g&t
-
Posts
315 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Blogs
Posts posted by g&t
-
-
Hello! I know that the date codes on mine are quite old but i like the Michelin XMS244's, so much so I look out for new old stock on ebay and buy them up. The last one i got also came with a brand new alloy rim !!
I only do the odd green lane just for fun when its dry so i don't need chunky tires.
If i were you i would just keep them on till they are worn out!
Last year I had all four removed from the rims & inspected by a tyre centre where none of the staff could believe that the tyres were over 20 years old. Bearing in mind that it would have been in their business interest to flog me a new set, they could find no signs of cracking or any other damage, refitted them with new valves & at the MOT later in the year no comment was passed or 'advised' As to your last comment, seeing as I only do around 1500 miles a year the Michelins would probably out live me!
-
My RRC had a fairly new set of Kumho Road Venture AT's in a 205/80 r16 when I got it. They look very similar to the Goodyear Wranglers that were a factory fit on some Classics during the 90's, and I had on my last Classic. The rears are probably about half worn now, but they have done about 15000 miles in my ownership. On road they grip fine, and are great in the snow. I'd fit another set.
Thanks for that, something to consider. Just as a point of interest, the Goodyears looked the part but when I had a set balanced once the tyre depot manager advised against Wranglers on anything heavier than a Gaylander & said that, despite the factory fit choice, heavier LR products tended to make the treads 'squirm' & looking at the tyres I could see what he meant. I'm a confirmed Michelin fan but the price of a set vs my annual mileage ............
-
Sadly the time has come to replace the original (spec) 205's on my 25yr old RRC. I say sad because they are Michelin XMS244's & are still in unbelievable condition but, according to the date stamp, have been on there since the early 'nineties! National Tyres are doing a deal on rubber at this time & I'm wondering if products like Barum (which I have on my Mundeo & am very happy with) & Toyo are worth considering? I never off-road but still want rubber that looks like it belongs on a 4x4, unlike Michelin synchrones(!) & is good in snow whilst giving a decent & reasonably quiet ride.
-
IIRC Discovery used rubber spacers to reduce road noise & vibration into the cabin.
I've fitted these (10mm thick) to the off-side of my RRC, as despite having recently fitted genuine LR srings & dampers all round the car tended to sit slightly lower on that side. Bit annoyed really as the suspension re-fit cost a lot of money (I'm not in a position to do the work myself) & RRC srings are not 'handed'
-
Composite gaskets can be used on earlier engines, but as already said they are thicker so there will be a slight reduction in CR. Can't remember hiow much difference it actually makes.
From memory a few years ago - not enough to notice during day-to-day driving. Also if you have a 9.35 CR engine the lower comp. makes it less likely to 'ping' on standard unleaded.
-
All's well that ends well - no nasty suprises on VED in the budget & the car passed it's test, so I'll apply for the new disc before the end of the month thereby getting it at this year's rate again. Only delaying the inevitable I know but it's the principle!
-
This will make you laugh! Having started this topic I've dropped a b.....k myself - tried to re-tax the eurobox but DVLA say no because the MOT has to be valid on the date the VED is due (first of April) not when it's applied for & the test runs out on the 31st. Being tested today, so lets hope any increase doesn't come into force until next month. I'm bloody annoyed with myself as I usually test a month ahead of the due date but forgot this year.
-
I would advise anyone whose road tax runs out at the end of this month to renew before next week's (wed 20th) budget. In the March '06 budget the government of the day went silly & introduced a 'new' rate of ved for certain high-emmission vehicles & that rate came into force on the very same day, as opposed to the usual 1st April. I've not seen any indications that there may be a repeat performance this year, but you never know ..............
-
I don't own a station-wagon so am un-effected by the recent problems faced by some LR owners with side-facing seats trying to obtain adequate insurance cover. I was browsing my classic car mag & guess what(?) stretch limo's with side facers, but then perhaps hire/reward insurers take a different (& expensive) view of risk assessment.
-
I can't, knowing a fair bit about VOSA, see why they would be interested at all?
Insurers yes, as it is a modification, but you aren't modifying the chassis in any way so....?
May be I've used the wrong title, what I meant was the MOT. As for insurers - surely a total suspension spec. change is going to raise a few eyebrows? I'm sure many on here will remember a certain 110 crash resulting in 3(?) drowned kids in Lincolnshire a few years ago - an event which probably did more harm to the 'modified 4x4' scene than anything previously seen.
-
Reading the last couple of posts I am reminded of why I love to just drive the thing & keep it maintained as factory original, but of course it's a case of 'each to his own' - though I still stand by my remarks re VOSA & it would be interesting to see what your insurer's reaction will be.
-
Sorry to be personal but have you considered psychiatric help? To take something so pure & simple and add a level of complication that so many seek to be rid of. You obviously relish a challenge & I wish you luck, but be aware that your DIY conversion may fall foul of VOSA & have a detrimental effect on re-sale value.
