Chicken Drumstick
-
Posts
2,461 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
11
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Blogs
Posts posted by Chicken Drumstick
-
-
Need a wide angle prop due to the new shocks I've recently fitted, no vibrations or anything. But serious binding under suspension droop.
I was eyeing up this one at Gywn Lewis:
£306 inc VAT
Someone suggested Bailey Morris:
https://baileymorris.co.uk/extreme-4x4-propshafts
More info in their catalog:
https://baileymorris.co.uk/documents/Extreme Catalogue.pdf
Although they list a price of £226 inc VAT, having spoken to them, they tell me their catalog is out of date and the current price is £288 inc VAT but doesn't have a greasable slider like the Gwyn Lewis one. This would be another £60 on top.
So off the shelf the Gwyn Lewis option is £18 more. But quite similar priced. Bailey Morris say 7-10 days lead time, Gwyn's site shows in-stock. Although I'm in no particular hurry.
Both have £14 of shipping to add to the price.
Anyone have any views on which they'd go for?
-
20 minutes ago, monkie said:
I don't think this is necessarily down to a fire risk though - @Daan hit the nail on the head above with the comment about bad electrical connections which of course applies equally to 12v electrics in ICE cars. I understand that on some EVs when something fails and can't be repaired the car has been written off. We are still very much in the early days.
Most definitely is down to fire risk. I can't name names, but a firm was testing an electric HGV (which turned into a failure). The failure was partly due to the fact their insurance wanted something like 12x their annual premium for 1 month if the vehicle was to be stored on site, due to the fire risks of having the vehicle there.
-
3 hours ago, monkie said:
Are you planning on getting one? I've had an EV (Tesla) since March for work. I've covered 20K miles in it to date all over the UK and I now wouldn't ever consider going back to an ICE car other than my Land Rover.
I don't know the answer to your question, but I'm sure it's been accounted for. We have a whole fleet of EVs at work (at least 250 by now if not more - a mixture of different ones, not just Tesla) and no one has burst into flames yet.
What about the batteries in mobile phones? They are most certainly subject to a lot of shock and people carry them in their pockets without a second thought.
I'm not against EV's. But the infrastructure does not exist and never likely too in our life times to be able to replace ICE cars for everyone. Just think about all those millions of people who do not have a drive way or dedicated parking.
As for fires, well just because yours hasn't set of fire, doesn't mean it isn't a real risk. Just do a Google search if you don't believe me.
-
3 hours ago, Naks said:
https://www.instagram.com/p/CzCkzPIy99a/
"Beefier new suspension system, that seems to be hydraulic... we suspect to help increase articulation, remove antiroll bars & reduce high speed body roll etc. 👊🏾
Also shown, high clearance rear quad exhausts, rear orange recovery hoops, possible front grill lights, 33s higher ride hight, roof load. 🔥
Release is eminent and 600hp+"
Not meaning to be flippant. This is of course what the world and brand needs. A likely £150,000 off road focused model that nobody will use off road due to the cost 🙄 Talk about about a brand loosing its way.
-
1
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, Kaitsu said:
I'm interested to swap 300Tdi / R380 into my 200Tdi / LT77 Defender long wheelbase (110 pick up). As with the points 1 and 2, suggests the engine and gearbox will sit in without mods, to brackets in chassis, other than cuts for the selectors and probably some hoses/piping. Is that correct?
You are probably off starting a new thread, likely to get more replies and info. If there isn't anything wrong with your current engine/gearbox. The swap would just cost money with no gains IMO. Same power, same torque, same mpg, same revs. And while the R380 is in theory stronger, the majority I've driven have been less nice to shift than an LT-77.
-
1
-
-
Have you tried another temp gauge? Maybe even buy a cheap eBay one and plumb it in separately.
-
15 minutes ago, Anderzander said:
If you took the feed pipe off the top would you not get at it ?
Its not the feed pipe as such, more that there isn't physical room for a normal spanner head to turn in the space provided. You also end up with the spanner jammed up against the turbo outlet or something else that doesn't move. However I'm pleased to report that a flare nut spanner fitted perfectly and was the tool for the job, providing you have a 22mm one.
-
3
-
-
Thanks for the tips.
I did try and order an open ended ring spanner, but it turned out to be the wrong size and incorrectly listed.
Order this last night, due for delivery today.
Also had a rummage through the tools last night and found I have a large enough flare nut spanner, so I'll give them both a try after work tonight. Fingers crossed I can nip it up enough.
-
1
-
-
19j 2.5 Turbo Diesel 1989 Ninety.
