Chicken Drumstick
-
Posts
2,465 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
11
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Blogs
Posts posted by Chicken Drumstick
-
-
2 hours ago, rusty_wingnut said:
You really want the TDV8 - don't waste your cash on the puney V6
I think everyone would wholeheartedly agree. Just a real shame the TDV8 wasn't offered in the D3/4 and some of the other vehicles.
-
2 hours ago, Snagger said:
DRLs activate with the ignition if the headlights are off. But they don’t activate the rear lights and the presence of lighting out the front often tricks drivers at night into thinking they have their lights on, but they have no rear lights, no long range illumination and are dazzling other drivers. I see it here all the time, even on vehicles with automatic headlights that are confused by bright street lighting. Far simpler and safer to bin the automation and DRLs and go tho the old system. I can’t see any occasion that you would need the lights off with the engine running other than charging a flat battery, and that can be mitigated by running the engine a little longer.
I suspect we are drifting a little OT with this. But there are times when you may want no lights. An obvious example was all Police Volvo's used to have the headlight on in day light disabled. Although not sure what they do with DRLs....
But other times I can think of, which maybe niched. But valid non the less. When over the fields at harvest. You just don't need or want lights. Preserve your night vision, its a big field and lights flying about can be distracting for the combine and tractor drivers. Likewise if just sitting in a car with the engine running, maybe waiting. So could be on a road where parked cars would have their lights off otherwise, so no increased risk of not having them on. Or maybe even when looking for wildlife, lights can be very distracting.
Have also been to a drive in movie where lights are not permitted as they cause issues for others, but you need the ignition and/or engine on to use the radio to listen to the film.
2 hours ago, Snagger said:I call bocks on that. Sidelights are useless for anything other than parking, but headlights increase visibility in all conditions other than when silhouetted against a light sky, which is very rare while driving.
All I can say is. There is a dodgy by-pass junction near here. The angle you sit it and relative height to oncoming cars means headlights any many DRLs make it very difficult to judge speed and distance. I've seen a lot of close calls and there have been loads of accidents. Not all due to this for sure. But less blinding and dazzling lights in non dark situations would probably be the safer option. If the road is wet and light rain in daylight, the lights also reflect off the ground making it even harder and may obscurer vehicles behind the lead car.
In these instances if everyone used sidelights I'm 100% sure it would be better. And in some cases cars would be more visible with no lights at all. At the end of the day, seeing a car 2 miles away isn't all that useful. Its the ones much closer you need to be concerned with.
-
1
-
-
25 minutes ago, Snagger said:
As I said, I strongly believe that having the lighting connected to the ignition is the answer, not a sensor operated ECU that determines when the lights should be on.
Not sure I'd want that, although don't really want DRLs either tbh. There are times when you just don't want any lights on. Although having said all this, isn't this exactly how DRLs work anyway?
-
1 hour ago, L19MUD said:
In the L322 if the wipers come on twice the lights come on irrespective of lighting conditions, now how many people actually put their lights on when it rains lightly?
Personally I think that is a bad idea. Lights on in some conditions just cause dazzle to others and make it much harder for them to judge speed and distance. It was a trick used during the war, essentially hiding behind light. It is super easy to demonstrate, get a torch (not too powerful one) shine it in someones face from 5-10 feet away, then hold your hand behind the torch and ask them to tell you how many fingers you are holding up.
In remote places, such as parts of Scandinavia I can see the benefit of DRL or headlights in the old Volvo sense. As you may go hours without seeing another vehicle. But in the UK that just isn't the case and from the Midlands down to the SE on almost any road you'd be lucky to 60 seconds without seeing another vehicle.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, Snagger said:
I disagree. Auto lights is a politely dangerous feature that encourages complacency and results in drivers failing to switch lights on in fog, dust, rain and marginal light conditions. DRLs are another stupid idea. Volvo and Saab had it right in the 70s, where the head and tail lamps were on whenever the engine is running. Simple, reliable and no electronics. My modern Volvo has auto lights. We have to keep switching it off after each service as it tends to switch the lights off even when we have selected them on. As for automatic wipers, they only work if rain is detected in the right part of the screen, and is it so hard to flick a switch for that? Electric seat motors? How often do you need to move the seat? How often do those systems fail? RRC and P38 were notorious for it.