-
The snag is that you get what you pay for & these days the cheapest (especially with safety related parts) can be lethal. Saving money is fine, as long as you keep your wits about you. The fact that many genuine parts are no longer available has opened the floodgates for cheap & nasty carp from manufactures who think of a LR as a device with which to plough fields.
-
The whole efi wiring has nothing to do with the lpg, because on lpg, the whole wiring from the efi doesn't do anything,
and could be removed, while the engine would stil run.
Sorry Retep, I stand corrected. I did say others knew more than I did, especially when it comes to LPG. Hope you get it sorted.
-
Caution, yes but bear in mind taking cards is expensive and a hassle, and not always necessary if you don't offer mail order. You can understand them not wanting to take cheques. Let's not forget it's perfectly legal to trade in cash and was the norm not so long ago.
This is of course very true, it's just that there are so many people in this world engaged in ripping customers off for a living that I for one am always looking for the 'catch' Sad really but remember no-one is born a cynic, people & events turn you that way over the years. I really hope this process turns out to be value for money for Mr S.
-
Hi Peter & welcome to the forum. I'm answering your post because (a) I've got an '87 myself & (b) because those folks on here, that know far more than I do, have yet to do so. What is confusing me is that you state the the RR runs ok on LPG, which surely means that all the extensive checks that you've carried out the ignition side have been pointless because if there was a fault there the engine would'nt run on gas either, unless maybe it's a 'fuel change-over' fault(?) I'm led to believe that extensive running on LPG alone can result in 'lack of use' problems as the pump / injectors etc. are not being used, but of course I don't know if this is the case here. I don't run my RRC on anything but petrol so I'm not qualified to advise, but hope others on the forum can help you.
-
In the past I've always rust protected my cars myself. But it's a messy job and getting under the Series isn't as easy as it used to be. Seen these in a local Land Rover magazine and was wondering if you think the price seemed worth it?
I don't know about alarm bells but I just thought I heard the strains of 'Oh home on the range, where the deer & the antelope play .........!! See if they have hitching rails outside their premises.
-
Not necessarily true: on a lot of vehicles manufactured this century getting the right battery is rather important - the alternator's charge output is matched to the correct battery's characteristics and is computer-controlled; get this wrong and you can easily have a slew of obscure error-codes being logged on various systems because the [wrong] battery doesn't respond in the expected way to accelerated charging.
I don't think we are singing from the same hymm-sheet here. I make sure that the battery in question is the correct one for the car of course, it's just that I only go for the basic model price range, in this case £75 & two year 'no quibble' warranty from my local auto-shop. My '87 RRC has never heard of things like error codes anyway, I'm a great believer in the saying 'if it's fitted then sooner or later it will go wrong'
-
On a slant to this post - if there's one thing I've learnt ove the years is that it's a waste of money buying expensive batteries if you just want a standard unit (as opposed to extra power for winches etc.) The so called extended warranty batteries rarely justify their inflated price tag in terms of service life, my current bog standard item has been on the RRC V8 for just over three years & continues to spin the engine over as fast as ever, despite the car being parked in a exposed location & only being used for 20-40 miles once a week/ten days.
-
I think you need to have them tested, probably what is meant by the 'drop test' that's been suggested. Bearing in mind that voltage output on it's own is useless, as a battery giving out 12 volts can be incapable of even turning an engine over, it's the amps that count & checking that that needs hefty equipment.
-
Judging by the posts on this & 'other' forums I would avoid P38's & stick to the Classic, but with the following reservations : Most are rot-boxes & although I've only ever owned V8 classics the only time I drove a 300tdi powered/manual Disco (basically the same vehicle underneath) it reminded me of a tractor. If you are fortunate enough to find a genuine rot-free Classic be prepared to pay good money for it, because such examples are now rare indeed.
-
Many thanks Ralph, like (I suspect) a great many others, I was unaware of this service & will pass the info. on to friends/family.
-
If you really want to put it in context I own a 1952 scammell explorer which is mot exempt and that weighs 13 tons , I maintain it well as it's my pride and joy .
I'm glad it's mot exempt because as fridge says if I took my scammell to Hgv testing station there is no way my 60 year old scammell will meet the modern standards of some 700 horse volvo / scania truck
Gary
I had the same situation when I owned WW2 trucks a few years ago - ruling applies to 'pre Jan 1st 1960 manuf. vehicles,over 3500kgs, used unladen & not for hire/reward. Obviously the claim stats. were favourable as the insurance was then (ten years up to 2005) absurdly low for such large vehicles. As a point of interest the EU has 'suggested' that pre 1980 vehicles could become MOT exempt in the future (info scourced from classic car publications).
-
Peter and Eileen Crichton (??) have been around the world several times in their disco 1.
I've read their articles in the mag & it warmed my heart to see that their steed was a 3.5V8, instead of the obligatory TDI.
Classic tyres
in Range Rover Forum
Posted
My concerns exactly, hence the decision to renew. The car is in original condition with a genuine 48k on the clock & I'm only the third owner, so when the time comes to sell (when the pensions don't allow for the upkeep!) the presence of old rubber will count against it anyway. I'm still open to recomendations as to replacement, along the lines of my original post.