Oil return from the turbo. We've had the head off to replace a cracked piston and do the head gasket. Also took the opportunity to replace the 3 piece return hose (2 metal bits and a rubber joining hose) as it always leaked with a one piece item from a Tdi. Access is terrible and it still has a slight weep on this nut at the top, but you can't get a spanner in there and turn it. Thinking of cutting open a ring spanner and/or shaving down the sides of an open ended spanner. But thought I'd ask if there was any other options before doing this. Thanks.
-
10 hours ago, Filbee said:
Thanks for the replies folks. It was worth an ask.
I always drive slowly through anything that looks more than a couple inches deep. The issue is more when you're driving along at normal road speed, you come round a corner and there's a puddle. You don't have time to scrub off much speed off before your wheels hit it and SPLASH!! There's almost a comically disproportionate amount of water spraying up and covering the windscreen and suddenly you can't see anything until you flick the wipers on.
My tyres are 265/75 16 Coopers, so nothing particularly big.
If that's just how it is and there's no simple "if you fix one these (insert description of some piece of plastic/ally sheet/stainless that looks like it cost about half what's being charged to make) here it will solve your problem" option, then I'll just carry on as before and be quicker to hit the wipers 😁👍
I would think if you are serious on tackling this, then lowering the vehicle an inch or two and a big front skirt that runs the entire width of the vehicle and maybe slightly different shaped front wheel arch spats. You could also look at adding some kind of re-profiled and/or aero aid along the leading edge of the bonnet to try and direct the water in a different direction too. Although personally this all seems like a lot of work and effort for a rather specific use case. I'd suspect just buying a different vehicle would be a whole lot easier.
I'd guess a Disco 1/2 or RRC would be much better in this regard, while still being essentially a Defender under the body work. But I couldn't find any photos on a quick search.
I did find this, which shows how well a different front bodywork directs the water away from the screen...
Same searched had this image, I'm pretty sure it is an XJ Cherokee and as you can see, a lot more water going up in front of the vehicle compared to the Disco Sport. The Cherokee has quite a similar front end profile/design to a Defender.
-
Drive slower or don't drive through water..
Joking apart. I think it is due to the short front over hang and high ground clearance. When the wheels displace the water it goes up and you drive into it. A lower vehicle with wheels more inboard and a larger distance to the front of the vehicle will likely trap more of the water under it. All IMO
My Jimny and Jeep XJ are/where the same as a 90 when driving through water.
e.g.
See how much water is kept under the vehicle and directed out of the arches. Remember there is as much water going under as out.
On a 90 the water isn't kept under the vehicle as well.
-
200Tdi is a fairly easy swap as far as engine swaps go.
Either engine will work fine, the Defender version has the turbo mounted up high and I think the timing cover is slightly different. Rated at 107hp vs 111hp for the Disco version. Disco version has the turbo mounted lower down.
As a rule Defender versions have been rarer to find, so lots of people went with a Disco one. The Defender one will be slightly more straight forward to fit. You'll still need other bits in either case, exhaust, rad, intercooler etc. Not sure what your budget is. If you are doing the work yourself I'd say min of £1000-1500 all in. If you are paying labour it could be quite a bit more.
Tdi's are nice engines, although less refined than the 2.5TD.
-
-
Not sure if I have any photos. Didn’t the do something like mount the upper rear shock inboard of the chassis or something.
-
So you have some options. Yes you can fabricate a tunnel. You won’t get anything pre-made.
But hard to tell in the photo. But if your box is sitting further back than a factory setup you might have issues with clearance on the seat box too. Also if the box is not in a standard position you might have to be creative with propshafts.
It is all doable and lots have people have done similar things over the years. Other options would be to look at a different gearbox/bellhousing setup. Most factory V8’s used the LT-85 box. But it is hugely agricultural compared to an LT-77. Not sure if latter V8’s used the R380. Anyhow all can be made to work.
I think you can also swap the top plate over to make a Disco LT-77 same as a Defender one. But I’ve not done this myself.
-
Curious what setups people are running on the front suspension of their Defenders (Ninetys, One Tens) or I guess even a Disco or RRC as the design is the same.
We all know the front radius arm setup offers less flex than the rear A arm setup.
So post up a photo of your front axle flex and let us know what you are running.
Mine isn't finished yet, but I'm keen to see what people have done. Looking about, even at things like the Gwyn Lewis truck:
Seem to have moderate front end flex. And despite having dislocation cones, the front spring is fully seated in its upper mount.
-
1
-
-
13 minutes ago, Retroanaconda said:
Had them fitted to my 90 for years. Didn’t fit them when I rebuilt it, and have never noticed any difference whatsoever.
