monkie

Oh no. That is frustrating. Are you absolutely sure that is coming from where it looks like it is in the picture? Could it possibly be a leak from the rocker cover gasket making it's way down there and fooling you? If the answer is no to that optimistic solution then the next question is - have you noticed high crankcase pressure at all (when warm take the oil filler cap off and does it puff oil fumes out?) The head gasket isn't that hard a job to do on these engines except the head is iron so it is very heavy - best to have help to lift it off/back on again. Click Here for a good guide and I would recommend the following: Get a good composit head gasket i.e Elring (land rover part # ERR3618) not a cheap one unless you enjoy doing this particular job and want to do it again soon You will need new injector seals (land rover part # 12H220L) and make sure you get the old ones out of the head first! Make sure the head and block surfaces are clean and flat. Take the head to an engineering shop if necessary for a check and skim. Clean the threads on the head bolts and block (1/2 UNF thread) then wipe them with an oily cloth (don't dip them in oil) Its a good opportunity to check the condition of the valve seats and give them a grinding if necessary

Sender and wire replaced. Gave it a good run today up some steep hills to get the oil hot. Not even a flicker of a warning light at hot tick over. Very pleased to have fixed this for under a fiver and less than half an hour's work

Its a long time ago now, but I seem to remember two separate issues at the time that the press were talking about. Phasing out leaded petrol as far as I remember (I was still at school so it does seem a foggy memory to me) did seem to coincide with the introduction of catalytic converters fitted to cars and yes there was much published about poising your catalyst if you fill up with 4star. I do also remember the environmental part being on the news. I think it was also a similar time to when there was a lot in the news about acid rain and they were showing pictures of dead forests in Norway and Sweden then "smoke" coming from a car exhaust.

That's a nice graph. The average shows atleast a 1'C rise during the period shown. That is significant. Also the extreme higher temperatures seem to be getting more frequent.

No, it was a massive problem because Lead is a toxic metal. The lead from car exhausts finds its way into human and animal blood. It is particularly a problem for children as their brains are growing rapidly compared to adults. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0892036201001842?via%3Dihub

I have no idea. It's the CFCs and leaded petrol that I remember.

I completely share your view.

Out of interest, I'm sure I heard somewhere that it was the same scientist who came up the idea of using CFCs as a frigerant who also came up with the good idea of putting tetraethyl lead in petrol. If this is true, he certainly left his mark!

I think I can now relax. When the light came on I was starting to convince my self that the engine would have to come out again be taken to pieces! Sender and wire will be changed and then I can go back to worry free motoring... for a while. Thanks for your help again.

It was the 20 Psi at idle that I thought looked low. The other figures look okay to me. The land rover 90/110 workshop manual quotes 35-65Psi when warm at 2000 rpm.

Thank you Western. I did order from Turners in the week a new sender and also a new releif plunger+spring. You are spot on about the wire. the insulation is quite brittle and broken in places so that too could be the problem. I will change the sender and wire. For extra information, I use 15W-40 mineral oil and change it along with the filter every 6 months. Last done in February. When I took it for a drive this morning with the oil pressure gauge connected up, all seemed fine. No nasty noises.

I have a 19J that I rebuilt 2 years ago. Crank was reground and new main bearings put on. This is what I didn't do: Replace camshaft or bearings as cam had very little wear. Replace oil pump - all seemed fine and oil pressure tested okay after rebuild. Replace oil pressure sender. Last week I took it on a short drive into Yeovil working the engine well up a steep hill. When I got into town the oil pressure light flickered at tick over. When I got home the oil warning light was on even when I revved it. This gave me all sorts of worrying thoughts. Hooked it up to an oil pressure gauge and this is what I got: 65-60psi at idle when cold 40-50psi when warm and driving 20psi at idle when oil was at normal temperature That does seem low to me. I'm thinking that the oil pressure releif valve may need replacement. My question is would I get those readings if a cam bearing was on the move or would it be much lower?

Good to hear you got it running as it should do again after a bit of frustration.

The thing is about volcanoes, as far I know there is nothing we can do about it. The problem with the CO2 we make is the rate we are releasing it from locked up sources into the atmosphere in terms of the past few 10s thousands of years. I don't think that it can be denied that we are changing the climate and doing so fast. All forms of power generation require some power to put into them at times for example nuclear plants require energy to power coolant pumps when the reactor is off line. Wind and solar require something (usually gas) to fill the gap when the wind doesn't blow and the sun isn't out.

100% agree. There are lots of promising nuclear technologies that would solve the problem worldwide and allow us to stop wasting time and money on wind/solar which require gas as a backup. This is why I get quite angry about various governments forcing us through taxes and wasteful scrappage schemes to go down a particular route while they simultaneously do next to nothing about the above suggestion which would fix the problem long term.

