Dave W

I bought a Tyreplier kit about 5 years ago now, it's certainly paid for itself both on my own tyres and a number of other people's too. I always carry it in my motor so no matter where I am I can repair or replace tyres as the need arises when I'm competing or just out and about. The only tyre they've failed on was a set of mud tyres someone had put on some P38 alloy rims, to be fair though the pro tyre changer struggled too with his bead breaker taking around 10 attempts per tyre to break it and then his motor stalling under the strain when trying to remove the tyre ! For normal rims it's always worked fine. I've never found it to be hard work (other than the alloys above !) it's more a matter of technique than force.

The insurance is up for renewal on my competition motor soon and for a while now I've been thinking about an agreed value policy. On paper it's a 1990 Defender worth a couple of grand but with the amount of money and time that's gone into it it'd cost me in the region of around £20,000 in parts if I had to build another one to the same spec. I've phoned one "4x4 specialist" (Sureterm) who advertise on their web site that... But they have said they won't actually insure an agreed value above the value you could sell the vehicle for, which, as we all know, is never anything like the cost of building one. Even with me providing parts receipts to the value of £25,000 they weren't interested. Is this par for the course or are there brokers out there that can arrange a genuine agreed value based on what it would cost to replace rather than what you could sell it for as a whole ?

iPhone 5, do you not have those yet ? I should probably pay more attention in future !

I'll second that, the Halford's Pro sets are very good, mine's been bouncing around in the back of my motor since early 2005 and the case and contents are all fine. I even managed to run over it at one point I use an offcut of tool draw liner in mine to keep everything in place.

For memorymap/oziexplorer level of functionality gpsdrive isn't a bad option, not that long ago someone uploaded a full set of digital UK OS maps for OziExplorer that could be used with gpsdrive with a little bit of work. http://www.gpsdrive.de/ Other, mapping software options, are: http://www.macgpspro.com/ http://www.gpsy.com/ For step by step road navigation I've not found a native app, the best option for me was to use PC Navigator running under VMWare Fusion which works fine on Intel Macs.

If you really need the offset and have access to the machinery, change the wheel offset, it's got to be a safer option. I wouldn't extend the studs, with a spacer that uses extended wheel studs the studs can flex and the spacer can move about, increasing the chance that the studs can fail due to fatigue. Essentially you are trying to mount the wheel 30mm (or whatever you choose) from the stud's mounting point. If you intend competing with the vehicle in an MSA competition then extended wheel studs aren't allowed and currently the maximum thickness of the wheel spacer is 25mm although I believe that is likely to change next year.

I've had good experiences with a couple of the autocraft4x4 guys but the midland one is particularly unhelpful. He's really awful at replying to questions and he rarely takes a photo of the item, even if you ask him to. A typical example would be the bulkhead loom he was selling, listed as "td5 bulkhead loom". I asked what the spec was, did it have elec. windows, central locking, air con and so on. The reply was "it's off a 90". It's a shame as he seems to have some good gear but I can't be doing with sellers who can't be bothered to describe or photo what they are selling and then won't answer questions when you ask. As I say though, I've bought from other autocraft4x4 (Essex ?) and they've been very helpful and communicative.

If you've got the bulkhead stripped off already, why not just replace it with a second hand one ? There's always a few available in good nick, or at least better than yours I have one in the garage that you could take away for a few beer tokens but I'm sure you'll be able to find one closer to you.

I've run a few 3.9 engines with the hotwire EFI and no speed sensor input and have never had any issues. I don't know if anyone's reverse engineered the ECU to see what it actually does with the speed input but I'm guessing it'll be used to effect the extra air valve, perhaps to improve engine braking ??? and maybe to adjust the mixture at cruise ??? I doubt the effect is noticeable though and I've certainly never seen an adverse effect. Some 3.9 hotwires came from the factory without a speed sensor, the ones I've come across also seem to be the ones without lambdas so maybe there is a link there ?