Useful comforts and options, depending on location and use, are things like heated glazing and seats, reversing cameras, and at a push, having headlights on a timer activated by the fob so that you can see your path to and from the car at night, though a small torch is better and we all managed for decades without.
Electric seats are great. Very often need to move a seat and I find with most manual seats that I want the seat half way between two clicks!
Can't say I've heard of seat motors failing. And I thought with the RRC it was more the switches (usually gummed up rather than completely failed), not the motors.
I agree with auto wipers, never got on with those. Auto headlights, well it wouldn't be a deal breaker either way. But the setup in my Jimny works well, you can either have them full manual. Or so that they come on when dark, a 2nd option than does auto mainbeam too. Which works brilliantly on B roads. But less good on dual carriage ways.
-
Indeed a Puma is the best of the bunch in that regard. I often say to people, they may all look basically the same. But LR made quite a few changes and updates over the years.
I think if I was building/modding and had a reasonable budget I’d probably go for an Ibex though.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, L19MUD said:
I see your point but in my mind if you already have ECU's controlling the engine and gearbox and emissions systems etc (which you cannot avoid nowadays) then you may as well have some creature comforts such as auto lights. Auto lights are not going to leave you stranded but an engine in limp home mode possibly will.
I personally am struggling to see the appeal of the Grenadier as a private purchaser. If all you want is something that is rugged and basic without ECU's etc I think you would be a lot better off spending the money on a properly sorted old shape Defender with a galvanised chassis etc and your engine of choice. I accept as a fleet vehicle that is less feasible.
If you don't mind the ECU's etc then the new Defender seems a much better bet (even if you have to buy a lightly used one to level the price up). The Grenadier is ugly and does not seem to do anything a Defender can't do?
Sadly I’m only a dreamer due to lack of funds. But the Grenadier is exactly the sort of thing I’d buy if I had the money.
The new Defender is a fine vehicle in its own way. But they drive like a tall heavy estate car. Because that is essentially what they are nowadays. Nothing wrong with this. It’s what the market wanted. And modern Range Rovers drive the same. Ie being more car like. And dynamically they do handle and ride like a big car.
For me I want a 4x4 to be a 4x4 and feel like it. My short list would include the Jeep Wrangler. But I’d really want a Rubicon. The engine options aren’t great in the U.K. though and there is no options list. Jeep also knobble the tow ratings on some models.
I really like the Ford Bronco too. But no real opportunity to own one in the U.K. not even sure they are all that feasible to get through an IVA either. But certainly any buying prospect is much more of a challenge.
The other car on my list would be the new Ford Ranger Raptor. Although sadly the EU/U.K. version is missing around 110hp over the one sold anywhere else. But that aside it looks pretty awesome.
The Bronco would probably be the most civilised. The Ranger maybe the most fun. Although roof off options with the Wrangler appeal. But the Grenadier probably the easiest to live with overall and the best all rounder.
I like rugged 4x4’s with real off road capability. I’m quite happy to have ECU’s and some luxury items though. And at these prices for any of them I’d expect them tbh.
A traditional Defender is great. But you’d need an engine swap and do something pretty major with the axles to even get close to the others. And ultimately you’d still end up with something that leaks and rattles. Dynamically the old model would always be a pretty large backwards step. Plus buying and rebuilding with heavy modifications will consume real cash. Much harder to finance such a purchase.
The new Defender is on my list too. But would be in 5th or lower place if I was given the choice. The only real thing is, being in the U.K. they are, or will become quite easily attainable. And they won’t hold their money forever. But I do wonder if I’d always wonder if I’d bought the wrong vehicle. But time will tell. It’s either wait for used prices to drop to my price range. Or swap another engine into my p38a. Which on face value does everything I really want and drives how I want. Just a little fickle and likes a drink!
The Ineos Grenadier would appear to be largely the same kind of vehicle with similar abilities. Hence why I’d say it would be ideal for me. I believe my p38a was £54,000 new in 1999. Which must be well over £100k today if you account for inflation. So maybe the price of the Grenadier isn’t so bad after all.
