ToyRoverlander

Any updates? This is one cool RRC !

Why not keep the computer and benefit from having it chipped.... 170hp/350nm, not to mention the petrol-engine kind of throttle response and the willingness to easily pull to 5k rpm is quite a lot of fun (mine is in a E30 )

What are those and where exactly do they go? I want to make a 4door softtop so mine doesn't have all the fittings on the tub. I'm trying to work out what I need. So that will be the things you describe above plus 10, I think, of those loops or whatever you call them that fit to the side of the tub, where you hook the rope behind. Correct?

Have got it on the front of the Disco. Dual swaybars, drives like a dream . Fuel econonmy is good too when you keep the speed below 100kph (about 11ltr/100km). The tent opens over the passenger side (rhd vehicle).

An auto will solve this, plus it will be way kinder on the rest of the driveline.

You're kidding right? D60's are way stronger than a sals. Sure, the diff is basically the same but then LR ruined it by fitting their 24spline shafts ..

80Series Cruiser! nuff said

Sounds like yours worked better than mine ever did (when I still had drums). I started with non assisted drums and they were terrifying. I'm very tall too so my legs are in a Z-shape that seriously reduces the amount of push you can give the pedal. The brakes I've got now are fantastic for me, not much pressure is needed to flip the seats forward and let the windows slide open by themselves . Next thing to do is clutch-assist.... same problem with the seating position (legs in Z-shape) and a very heavy clutch (Toy clutch, LR master).

Guess you never experienced REAL brakes rears, 335x18 ventilated fronts, 311x32 ventilated, 4piston calipers and extra large pads AWESOME!!!!!!

Have a read here: http://forums.lr4x4.com/index.php?showtopic=60293

That's always a good thing Just found this pic. This is how mine was setup, see the big u-joint angle at the diff? U-joint angle at the t-case was practically zero.... Vibrations anyone?? Didn't notice them in 2wd, but in 4wd it would rattle like mad even at low speeds (25mph).

Interesting... I indeed used rear spring plates of an 88". Shocks never did hit anything.

That's a good idea, there's great info on there! Just an FYI, there's no need to modify the spring plates, you can use the rear spring plates of an 88". Gives the exact same result, but without all the effort

From what I've read is that stock dana44's are stronger than rover axles (duhh....). And if you want more strenght, there's is lots of aftermarket support for these axles.

How I did it was also a compromise. I needed the front end to come up a fair bit as it was sitting so low compared to the back end (heavy motor, soft springs). But it was a terrible compromise to be honest. I'll give you an example of one of the bad things. When greenlaning, driving over pot holed dirt roads, the front wheels would constantly kick left to right when going through the potholes and you could feel each and every pothole while it jerked the steering wheel left to right. VERY annoying I can tell you! Think long and hard about doing that as you will hate how it drives afterwards! Perhaps the simplest compromise is taller bumpstops so the driveshaft won't hit the engine mount under braking.

Aren't they Dana44's?

I reckon it's a great idea! My 109 used to have non-assisted drums which were terrible! You really had to stand on the pedal to get the thing to stop. Tall people (long legs) have their legs in a real weird Z-shape position which makes it harder to press down on the pedal and in my case it hurts on the knees. I know have huge ventilated discs front an back and it really is a revelation to have GOOD brakes! Not much pedal pressure and enourmous brake force. If I were to fit larger tyres I would be looking at hydro-boost if only to keep the light pedal pressure. Why would I 'have to live with it' when it can be a lot lighter and more comfortable? The clutch, same story... when offroad it hurts my knee because it's so damn heavy (LR master, Toy slave and clutch). Luckily I know a source for a booster so that will be installed soon.

Thanks! BAD idea! I don't know why the front driveshaft gets close to the engine mount.. what did you do? What's your castor angle? When it's set like a coiler the diff points up quite high which might cause that problem. You're better off compromising the castor angle a bit (increasing it to 6-7 degrees or so). That lowers the nose of the diff. Making silly long shackles has some serious disadvantages. When viewed from the side the leaf springs will be on an angle (front mount way higher than shackle end of spring). That creates a lot of dive when you hit the brakes. Offroad, when articulating, the side with the drooped wheel will have a big arch in the spring and it tends to bend the spring when power is applied to that axle creating wheel hop. It's not a positive way of putting power to the ground. The flatter the spring (arch in spring and position of spring under vehicle) the better! When I had RRC axles under my 109' I had a 10degree castor angle to keep the diff nose down. Clearance between tierod and springs was measured in mm's though. Steering gets heavier that way and when bits like steering joints and such are worse the 'castor slap' (death wobble) becomes a bit of a problem when hitting potholes at low speed. That's a before and after shot of my front suspension. The before shot shows the RRC axles and the rear springs up front which are at too big of an angle under the vehicle and gives the problems I described above. I got this angle because the shackle mount wasn't a bush in the chassis but was positioned underneath the chassis combined with one-ton shackles. After shot shows revised spring position with bush in chassis, nice shackle angle and the Toy axle. Power delivery to the axle is WAY better. No wheelhop, well I do get a bit at max articulation but it's a leaf spring after all. No massive brake dive and unloading on hillclimbs. And no need anymore for a massive slipjoint in the front driveshaft. With the old situation the axle moved more than 2" in either direction while articulating. Just saying.....

You can buy them in the states. They're 2.5" wide, axletube is 80mm diameter. Other thing you need to look out for is that the hole where the leaf spring centre bolt sits in is the correct size. Fronts are 12mm and rears 16mm IIRC. I made them myself from 5mm wall box section. Easy as pie. I made them very large to help resist spring wrap. Staying SUA they don't need to be so large.

Another happy user here of paddocks parabolics. Even in a SOA configuration, 3leaf rears on a heavy 109, they work very well! Mate of mine has them too, 4leaf in SOA config and no issues whatsoever. I did dislike the front springs though, waaaaaay to soft.

Mine is home-made . Doesn't matter that yours goes down, the only ones you can't use are the ones that attach to the back door so that when you open the door the carrier swings with it.

Just an FYI. I took it off the backdoor as the doorframe was cracked in multiple places (quite a common problem)and I've fitted a tyre carrier..

Put 80series axles under it. They got HUGE brakes, and if you don't think they're good enough slap some grooved/drilled discs and green stuff (or whatever) pads on it. These axles will also handle the increase in power and give you a better turning circle . (311x35 vented front discs, 4pot caliper. 335x18 vented rear discs, single pot sliding caliper). I've got them under my 109' with front pads from a 100series (physically bigger than 80series pads), brakes are awesome!

And now in english ?

It does! I know of at least 2 110's with Toy 4.2's in them. One of them is here in the netherlands, it's, IIRC, the 24Valve version with the autobox and everything. Should be awesome when finished!