I think we’re kidding ourselves if we think that a 10mm bit of rubber-coated steel is going to really have much effect. But they can’t do any harm I suppose.
I would agree. I suspect you'd need a very quiet vehicle to notice them. On the RRC & D1 these are part of a lot of NVH changes, as well as a body tub mounted in a completely different way. Collectively all these changes have quite a big impact. But as a singular item I'm willing to bet most people would not be able to tell the difference.
-
1
-
-
25 minutes ago, muzaz said:
I was eyeing these wheels:
https://4x4tyres.co.uk/product/16-x-8-challenger-true-beadlock-black-et-32/
No idea if it's a good brand or not but if they offer lifetime warranty on manufacturing, they must believe in their product!
Those 255s look good on the truck, perfect size I think. The only problem is I'm not sure there's much to choose from locally as they're not a common size, I'll look around.
Sadly very little choice in 255/85R16. The BFG KM3 is a really good tyre though. But pricey.
Occasionally seen some Maxxis tyres in this size. But not for ages. Else Toyo Open Country is the only other. This is ok, not a bad laning tyre. But not so good in real muddy conditions.
-
2
-
-
49 minutes ago, muzaz said:
@landroversforever, that size tyre is what I'm after, what wheels were you using? I was thinking some negative offset would be good to clear the front arms but then I don't know if it hits the arch. I have seen mach 5 style wheels with -32 offset but maybe that's too much?
My truck will be very close to yours in weight from your description, so your set up will probably be close to what I need. You had the GL rear cones with spring catcher? Why did you change to axle mounted cones?
You can run them on 6.5-8" wide rims, although at 8" they almost start to look a little stretched. -32 should just about be ok, but may just rub the wheelspat.
These are the KM3's in 255/85R16 on 16x8 rims with 00ET off set and running 30mm spacers all round.
It gets very close but doesn't quite rub.
Off road and full flex all round it wouldn't surprise me if you occasionally lightly rubbed the edge of the plastic spat though. But not enough to worry about.
The Mach 5 rims you mention should be fine. Although I'd probably go for a set of Wolf replicas and run some 30mm spacers on the front only. They won't stick out quite as far as the Wolf replica's are +20ET, so with a 30mm spacer would be -10ET. Either setup should work fine though. The rims in the photo above are nice, Series IIb replica rims in deep offset and 8" wide, but the are stupid money to buy. More than double the cost of the Wolf replicas.
https://www.paddockspares.com/16x6-5-wolf-rim-tubeless-white.html
Tyre size comparison. General Grabber X3 in 33.10.50R15 on 15x8 00ET rims on the left and BFG KM3 in 255/85R16 on 16x8 00ET rims on the right:
The 255 is slightly narrower, mostly on the tread section, not the sidewall to sidewall width, but this may be due to the 8" wide rims, you can see a slightly stretch on the where as the X3's have a bulge on the same width rim. The 255 is also slightly taller. 0.6" according to the maths, which is probably pretty close to reality too.
-
Just to add to the above. If you want more suspension travel it is still quite easy to get more flex on the rear axle compared to the photo of the 90 above. There are +5" or +5.5" rear shocks available. You'd need to change the upper shock mount and at this stage you'd likely also be needing a custom wide angle rear prop. A re-bush on the rear arms would be advisable too. You could also look at cranked trailing arms or even a replacement A-frame balljoint. I personally don't feel cranked arms are essential and the stock A-frame ball joint is pretty good if in good condition. The main issue here is, your vehicle becomes more unbalanced front to rear. The rear will already have been flexing a lot better than the front and this will increase that difference. You will also be relying heavily on the setup dislocating. And there are a lot of debates on the effectiveness of a fully dislocated setup. Without a hugely custom fabricated setup you won't be likely to run a spring long enough to prevent it dislocating with this amount of travel. Therefore I'd suggest that while this would give more flex and it might perform better on an RTI ramp, the real world benefits might be less so, due to the imbalance front and rear of the suspension flex. Of course all IFS vehicles suffer with this problem too. But overall the vehicle is more likely to less nice to drive IMO.
If you want to get more flex from the front axle it is arguably harder. As said above, it isn't really the shock that limits the travel. You can see this for yourself if you unbolt the shock, the axle will hardly drop far enough to get a standard spring out from the upper mount. Therefore a longer shock here won't offer any benefits until you get the radius arms to drop further.
Or if you want to go full out, there have been many attempts, either home brew or small scale production that have offered things like custom 3 or 4 link setups. I'd suggest most of these will come with high cost and potential for degraded road manners.