-
1
-
-
22 minutes ago, Bowie69 said:
.....and a waaaaaay better oil pump, which the serp-belted 3.9 also had, I understand.
Once you start down this road, you realise just how many iterations there were..... and how you can never really be sure of anything!
I have a late 3.9 serp like that in my TR7, it came out of a 1996 Disco 1.
It really screams, lovely engine. Have noticed it before, the earlier 3.9's just feel a bit more lazy compared to the last of the line.
-
Think the HP24 is stronger. But probably not a real world issue on a single vehicle. Lots run the 22.
Really depends what you want. For me the manuals are a lot more fun and in theory should offer better cruising mpg. Autos tend to make the RV8 feel lazy IMO.
But lots of people like autos.
-
1
-
-
40 minutes ago, jeremy996 said:
Para 1: That will be down the actual wording on the policy and the additional schedules. If you have a modern vehicle, post 2006, you can only have an approved bar on the front, unless it is a winch bumper. The vehicle and its accessories have to meet roadworthiness compliance rules. The insurance company has no power or desire to police this until you make a claim. At which point it will depend on whether it is a small claim or a big one; a small one will probably go on the nod, so no issues. A big one will have investigation assets thrown at it, as it is a commercial decision. In the UK it is a grey area as the police/DVSA are under resourced and will only act where they have to. In Germany, no approval on your acccessories and you don't pass the equivalent of the MOT and your vehicle is banned from the road. We currently have mostly the same laws but much less testing; Jacob Rees-Mogg not withstanding.
Para 2: As a private owner you can change all kinds of things, but there is a general expectation that it will be roadworthy. Fitting items labelled "off-road use only" is prima facie evidence that it is not roadworthy. Fitting items that are e-marked suggest that it will be roadworthy. You pays your money and takes your choice, but after the RTC, you don't get to decide what is right or wrong.
Para 3: Compliance is the issue; banning all sales of unapproved bars was a decision made to reduce the number of bars in circulation without having to inspect and inforce the nation's car park of 4x4s.
You may remember the case of the LR110CSW owner who had an accident that killed some of his children, pre 2008. His LR was dissected in forensic detail; all kinds of infringements were brought out in Court, missmatched parts, poor workmanship, second hand parts, construction and use failures, the book was thrown at him.
That's fine and I don't want to re-rail this thread, so maybe we agree to differ. All I can say is, what you have posted is very interesting. But does not tally with what is on the .gov site.
-
34 minutes ago, jeremy996 said:
In the UK, so long as you are not involved in an RTC it is unlikely that anyone will look at your vehicle hard enough to truly enforce the law. If you kill someone or create enough damage you can be certain that interested parties will examine you, your documents and your vehicle very carefully.
UK law is permissive; if something is not proscribed as illegal, you may assume you can do it, but other factors then come into play. There is a general presumption that you have a duty of care to those around you, there is statute law, case law and common law.
Modern vehicles have to meet their crash tests to be allowed on the road; add anything that changes that crash performance and any adverse consequences will come back at you. If your unapproved, non-squishy bullbar kills your victim, where an approved one might have just maimed them, your insurance company will cover the losses, (as they have to), and then seek redress from you. Much like the situation with drunk drivers, insurance companies do not indemnify lawbreakers.
Summaries on Gov.uk are just summaries written for the general public; you need to read the actual statutes, the guidance, the decided cases and even then the Courts may chose a different winner, if they consider the conventional outcome to be perverse.
In a previous career, I would have been the one sanctioning the payment of damages and engaging legal counsel to bankrupt the offending policyholder. I will not have an unapproved bar on the front of my vehicle, it is a risk I am not willing to take. YMMV
I'm not sure I agree. An insurance company can't say they will cover a specific item and even document it on your policies, then turn around and say they won't after an accident or claim. That isn't how things work.
You can change lots of things on a car after you have bought it. No car maker sells a vehicle on extreme mud terrain remould tyres, which will impact stopping distances in the wet or dry. As they would not be part of the type approval for the vehicle. But it is perfectly legal to fit them the moment you roll off the dealers forecourt. And I do not believe anyone would be prosecuted for having them fitted to a vehicle, even if involved in an RTC where they could have stopped quicker on a different tyre.
