tony109

They improved starting and worked perfectly on mine for years. The Britpart plug set is excellent. For the 2.25, upgraded Single heater plugs are shown as Part No. DA1057PLUG

Not been on here for a while, Just saw your post.. trust you've sorted the problem? Leaving the thing parked for months can cause the metering valve inside the CAV Injector pump to stick shut, regardless if the stop cable is in the run position of not. There's only the light governor spring to push it back. The metering valve is meant to float in its locating hole, often gets tarnish on it and sticks in the closed/OFF position. Then no fuel get into the high pressure side of the pump. You could try wiggling the stop lever arm on the pump back forth... but Remove pump, and partial strip down/clean of the stop lever side best.

Hi, thanks for the HNJ drive dog.. Not the same as the crank drive but the crankshaft bolt might be the answer. Its the bolt size for the engine mount bolts in the block Im stuck for. They're metric and probably the same size for the 2.5 and maybe 200 tdi?

My old 2.25 diesel is on its last legs, burning oil, etc. So I've gone for the 5 bearing updated engine. Now am I right in thinking all the treads are metric on this engine? As its missing all the studs on the flywheel, the dipstick tube, manifold studs, engine mounts etc this is more of a mission than I thought, thinking I could simply swap the bits from my old 2.25 3 bearing. Theres 4 bolts instead of two holding the engine mount brackets, so were can I go for these parts.. Paddocks look good but am I right in thinking the engines all gone metric? Plus the crank shaft drive dog for the capstan winch will be missing... So its the studs and bolts I need, can anyone advise a source?

Back in the days when of British Leyland were making/running landrover, Landrovers were built within the light commercial group, which also included Freight Rover. You'll notice the freight Rover Sherpa also carried the corporate link with other vehicles within the group with its Range Rover style grill.. As the Freight-Rover sherpa was part of the landrover group, the 4wd Sherpa version was later dropped as it conflicted with Landrover sales. The rear pressings of the earlier Leyland Sherpa were the same as the Austin J4 but the Freight Rover K2 pictured has vertical seams as did the later LDV Pilot that followed. You could argue that the LR Defender is a penny pinching exercise with pressings that date back to 1958 series 2? If thats penny pinching, im all for it. All you hear today is how bad the products of British Leyland were. Leyland transmissions LT, plus they were a huge exporter of commercial vehicles, the Scammell Land Train being an export only product meant that BLMC bought alot of money into the country

Back in the days when of British Leyland were making/running landrover, Landrovers were built within the light commercial group, which also included Freight Rover. You'll notice the freight Rover Sherpa also carried the corporate link with other vehicles within the group with its Range Rover style grill.. As the Freight-Rover sherpa was part of the landrover group, the 4wd Sherpa version was later dropped as it conflicted with Landrover sales. The rear pressings of the earlier Leyland Sherpa were the same as the Austin J4 but the Freight Rover K2 pictured has vertical seams as did the later LDV Pilot that followed. You could argue that the LR Defender is a penny pinching exercise with pressings that date back to 1958 series 2? If thats penny pinching, im all for it. All you hear today is how bad the products of British Leyland were. Leyland transmissions LT, plus they were a huge exporter of commercial vehicles, the Scammell Land Train being an export only product meant that BLMC bought alot of money into the country

With the chassis, you'd have done better to have cut the previous attempt out and start fresh.. It does let it down. The welds havent properly fused.. I'd do it again.

Got a few pics, although no great detail. Ive got the transfer box linkages to connect next, along with bolting bits back together. Ive changed the 4 speed box for a 5, referbed the axels and engine, Perkins Prima. This was meant to be a quick-ish job, but has dragged on a bit. The cab showed a bit of rot in the floor and front wings, so cut out and replaced. Detail pics are lacking but will get a few more soon.

I was joking you know...... I'd NEVER Ever take Discovery 3, or any of the new Land Rovers. If I go away again it'll be in my series 2A which offers all the comfort and reliabilty I require...most of the time.. Cricky i dont believe I was taken seriously!!!