My philosophy for off road suspension is about maximising wheel travel. You want lots of droop, but without sacrificing compression. I also like to keep vehicles riding close to stock ride height. With something like a coil Land Rover you need to also consider things like anti-squat when braking. Lifting too far can have a big impact on things like this. Some vehicles do need a lift as their ground clearance or approach/departure angles are not great in standard trim. Or they ride comparatively low from the factory. (my p38 Range Rover is lifted, which isn't ideal or fully intended, but gives benefits of a much improved breakover angle, which was a weakness on the p38 due to the long wheelbase and small tyres).
My coiler 88 is still a work in progress, although the front now flexes brilliantly. Maybe even better than the rear axle. It was nicely balanced previously. Currently waiting on some bits (and money) to finish off the latest changes.
In the past I built this which again had a lovely balance front & rear and for a leaf sprung vehicle that looked stock for the most part, flexed very well.
And this is a mates 80" CCV trials vehicle. It rides quite low, either similar or lower than a stock Defender. But also has very good suspension travel and is near impossible to to get it cross axled:
For me it is more about suspension travel and flex than it is about lift.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, muzaz said:
So let me explain a bit better. The vehicle is a Defender 90 and it's not my daily driver. I consider it more of a grown up's toy than any thing else, mainly to be used for "overland" offroad trips which may be quite challenging - mud, rocks, snow etc.
I agree that lifting the vehicle will not achieve better clearance. But lifting it I can fit larger tyres, and that will increase clearance and also better articulation.
Also, as mentioned in my original post, I will be fitting front and rear winches plus bumpers roll cage guards etc...all these will surely weigh the landy down if I keep the standard springs. So in reality longer or harder springs would be needed no?
I'm not on a tight buget, not an open cheque of course, but I can spend a bit on it.
Lifting won't really allow bigger tyres. Ok, you "might" get away with it on road or as our American friends would call a Mall crawler. The reason is the wheel is designed to go up and down as the suspension extends and compresses. All a lift is doing (assuming spring or spacer lift) is extending the suspension a bit. For most off roading this is bad, often very bad.
It means your suspension is already drooping, so when off road you will loose flex as your wheels will no longer have as much available suspension droop. This usually results in more lifted wheels and more cross axle situations. Assuming you still have full suspension compression the tyre and wheel will of course move up into the wheelarch. As negating and removing any clearance a 'lift' will have bought you. i.e. if the wheel would rub without a lift, the will also rub with a lift under suspension flex.
To get around this issue some lift ktis will come with longer bumper stops to reduce the amount of up travel. Which can reduce the chance of rubbing. But for off roading this is even worse, as not only have you removed some of your available down travel. Doing this would also limit your up travel and reduce the total distance the wheel can move up and down. Some poor lift kits will even coil bind or have springs too stiff to full compress, which may kind of help prevent rubbing, but will offer all of the downsides of extended bump stops, but often with a harsher ride and even less flex suspension.
Now don't get me wrong. Lifting is not all bad. But a 90 already has great clearance and approach/departure angles. It would be like buying a TJ Wrangler and adding a 2-3" lift to it. The Land Rover in many ways already comes with a 'lift' pre-fitted from the factory as part of the suspension design. Of course lots of people will and do lift Land Rover's and manage just fine, but often may not have compared back to back or even to other vehicles. But it is quite amazing when you see a lifted vehicle wave a wheel in the air and get cross axled, then watch a completely stock Defender drive straight through the same obstacle with no bother at all.
There are things we can do to counter some of the issues. We can move shock mounts or fit longer shocks. But it is all a balancing act and the further you go, the more it'll cost and the more changes required.
Do you know what sort of tyres you'd want to run?
I often roll about on some 33.10.50's and my brother currently has some 255/85R16's on his Ninety at the moment. Both sizes can work on mostly standard vehicles and the axles for the most part should handle this size. Personally I'm a fan of narrower tyres over wide ones. Fat wide tyres do look cool and monster truck like, but my experience and research says they generally perform less well off road vs a narrow tyre.
TBH the factory 235/85R16 or 7.50 x 16 is a great size to use. When I do off road trials and competitions I like to run a set of 7.00 x 16's, nice and skinny and several inches shorter than my 33's. I do this because it goes better off road, although is more understeery on road with these tyres.
As mentioned above, 35's can be made to fit. But may require some massaging or trimming of the body or wheel spats. I'd also suggest you are at much higher risk of breaking an axle/diff at this size. What sort of terrain are you driving on mostly? In the UK we don't really have much in the way of rock crawling, the vast majority of our off roading is mud and grass and deep ruts.
