130 Overland

Hello All. I just want to share a few thoughts and points of interest about our galvanised chassis project. Yes, I know, it is yet another thread about galvanised chassis but I hope someone might find it useful! The rear chassis cross member on our 1998 300 TDi 110, called Lottie, was starting to go. MoT time was coming up. What to do? The chassis rails at the rear seemed ok for now. I researched replacement rear chassis cross members and ordered one from Bearmach via one of their dealers. That was a mistake! As soon as I opened the packaging it was obvious that the body mounting brackets were welded on ad hoc. The centre one was very noticeably off centre, so much that it would have been obvious when packing it to send to me! Why bother welding them on at all if they cannot put them somewhere near where they are needed? The general quality was poor and I would not have been happy hitching 3.5 tons on to it! I was not fit for purpose and I photographed the cross member and emailed the photos to Bearmach, three times, but they could not be bothered to respond. So, after the big knock to our enthusiasm for the job it was already time for a rethink. After talking with a local LR workshop they said that the quality of a lot of rear cross members that customers source and supply themselves for the workshop to weld on are of such poor quality that they refuse to weld them! This follows our experience and does not inspire confidence! They also pointed out that the rear quarter chassis, over the rear axle, will be next to go so consider getting a rear cross member with long 'legs'. Of course the item price is getting higher and considering extra work like the fuel tank having to be dropped the labour time and cost is getting higher. In fact the cost was now spoiling £1k ! And still the quality of the products available was dubious. Time for another rethink, methinks! How much do we love and use Lottie? How long do we want to keep her? What about a quality new galvanised chassis? How much will that cost by comparison? After not too much contemplation it seemed a logical decision to have a quality new galvanised chassis. So which one? Marsland are OEM (?) but come with the TD5 rear cross member. Apparently the earlier rear cross member can be fitted by special order (?). A consideration here is that we do of heavy towing and we have the Dixon Bate adjustable height drop plate fitting on which we use their Shock Link, all of which is not cheap and serve us well, but I understand do not fit the TD5 cross member (?). The Marsland chassis do have extra thickness in the places that matter though. Richards' fabricate their chassis themselves and they come with the pre TD5 cross member and matches what we have. Interestingly they can fabricate just about any chassis from Series to 130. They do not have the extra thickness in places, but then the complete chassis is that little bit thicker gauge steel anyway. Swings and roundabouts.... Our preference was tilting towards Richards. At the time there was a long waiting list due to large orders from Europe, which encourages confidence in the product. The order was placed with Richards and the long wait started, which turned out to be not long at all. So now our thoughts are directed to how to collect it and bring it home or to the local LR workshop or have it delivered. Whether or not to have it painted, by who and where? If it is delivered to our home I can paint it but then I have to get it to the workshop. I do not have the skills or time to do everything at home. Another option which was becoming very appealing by its simplicity was the working connection that Richards have with Marsden Auto Developments (MAD). MAD is Paul Marsden. (I had to be careful that I did not write Paul Marsden is MAD!!). Anyway, he is a sound chap, knows his stuff and is easy to deal with. His workshop is just metres away opposite the Richards premises and he does chassis swaps for them. He has done lots of them so he knows what he is doing and Richards are happy with his work so it all looks good. Paul likes to have the vehicle for two weeks for the complete body off chassis swap. But then fate intervened and made the whole process quicker. The ever helpful Tracy from Richards rang me to say that as MAD had a cancellation coming up soon and would I like to take the two week slot, and they could have our new chassis ready, so I grabbed the opportunity and booked Lottie in. So that makes the whole process simple and easy. I would drive Lottie to their premises in Swinton, South Yorkshire, (with a guided tour of their fabrication workshops - quite impressive), leave her there and travel home on the train. Two weeks later I would do it in reverse, catch a train to Swinton and pick up Lottie with the new shiny chassis fitted and drive home. Simple! But what about painting the chassis? There was no facility or time to get the chassis painted. But did it really need painting anyway? Having owned and used and abused the likes of Ifor Williams galvanised trailers I am happy that the 'bare' galvanised chassis would last well enough and long enough. Certainly there is the usual caveat about washing off road salt etc.. Another train of thought as was told to me is this...before painting, a mordant solution needs to be applied to the galvanised steel. This etches into the galv to give a base for the paint to adhere to. This, as explained to me, actually reduces the layer of protection just so another layer of protection, the paint, can be added. Hmmm... Now, I have read a lot about whether or not to paint a galv chassis but this view on it is not one that is shouted out loud, but does make basic sense. Or does it? What do you think? I have seen bare galvanised chassis on Defenders and I don't dislike the look anyway. But another consideration is that thieves do like the look! The factory fitted immobiliser has had to be isolated because it had a mind of its own! But they can be bypassed easily enough by knowledgeable thieves anyway so I have invested in some very visible mechanical anti theft devices! A Tracker type device is also being researched. It is now three months on from the fitting and I love the look of Lottie, and the galv is starting to tone down nicely. At her age of 18 years we look on Lottie as a rolling restoration, replace rusty doors etc., but with a chassis that will last for donkey's years it gives us the encouragement that all our future fettling will be worth doing. As I said above, just another galv chassis thread but just maybe someone might find it useful..... Hope it helps. Bob.