Assuming it's a ZF auto, the answer isn't completely straight forward... The oil cooler is in line with the torque convertor so in normal operation the oil flowing out of the torque convertor goes to the oil cooler and then returns to the valve block. IIRC the output in this case is the one on the side of the box with the return to the one under the box. (This is from memory though !). The problem with your question is that, when the gearbox locks the torque convertor it does so by reversing the oil flow through the torque convertor which also means the flow through the oil cooler changes direction at the same time. The short answer is therefore, that depends The temperature sensor is normally located on the end of the oil cooler and, as above, can be on the input or the output of the cooler depending on the direction of flow at the time...

I think those are mainly "recovery straps" rather than kinetic ropes though ? Kinetic ropes have a much greater stretch and store a lot more energy than a recovery strap which, IIRC, only stretches to around 20% of it's original length. I carry and use an ARB recovery strap which I use both for simple recovery and towing having seen them and used them in Oz and been very impressed with them. They are not a KERR though in the form that was developed/used by the military to recover tanks. They are a sort of 'KERR Lite" and, partly as a result of their limited stretch, aren't used in the same "banzai" method that KERR tends to be used. We banned KERR from club events many years ago after taking the decision that we couldn't control or monitor their use and the risk involved was much higher than any other form of recovery. This followed a particularly close escape where a recovery shackle took out the windscreen of the vehicle being recovered when a recovery point gave way (it tore the spreader plate out of the chassis). Fortunately the shackle hit the windscreen at the top so it both smashed the windscreen and bent the roof of the vehicle, the roof absorbing most of the impact and stopping the shackle entering the passenger compartment (although I doubt they ever got a windscreen back into the frame !).

If you remove the wheel arch flares you can use a ratchet with a long extension to reach the bulkhead bolts as it leaves a gap between the inner and outer wing. As above you only need to slacken them off a turn or so although I find it's easier to get the wing off if you wind them out completely. The flares are attached with a plastic rivet.. normally anyway. use a pin punch to push the centres out of them and they just pull out.

Did you contact Bill like I suggested ? Glad to see you got it sorted anyway

Never mind telling Paddocks, make sure the CC companies know the source. If Paddocks aren't PCIDSS compliant they can get hit with a hefty fine and possible withdrawal of their CC facility, which might encourage them to sort their security out. After all, what do they lose if someone gets access to your card details ? There is also a very good statistical chance (about 80%) that the fraud is being perpetrated by one of their staff.

On an 8274 there's no point in using air to operate the original free spool (even if you could) as with all those gears to drag against "free spool" is more of a vague hope than a reality. The advantage of the gigglepin and the Australian freespools is that they disconnect at the drum, completely removing drag. The Australian one has an adjuster to allow you to add drag to stop the drum spinning when you stop pulling the rope out. As for the compressor, the latest ARB has a very good output and is far more capable than the old ones, however, I found the smaller reservoir meant that any leak in the lines would leave the compressor "pulsing" as a small loss of air reduces the pressure below the switch on point and the compressor charges it so quickly that it only runs for a second or two. I fitted an additional air receiver under the floor that sorted out both the pulsing and also makes blowing up four Simex more efficient.

Bill Shurvinton is where I normally get my kits/parts from, he seems to have a good stock in the UK so can ship pretty quickly. Listed in the official suppliers list http://www.msextra.com/viewtopic.php?f=94&t=22372 under "Bill's Bedroom' and I think he hangs around on LR4x4 sometimes. He's in Reading BTW.

Assuming you are using MS1 new CPUs cost £13 each. In the long term you'd be better off just buying a new CPU. However, you could modify the code and hardware to use a spare port but I'm not sure how big a job that would be. You could probably get most of the way there by using the user defined output triggering off the RPM ? That way you don't modify the MS code and it can all be done in hardware and MT.