Land Rover's are designed to carry weight in stock trim, so to some extent standard springs and shocks cope well with various payloads. It doesn't sound like yours would be overly heavy. Although you may have some extra weight out in front of the front axle. So something a bit more heavy duty on the front suspension may be required.
Then it comes down to price. Shocks can be quite modestly priced to costing as much as a used VW Golf GTI or a weekend away for 4 people.
For off roading a simple setup to make it a bit more capable and flexy would be:
+2" shocks all round on stock upper mounts
Longer brake lines (because you don't want to stretch and break one off road, probably fine on 2", but why risk it)
Stock springs with dislocation cones OR +2" length standard rate springs. Accepting that you might go HD on the front axle.
I've got on well with Procomp shocks in the past. The ride smooth and flex well. But are softer on the road and will allow more body roll.
I've also got on well with the Britpart Celluar Dynamic twin tube shocks. Not quite as compliant on or off road, just as flexy off road and better for towing or carrying some additional weight.
Neither of these shocks are expensive to buy.
You can spend more money on shocks, but even spending 2x or maybe even 3x more per shock may only result in subtle differences. That said, there are lots of good shocks out there.
As for springs, I quite like the Flatdog springs, they offer different lengths and spring rates and tell you what they are. Lots of other places don't.
https://www.flatdoguk.com/search.asp?types=FD+SPRINGS+>+Defender+90&super=
I'd be tempted to go +2 standard rate on the rear and +2 HD on the front.
The longer springs you probably won't have any issues with the springs dislocating. Definitely not at the front. You need to do other things to get more travel on the front radius arms and shocks aren't really the limiting factor from the factory. On the rear you might still either need to retain the top of the spring or add dislocation cones. It would depend on the brand of shocks you get as not all +2's are exactly the same length. Chances are your stock props would be most fine too, although something like the Hardy Spicer wide angle props might also be advisable.
There are lots of other things you can do, but from here on in you'll need to consider more parts and look at the wider suspension system.
This is the sort of travel you should expect with something like the above setup. Think this is on 7.50's here and it is a very capable Land Rover. That rides and handles like a standard vehicle (or better) on the road too.
The next step up would be to consider some traction aides like lockers or ATBs.
-
1
-
1
-
-
What vehicle is it for? What do you plan to use for? How much do you want to spend? And what are you trying to acheive?
Also why do you feel you need to lift it? Not saying you shouldn't, but assuming it is a Defender they already have good ground clearance and sit higher than most other production 4x4's.
-
1
-
-
On 8/8/2023 at 3:45 PM, boaterboy said:
I would really appreciate some advice on how to establish the reasonable value of my Discovery 2.
A 2002 7-seater, I have owned it from new, 123k miles, never off-roaded.
I have a full service history, oil & filter changes every year, the body & chassis are in good condition, the latter being professionally cleaned & undersealed (not Waxoyl) about 7 years ago, excellent tyres.
It has a 12 month MoT with two minor defects & and a number of advisories shown.
The headlining has sagged in a couple of places and it requires a new a/c compressor.
I imagine it would suit an enthusiast who has the time & faciities and could turn it into a first class vehicle.
Any thoughts and advice would be appreciated.
It’s worth whatever you can sell it for or whatever you are prepared to take for it. There isn’t a hard and fast rule. It’s a used car.
The D2 is also right at the bottom of its depreciation curve. So prices are all over the show.
I’d guess if you were trading it in a dealer would only want to give you £200-500. But that isn’t really a reflection of its value.
All you can do is take a look at others currently for sale and pick a price point you’d accept. If it doesn’t sell or spark interest, you’ll have priced it too high.
-
2 hours ago, Maverik said:
Put it in "Parkers" and get an evaluation from "we buy any car".
This will give you a baseline as to what the non land rover world would value it, then tweet it usually up a little. I've been keeping half an eye on price of D2's recently and they seem to have taken the place of D1's you can pick up a lot of car for not a lot of cash.
Pretty sure wbac won’t give you a price on a vehicle that old.
EV’s
in International Forum
Posted
As said, I'm not against EVs, but my comment was very specific about people who do not have off the road parking, aka a driveway. I'm guessing you do. If you can charge at home it is a game changer. But lots and lots of people can't and never will be able too.
As for infrastructure, it depends on which part of the UK. Around London there are lots of charge points, but other places less so. Which means you do need to plan journeys differently or make stops you wouldn't have otherwise made. Some people might be fine with going places they don't want to go. But it isn't for everyone.
I think you are rather belittling the fire risk. While petrol is volatile, over 100 years of petrol powered cars have shown them to be quite resilient to fire. Electric cars make up a tiny proportion of the vehicles on the roads globally, yet there have been a high number of EV related fires.