They have made it north up Alaska, and with granted special permission to cross the oil fields, they reached the Arctic Ocean. Mission accomplished. Congratulations.

Blimey, we live and we learn! Covers for beacons! In 1981 I went to police training school (Bruche, Warrington) and we were never told this and this is the first time I have ever heard of it. Mind you, if we had to learn the ins and outs of absolutely everything I would still be there! Thanks OP, it has got me thinking though! With 21 years of driving vehicles with (blue) beacons on I got used to having them. When I did rally recovery (with Western) I had a fixed amber beacon on the roof of my 110, a requirement for entering rally stages. Now retired and not doing rally recovery either, we bought an ex AA VW Transporter van at auction. Guess what? It still had the beacons on and we never thought to take them off. With our current 110 I put on a full width beacon, ironically off another ex AA van, when I got involved with 4x4 response, but I could see where that was not going, and was already leaving when the local County Council refused to accept them, so I thought I would take the beacons off. That was a few years ago and I still have not got around to it but they have proved useful since. Like I said, I am so used to having beacons I do not notice them but I am glad they are there when I need them. In this busy safety conscious world I cannot ever imagine any bobby reporting anyone for not having a cover on the beacon. Yes, the list of authorised vehicles exists, but these days council vehicles, company vehicles etc., can be used for many uses, not just those listed, and employers are conscious that their staff are in ever more danger working on or beside a road these days. I can see Health and Safety having a fit if an employee was expected to climb on to the roof of his hi-roof van to put a cover on the beacon. And if he does not risk life and limb, the Crown Prosecution Service will prosecute? No, not in the public interest. It will never happen. These days on our busy fast paced roads the more highly visible protection you have the better! Be safe! One recent winter we were in our ex AA van on a dark night with thick fog on a dual carriageway. The traffic suddenly came to a stand in both lanes. Hazards on but rather ineffective in the fog. Looking intently in the rear view mirror I could see the water particles of the fog start to lighten as a vehicle approached. A quick flash of the full with beacons and the fog turned to flashing orange. At this time the headlights were starting to become discernable in the fog, but immediately on flashing the beacons I could see that the front of the vehicle was diving under heavy braking. He stopped behind us in time and I was thankful that I did not have to climb up the back of the van to take a cover off the beacons! The second vehicle stopped in the same manner, but did not put his hazards on! Not only that but he was effectively blanking the hazards of the car in front of him and those on our van! So when the third vehicle approached the high level beacons on our van were even more essential!! I challenge any bobby and CPS to prosecute me for preventing a multiple pile-up with my uncovered beacons! With our 110 we have recently been towing a twin axle trailer with a 2.5 ton digger on it. Often, we have to stop on the side of a busy main road to load or offload the digger. With the trailer tailgate down and ramps up, the trailer hazards are barely visible. Furthermore, the 110 hazards are essentially blocked by the digger. The roof mounted full width beacon is essential for safety. So I say beacons are a good thing! Be seen. Safety first. Bob.

Yes Cynic-al !! I can see that you are indeed being cynical. I get it! President Putin is building a road across Russia for the same reason the Romans built their roads over here. Back to the expedition..... an interesting project and good to see the original Landy still about. It helps to go to show and remind Joe Public that a large percentage of the Landy's ever built are still in existence.

Yes Ralf, you and me both. Very enjoyable events and I still have my overalls and polo shirt and often think how Tim and his magazine articles articles had inspired me. Bob.