Also worth noting, the .gov site makes no mentioned to the fitting or use of a bullbar, the only mention is to "selling". Again, I suspect this is a rather key piece of information. Meaning that even selling them for off road use would be illegal, just a like a restricted item such as a firearm. Clearly reality differs as there are loads of companies "selling" bullbars, which would be the illegal bit. If this was true, they would be simple open and shut cases to prosecute all of these companies selling bullbars.
I very much suspect the restriction is to new vehicles ony being supplied with a bullbar that doesn't meet approval standard. If you wish to buy and fit one afterwards it is perfectly fine (even if not recommended), all you need to do is inform you insurance.
-
1
-
-
As said. The info on the .gov site is a bit vague and incomplete.
The first line is very clear. They are not illegal. This is the key take away.
I also don’t believe insurance companies can “dump you either”. My insurance company happily had a bull added at no cost and shows on the policy documents.
The last paragraph is interesting. On face value if you take it as written. It would be illegal to sell a 2nd hand bull bar. That isn’t approved. Or even a bull bar for a quad bike. Clearly this isn’t the case which means there is far more detail behind this paragraph than is published here. I suspect it is more about new vehicles under type approval can not be sold with one fitted that isn’t approved, rather than a person fitting one to said vehicle after they have bought it. Hence why manufacturers no longer offer them as dealer fit accessories.
If you Google, there are loads of companies selling and fitting bull bars to post 2007 vehicles in the U.K. I doubt very much that they are all trading illegally. As many of the companies have been trading for decades.
I also do not know if there is a legal definition of a bull bar. When does it become just a winch bumper or a heavy duty bumper for example?
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, jeremy996 said:
The Magic Mushroom ones are renders, the black one is real, posted by Ineos on Australia Day. (We are never going to be able to fit those in the UK; fails even the workaround of being a 'winch bumper')
Should be ok. Bull bars aren’t illegal in the U.K. I know there is the thing on the .gov site about post 2007. But there is more to it than that and it isn’t a blanket ban on them.
It’d be more about if anyone is importing the bumpers.
-
47 minutes ago, Snagger said:
On the plus side, that bumper gives plenty of space to sit down while having a tea or space out of the mud to put tools down.
I was thinking along similar lines, ideal to stand on for an elevated view over a hedge etc.
-
1
-
-
Probably best to get confirmation from the dealer you are ordering from. I know in the UK at least, specs can change after you order and has been quite frequent in the past couple of years on the Defender.
-
Do you have a budget op? I got hold of some KC Hitlites used a few years ago and found some new lenses going cheap online. Although that might not be so easy these days.
I would say, don't snub LED. You just need to do a little more research. The do put out a lot more light and suck way less amps too.
I went with Osram for a moderately priced compact lightbar. It's a spot beam and easily exceeds any halogen setup I've used or had. All running through a 5amp fuse too.
Info in my review vids. But I can provide you with some links for more info if you want.
-
12 minutes ago, FridgeFreezer said:
They do have an awful lot of black plastic trim hanging off them don't they?
Do they? I can only see the bumpers, grill and headlight surrounds. Which is about the same amount as on my Jimny.
-
1
-
-
I still think they look great and loving that light blue colour.
Sure there is a lot of Defender 110 in their visuals, but you can also see classic G-Wagen in the bonnet profile and even glimpses of Landcruiser 70 Series.
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, Ajith said:
Chicken drumstick, how did you go with the swap. I am currently considering it on a range rover 2 door already swapped with lt230, lt77 and a holden 308.
Vehicle was rebuilt with a replacement 200Tdi in the end, so no changes needed. I did speak with Ashcroft transmissions and they confirmed the above info in this thread. The Td5 will not mate to the Lt-77 or the R380 stumpy gearboxes.
-
I think it goes to show we are all different. I personally love how it looks. Wouldn't change a thing (only the price, so that I could afford one!!).