Yes, the article mentions a study from Australia where they burn a lot of coal to produce much of their power. It comes back to that "flippant" picture I posted - I agree it is an over simplification, but there is truth in it. Sorting out air quality in towns and cities is important and Bowie69 makes a good point above, but I see that as a very short term solution. It's just moving the problem away from one place and dumping it in another.

At the time when I was studying chemistry about 18 years back when Hydrogen looked like a viable option they were looking at storing it absorbed on to a catalytic surface at a relatively low pressure (similar in principle to how acetylene gas is stored by dissolving it in acetone) rather than cryogenically storing it for the reasons you rightly point out. I don't know how far they got with this, I would imagine the materials cost would make it not commercially viable.

Using hydrogen in a car is great..... at the point of use as it just produces water. But.....In addition to the issues with Hydrogen already pointed out in terms of storage and making it commercially available to the public in a safe and easy to use form - the major problem with hydrogen is how do you produce it on an industrial scale? You either do what we currently do which is to produce it from natural gas and steam or you can pass massive amounts electricity through water which is very energy intensive for the amount of hydrogen you get and brings us straight back to the initial question of where do you get the energy from in the first place to do this? Also from a safety point of view if you use hydrogen in a fuel cell, some designs use some quite hazzardous materials that I wouldn't want in a car. I realise that I am sounding like Mr negative here; the reality is that our global demand for engergy whether that be for running cars, industry or our homes really isn't a simple problem to sort out by saying get an electric car or fit solar pannels on everyone's house. There are implications, some much more serious than others for what ever solution is put forward. From my point of view going from evidence I have seen and listened to, I think that long term we (the developed world) need to walk away as quickly as possible from fossile fuels, wind and solar (the latter two often require a fossile fuel back up and largely just confuse the energy mix making it look better than reality) and put some serious R&D into other alternative nuclear powered technologies that are gas or liquid based. The developing world in particular wants cheap energy dense power, renewables simply can't offer this where you need it to so they go for coal and oil instead. When large parts of the world opt for such carbon dense solutions, it makes our efforts seem almost irrelevant which is why I strongly stand firm in my view of focusing efforts on how we really intend to generate power long term. Instead it would seem that we are demonising diesel cars (I can't imagine petrol will be far behind when most people swing back to it and use dramically shifts again) and making us all feel better by sticking up a few solar and wind farms then patting each other on the back. A cynical view I will accept, but that is how I see it.

Don't worry, I don't take this personally. However I'm sorry, but I don't agree with it being utter nonsense. This is more complex than people realise. Flippant yes I agree , but there is a lot of truth in it. There has been much research published in scientific journals (not news papers) to say that an electric vehicle is only as green as their power source. Generating power by burning coal, oil or gas does put out alot of CO2 plus other gasses. If you run an electric car in a country that predominantly generates electricity from burning coal (China, Australia, South Africa) then you are doing no better interms of emmissions than an average petrol car doing 30 mpg. In the UK with our current energy mix an electric car is as good as a car doing 50-60 mpg. In Switzerland which is overall low carbon then you are probably doing equivalent to over 100mpg. Watch that video that I posted earlier. We are not at all in a clean energy revolution. Renewable energy is not 100% carbon free, it does not generate power all the time and it is still a minority contribution to how we generate power in the UK. I stand by my opinion; any government effectively forcing the public to ditch conventional vehicles in favour of plug in vehicles from an environmental point of view needs to first address how we generate electricity long term.

This is what I'm getting at given we generate most of electricity by burning things:

Yes, but it is how you do it if the political reason behind shifting everyone off diesel/petrol to electric is based around emissions and climate change.

For electric vehicles; Iong term I don't think batteries are going to be the main problem, they are improving albeit slowly. Its going to be how we as a whole generate energy in the first place. Personally I don't see wind and solar as the long term solution. Imagine if battery technolgy was good enough for many city drivers but we continue to do nothing about energy sources and lots of people all start plugging their cars in to the mains to charge them. This is an extemely interesting TED talk, 13ish minutes long....

I wish that they would scrap vehicle tax completely and just tax the fuel. That way the more you use the more you pay or vice versa, also you wouldn't have to remember to do it. It would also mean that if you drive a plug-in hybrid but don't plug it in as often as you should; then you would be paying a fairer share of tax. I think more and more company car drivers like me are going to get a plug-in hybrid as they can attract significantly less benefit in kind tax. Trouble is from an environmental point of view, they are unlikely to be plugged in and charged anywhere near as often as they should be.

Agree with Bowie69, I think the rods are designed to be the weaker part in the system for when this happens. The real damage occurs if the belt lets go when driving along at speed.

You recall correctly, my friends and I ran into this a while ago when plannning a trip to Le Mans. https://www.eurotunnel.com/uk/site-information/lpg/