how and where the gearbox is mounted and maybe measure the props. Or buy via trial and error. Just measure the new one against the old before fitting.

Very interesting, thank you I don't suppose you have any proof of the Type Approval for 255/85's do you, or know a way to get hold of it?

I haven’t. But won’t that just make the steering feel heavier?