Just a quick thought..... I appreciate this is a Disco and it probably is the fob...... But just in case, I will mention that I had a similar problem on my 1998 Defender with factory fitted immobiliser away from home one dark night. I called the RAC and he found a poor earth on one of the immobiliser wires.

Do not take it on the road at all without insurance. Suppose a truck hit you and wrote the Landy off? You have lost every penny you have ever invested in it. Or you injure somebody? You could be personally sued for every penny you had. Not good! Insure first, then pre book an MoT. You are then legally allowed to take the Landy directly to the appointment, then if it fails, directly home or directly to another place where remedial work will be done. Another thought, if you get picked up by one of those mobile camera vans and the DVLA computer shows the vehicle is not insured, you will be hammered in court. Cheers, Bob.

Yes. Tis me! Long time away and forgot my log in, who I am or was, so started again! It's an age / too many ales thing! Cheers, Bob.

A regular discussion every year that it snows! It would seem to me after reading this discussion for many years is ..... the jury is still out! The points raised above are vey good and equally valid! Put the chains on the back and perhaps lose steering ability, put them on the front and the back end might come around to join you at the front. All I can suggest is read the answer, think about it and make your own choice! Cheers, Bob.

G4FUJ ..... That was a nice bit of kit you had, shame you sold it! Many happy memories with you and Western on Rally Recovery. Caerwent in the photo. ELVIS .... I have had and run three 130's, a Rapier, a Double CabPick Up,( both sold) and currently one with a body similar to a Pulse ambulance. I have had no problems apart from the obvious bigger turning circle. This can be helped by using greater offset wheels or wheel spacers. You will find the extra carrying capacity of a 130 to be a real boon. Cheers, Bob.

He he! C18RCH, you and me were both typing at the same time, but as I am a newbie I have had to wait for moderation. Thanks for putting that footage on this post. As I write this my other post I refered to is not yet on the system and I wonder if you or some other clever computer savvy person could put the clip on to that post. I don't think it could be considered as duplication as the new post is for the good press, if you see what I mean? (Isn't it confusing trying to have a conversation when it takes hours to reply / update a post! and comments become out of sequence! I do understand why it has to be though!))

I have just posted 'Defender rescues man trapped in car in flood'. So thankfully some happier news and some good press!

After posting 'These idiots give us all a bad name' yesterday it is pleasing to have some positive press.... On a clip on BBC West news at lunchtime today is a piece about a Defender going into deep water to drive to and rescue an elderly gent stuck in his car. The camera views through the Defender windscreen and shows the gent being assisted out of his car through a window by his rescuer standing on the Defender front bumper. Well done chaps, some positive press!

A few idiots have brought 4x4 bashing back into the headlines.... Quote... Rescue services in the West Midlands have appealed for drivers of 4x4's to stop taking unnescessary risks. They say a remarkable number of their call outs have been to people in four wheel drive vehicles. Nathan Hudson of West Midlands Ambulance Service said, "Perhaps surprisingly, we have had to deal with a remarkable number of stuck 4x4s. Just because your vehicle has four wheel drive does not make it amphibious. They too can become stuck in deep flood water. We would urge people to not try and get across flood water and instead take a short detour rather than become trapped in their car and have to be rescued" The warning follows a report from Warwickshire Police that three people who had decided to go off-road driving in the bad weather had become stranded and were stuck on the roof of their vehicle shouting abuse at rescue teams. .......Unquote So instead of the public and authorities hearing of good works and rescues by 4x4 lads and lasses in this spell of severe weather, the overiding image they take away is that of 4x4 drivers being complete idiots. Ho hum!

I can recommend the Roadhawk. If you have two or more vehicles put a bracket on each windscreen and just clip the camera onto the bracket, plug into the cigarette lighter and away you go. We have all had cars pull out in front of us and we have had to brake hard to avoid running into the back of them and the law says that if you do it must be your fault for driving too close! Wouldn't it be good to play back the video and show that the other driver was actually at fault! Why have the points taken off your licence when you can prove someone else was at fault? Take a look at the Roadhawk website and they usually have a demonstration clip. Many of the amazing accidents you will have seen on You Tube have been filmed on Roadhawk cameras. Ever wondered how on earth an accident happened? Many a Roadhawk camera footage has explained exactly what happened. Many crash for cash scams have been smashed by video evidence from Roadhawk cameras. I don't leave home without it! Bob.