A well set up new engine will cost you around $8000 plus shipping (air freight is roughly $1000 for an engine). That's a turnkey engine so complete with everything you need including fuel pump, regulator, filters and so on. Plumb it in, connect a few wires and away you go in theory. They are available second hand and seem to be quite easy to get hold of in the US and Australia but not so easy to get hold of in the UK although they do come up occasionally. There are a couple of places selling LS engines in the UK with UK stock but they've been less than helpful or knowledgeable when I've contacted them regarding spares and equipment as all they seem to be doing is shipping in turnkey engines and selling them on. Even with the current exchange rate it works out cheaper to buy from the US and fly the engine over than it is to buy from the UK suppliers. IMV you're better off building a relationship with a decent US based supplier and dealing with them direct rather than through an intermediary. http://turnkeyenginesupply.com/

I don't know a lot about the Hemi engines, they didn't really come into the equation when I fitted my LS1. The LS1 is slightly smaller and lighter than the Rover V8 and has many of the features "as standard" that RV8s have had to have shoe horned into them over a period of time. The attraction of a V8 that, rather than being a series of band-aids stuck on an aging design, was designed using relatively modern techniques and production processes was a real attraction to me. The LSx is also a pleasure to work on compared to the RV8. In terms of value for money you really can't get much better than an LSx at the moment if you're looking for something with a bit more power than your standard RV8. Having said that though the Hemi does seem to come in at around the same price from turnkey suppliers although they don't seem to be as widely available or come in as many option packages as the "ubiquitous" Chevy. Nowadays I suspect the main reason for choosing the LSx is simply because it's been done often enough now for people to start to feel comfortable that it's a good alternative to an RV8 and will fit in with a minimum of fuss. Imagine paying upwards of £5000 to import an engine you weren't certain could be made to fit and match the requirements of your vehicle. I'm sure if the Hemi were better known over here as an alternative engine that slotted in as easily as the LSx, there would be as many Hemis as there are LSx engines. I'd probably never have gone the LS1 route had I not been involved in fitting one to another Defender first.

I keep all my shackles, snatch blocks etc... in an ammo box, they are cheap, robust and water tight.

My 3.9 LPG Disco ES used to return around 16MPG. There is no way anyone is getting 25MPG out of a Petrol or gas 3.9, the best you'll get on petrol is around 20MPG and LPG always returns less MPG. Even a TD5 can struggle to get 25MPG at times !

Assuming you have a ZF gearbox then you are probably mistaking the 3rd/4th change for 4th/lock up. It would be normal for the gearbox to lock up at around 50. When the torque convertor locks up you will get a drop in revs as if the gearbox has changed up a gear. If you want to check for sure, try manually shifting into 3rd to see how that compares at 50.

You can also drive the Land Rover coil packs with EDIS8, as fitted to Thor 4.0 and 4.6 engines. this has the advantage that you can buy "off the shelf" HT leads if you mount the packs behind the V like Land Rover did. Not as easy to get hold of second hand but if you do stumble on a set or don't mind buying new (buy the full assembly complete with mounting bracket as it's cheaper than the individual coils), they are worth considering. It also means you can easily treat yourself to an off the shelf set of good quality HT leads from Magnecore or similar.

Get someone to rock the steering from side to side while you look at the panhard rod bushes, if there's noticeable movement in them, replace the bushes. Also check that the bolts aren't moving. Steering dampers don't do anything useful so it's unlikely you'll notice any difference if you renew them but won't do any harm either.

You need to look at the log files yourself if you have concerns. Look for areas that correspond to the bins in question and see what the EGO is doing at that point. Running analyse in MLV isn't the only thing you need to tune the engine, you need to look at the log yourself, see what's happening when you're in those areas. If the EGO is high and Analyse is recommending a reduction in VE value then fine, if EGO shows low (weak) then you have a problem. Remember that the VE bins are there as a correction to an underlying calculation, they are not an absolute value. There is no need, in theory, to increase fuelling as RPM increases because the fuelling is calculated/injected per revolution. Just because an engine is running at 4000 RPM doesn't mean it needs more fuel per revolution than it would at 400 RPM. The engine capacity doesn't change with RPM, the injectors don't change with RPM, all you are doing is compensating for differences caused by air intake, exhaust and ignition advance. Your peak torque and peak power positions will also have an effect on required fuelling. The 72 figure at top left is probably there because you've never managed to get the engine into that state while logging, near full engine load/throttle at 600 RPM isn't something you'd expect to sustain so you'll never get anything meaningful in there using MLV. I'd be quite impressed if you ever managed to get the engine into that area of the map