Ive finally got my Freight-Rover 4wd sherpa up together. The transfer box had a single stick, for easy operation, but this limited your options, and also jammed easily. Ive replaced this single stick with a twin stick operation. I made up the linkages and I now have the options of: 4x4 Low/High, RWD Low/High, FWD Low/High.

Sorry for the early reply.. Standard springs are the future. All these parabolic converts have lost sight of the originals advantages. Shocks now notice when they fail, and they dont last. Ive gone through two in 8 years. Not bad, but not good either. I must say the parabolics do give an amazing ride over corrugations compared to the originals yet there is alot less body roll. Standards springs and standard bushes are perfectly suited, but with parabolics the movement of the shackles would tear bonded items even quicker. I've not had the time to think about planning any other trips as Ive been travelling alot with work, not in the Landrover. I'd still love to get to Mongolia, China overland. Ive been a bit softened I have to say, so I'd take my new-ish Discovery 3. Then I'll have comfort and reliability.

Ive been asked to make a new series 1 bulkhead. Galvanized mild or in stainless steel. How many variations are there in series ones? I have a 1957 series 1 bulkhead as a pattern. will this fit other series 1s or is the 1957 bulkhead limited to just the later models? Of course if I can make a good copy of the pattern bulkhead it would be easy to make many more at a very reasonable price. If anyone knows of a source for new series 1 bulkheads then this will save alot of time. Otherwise one will have to be made. Hope youcan help tony

The problem is removing all the zinc coating from the holes in the first place. The bonded rubber bushes are a tight fit in an uncoated chassis, so all the zinc needs to be removed. You've paid good money for the Galvanized protection so why then remove it? The untreated steel outer of the bush against/near the galvanize coating will increase the loss of the sacrificial zinc should they start to rust. Sure with plenty of greace they wont rust, but the rubber will perish from the grease and general oil contact, along with the fact that he bonded rubber bushes will tear if you flex the springs alot. With poly bushes the center pins are free to revolve inside the bushes, so can flex as much as it likes, without a problem. I fitted brand new bonded rubber bushes in my RM springs at the same time I fitted the poly bushes in the chassis. The bonded rubber spring bushes in the springs are knackered, the Deflex polybushes in the chassis are still going strong. My next task is to fit poly bushes in the RM spring eyes. Then they'll last alot longer. Lexi, can I ask how long youve had your rubber bushes fitted, how much abuse they get and how did you fit them to your galvanized chassis in the first place. What did you use to ream ou the holes etc? The Poly bushes that I fitted were not that easy to fit I must say. I needed my bush extractor to fit the center tubes into the bushes, but they'e not worn badly, if at all in all this time, where as, the rubber ones in the springs have had it

I had 2.888:1 low range and the lower suffix C main box, giving a Low of 50:1. This is close to the One Ton normal control, which has a Low final drive of 56:1. The standard final drive on a series 2a is only around 38:1. Unlike the One Ton, helical transfer box, the high range ratios remain unaltered.

Hi, I was just looking through this thread and saw your question.. Im the guy who started this thread, faced with the poly bush/standard choice.. The polybushes are still running very well, as is the land Rover in the pictures.. The springs get regularly flexed which would have destroyed a large number of Bonded rubber bushes by now. But my Deflex poly bushes are still looking good and unworn. I have RM spings but sadly these still have the bonded rubber bushes in the spring eyes. When I fitted my Deflex Poly bushes to the chassis, I also replaced the bonded rubber bushes in the RM springs,. These are a unique size. The RM bonded rubber bushes in the spring eyes have now fully broken up and will need changing again, but all the Deflex poly bushes in the chassis are still going strong I fitted polybushes to the chassis for the sake of the galvanizing and they've worked a treat! The bushes saved me from honing out the bush eyes and cutting away all my expensive rust prevention just to fit some cheap rubber bushes., Bushes that'll wear for a pass time. I would without any doubt, fit the poybushes to your chassis. Just ensure when you fit them to use plenty of greace. Then report back onto this thread just to keep some sort of record as to how much better, or not, various polybushes are, Both over each other or the standard rubber items