-
2
-
-
3 hours ago, Series3Spudd said:
Ok over axel springs is a bit much would still like to run original one 109 riveted rims in the summer and I think the biggest you can get on those is 750s it’s a 2.5na Diesel from an early defender when I bought it the guy just swapped it from a Perkins and thought it was a 2.25 as only after a closer look that I realised it was a 2.5an The rest of the drivetrain is original not planning on doing any heavy off Roading only for a bit of fieldwork (work on a farm)in the winter Only want 265 because have a set leftover from our old defender but they need new tires soon anyway so can always change for a smaller tire if there as good off-road found that 750s are to narrow and just sink. For some reason the 750s rub long before full lock but the 265s don’t rub at all?? 750 is on 5.5 inch 109 rims 265 is on modulus
ps thay don’t stick out to much
Glad they don't stick out.
Rubbing will be down to the rim offset most likely.
TBH - lift shackles are pretty cheap to buy and fit. Just give them a go and see how you get on. If they don't work out, take em off back to where you are now.
-
2 hours ago, Bowie69 said:
The no gap thing is for aero, emissions reduction etc.
The USA spec Jeep Wrangler has a gap on the bumper, only the Euro ones don't. So I suspect it probably isn't emissions as US is normally stricter on those. I wonder if it is more along the lines of not allowing pedestrians to be able to get limbs trapped or something silly.
-
On 1/8/2023 at 8:22 AM, elbekko said:
Probably to have a modicum of crumple zone before a ladder chassis impales someone in a side impact.
Suspect the bumper size is crash related, as someone else said, check out the Euro version of the Jeep Wrangler JK and JL.
Not sure it is specifically ladder chassis related, plenty of other ladder chassis vehicles in production still. Pick up trucks, vans, SUV's...
Just to add further. If you look at a late Puma Defender model the bumper is also pretty big with plastic gladding. The main difference on the Ineos (and Jeeps) is there is no air gap between the bumper and vehicle. Which makes it look deeper than it would otherwise.
-
1
-
-
Really depends what you are wanting to try and achieve overall. Extended spring hangers/shackles will go straight on and will give a lift, but they also change the diff angle as you can only add them to one end of the spring. Mil 109s running these would have had slightly different mounts at the other end of the spring to compensate. But lots and lots of people run extended shackles on otherwise stock Series.
Spring over axle conversion is doable. But is quite a large modification and you'll have to solve some things with the steering arms. No reason not to do it if it is what you want, but would be more at the 'extreme' end of modding and would yield 4-6" of lift. You'd might need to consider other supporting mods.
Another option would be different springs designed to give a lift. Not all parabolic or leaf springs are equal. But you might want to ride, handling and suspension travel too. The latter more so if you off road.
Personally I'd say your tyres are a bit too fat for a Series and I'd guess are sticking out of the wheel arches. Which in the UK is illegal for road use (not MoT, but Construction & Use regulations). You'll need to add some Defender style extended spats to keep the wheels covered to remain legal for road use.
On my Series I heavily modded the suspension and used to run up to an 8.25 x 16 tyre (size up from a 7.50 x 16). Which are about an inch or two taller than the 265's you have, but narrower.
Link to my build thread if you are interested in the suspension mods:
Personally I'd probably only SOA if wanting to run 35's or building for a specific off road need.
Wheel spacers - wheel stud/bolt
in Defender Forum (1983 - 2016)
Posted
Do all alloy wheels have steel inserts? I've never really looked, nor noticed. I don't recall them being very obvious on the alloys I do have.
As for spacers. No idea on the terrafirma ones. I have that I bought in 2002/3 that have been used loads including on large 33"Simex tyres. They use a slightly smaller steel wheel type nut. Never had a single nut come loose over many thousands of miles, off roading and trials events.
I have some cheaper (eBay) spacers too which I run only on the front. Must have done a fair few thousand miles on them too now. And they take some abuse off road with wider offset rims and chunky mud terrains. Pretty sure they use something akin to a regular LR steel wheel nut. All of the spacers are alloy and again never had a single nut come loose on these (and change wheels fairly often for different events, terrain and use). And no sign of any deformation of the spacers. Apart from being dirty...