uninformed

Hey all, in the near future I’ll be looking for a full width intercooler for a 300Tdi 110. I was looking at Alisport, but it seems a few blokes here in Aus have had problems with them cracking etc. Is this a known problem with this brand or others. What other brands worth a look? Serg

OEM doesnt nessecarily mean LR

1000s of maxi drive HD drag links and track rods sold over the years and have not heard of them causing failure of the other steering componets... The stock steering links are completely under done. Trying to excuse or reason this is just BS IMO

Typical LR pig headedness... The drag link and track rod has been a known problem or many many DECADES, yet they did nothing about it. Ive seen them bent on LRs that have never been offroad!

Im not sure if things have changed or not... But back when Longfield (Bobby Long) was getting his CVs made it was by RCV (then known as Rockford Aeromatic) He started the "small ball" idea to increase bell thickness... Problem is it creates a larger stress riser as the load is flowing through a smaller contact point due to the smaller radius. I think he ended up going away from this. AFAIK Ashcrofts gets theirs made by RCV as well? I think Ashcrofts fit the market well, I guess if you are breaking theirs maybe time to reconsider the complete diff/axle set up . Is there anyone else making high quality AM cvs for LRs?

What material are they made from? Any idea of heat treat hardness? Have they changed the ball size or other component sizes?

Ok, need some help with 2 hubs I have, They will be the second generation of coil sprung disc brake hubs. First gen being up to 1985. So im guessing 1986-93 maybe?. They look identical to the hub in the pic. They measure the same seal depth and inner bearing seat depth as it (I believe the one in the pic to be early RRC) But they have smaller bearing spacing (by about 9mm or so) One has a WMS to rotor mounting surface (RMS) of ~38.4mm (same as early RRC) and the other ~22.4mm

hmmm adding more weight and a material that will make the steel and other metals rust/corrode etc faster than the Aluminium. I would not think that a good idea. Wouldnt it be better to hot dip gal the steel parts in contact with the Aluminum?

There is NO replacement for this alternator. Neither genuine or aftermarket. The only option is the M&D modified custom alternator. Some repairs are possible but not everything of course.

Thanks, I had read that thread at some point lol... so many searches my head hurts. Yes those stubs pictured, and the ones on your Sals, will MOST PROBABLY be FRC8540. The second stub to be fitted to drum brake rear 110 and 90 according to parts catalogues. This change happend about 1986? and ran through untill the 110 went to discs in 1994. Funny that both the 90 and 110 have the same part number/stub axle as NORMALLY I thought the rover rear end had the stub axle locate internally in the axle flange where as the Sals has the stub locate around the dia of the axle flange I am hearing some confirmation, but yet to comfirm with my own eyes and measuring that there is indeed 3 different wheel bearing spacings. It will take not only the stubs but also the hubs to prove this. Im slowly buying bits or sourcing tem to do so....

Hi all, Im after a early disco 1 89-? parts catalogue and RRC 87-94? parts catalogue. I have the 90 and 110 versions Western linked and have searched the interweb a fair bit but no luck. any help appreicated. Cheers Serg

I have Edited what I think was my mistake. IT appears FRC8540 could actually be a narrower bearing space stub axle. It definitely is a flat sided thread end, NOT slotted. FRC8540 is definitely 110 rear drum brake. I think the change over was 1987. The slotted one in the pics above is going to be FRC3132, early 110, drum brake.

Id much rather a LS3 than anything LR makes.....

Ill try and add as much data to this thread as I can, it may become a useful reference? attached pics are of 110 rear SALS stub axles. FRC8540 - slotted key way, wide bearing space, drum brake. FTC1740 - flat section for lock tab washer, narrow bearing space, disc brake. There may be another 110 stub from the very early 110's but Im not sure? I have even heard that there was a narrow bearing stub on drum brakes but no data on this? If anyone wants to add pics and data, please do so and be specific if you are definite or not on part number, vehicle type please

I get what you are saying about the packing washer on the slotted stub is thinner. But to my eye, even though the threaded section is longer on the slotted stub, the same section (not just the thread, but also the smooth on the same dia section) of the flat'd stub looks longer. Again, to me the witness marks do look different. (am I the only one seeing that?) I have looked at these pics over and over, and while there may be some error of parralax going on, it appears to me to be different. Also take into account the flat'd stub has an extra spigot on the axle housing end. yet over all they look similar heights But we are still unsure of which LR stub that flat'd one is???

Snagger, do you think the other stub in those photos is FRC8005? Looking at the total arrangement as shown in the IPL, either the later FRC8005 has to be longer overall for the bearing spacing to remain the same, OR the bearing spacing gets reduced and the stub stays a similar length. There is now a spacer to go with that seal you mention that sits between the outer bearing and inner nut. Have a lookjust below the threaded section on both. And then the smooth section the bearing runs on. Clearly some difference in length and design. Given they look very close to same OA length/height I have to think the bearing spacing IS reduced. Funny thing is there is 2 different REAR stub axles for the LR 90 during its drum brake era FRC3132 - stub axle - sloted for lock tab - wide bearing spacing - rear, drum brake FRC8540 - stub axle - flat spot for washer lock tab - bearing spacing ?? - rear, drum brake Then they go to the disc rear end FTC3188 - Stub axle - flat spot for washer lock tab - narrow bearing spacing - rear, disc brake Ill add more later. Off to work now cheers Serg

I dont think its that simple... From my RRC parts catalogue and searching online for Disco 1 (early first of run), im getting FRC8005 stub and FRC8532 (superseded to FTC1457) for RRC July 85 and on and Disco 1 (first type) When I google search FRC8005 stub I came across this thread: https://landroverfaq.com/viewtopic.php?t=260 I cant read French. But the pics in it show the same stub as mine posted in this thread and a stub that I am seeing on google image search as FRC8005. Look at the bearing cup seat marks and the space between them. IMO there is clearly a difference. Thoughts?

ok If these are early RRC that would make them 593681 for the stub axle FRC5927 for the hub Now I note there are 2 different oil seals for the hub. RTC3508 - 8mm thick and RTC3511 - 12mm thick. That makes me think that the 2 very similar but different hubs I have (one of which is pictured above) are both these and its the seal depth/thickness that may be the difference. As I said in my first post, They look identical, the WMS to rotor MS is the same distance, as is the wheel bearing spacing. The only difference is in overall width of hub and thats at the seal end. Can anyone confirm that stub axle FRC8005 and its corrosponding hub FRC8532 are a smaller/narrower wheel bearing spacing?

Bronze bush is going to be front for cv is it not? Yes im thinking early RRC. And has to be a rear given the dia of the spigot at mounting face of stub axle. Plus the offset from the WMS to the rotor MS would also indicate a rear over a front I think. Definitely pre ABS.

btw who ever designed this forum, hands down easiest to attach pics ever! well done

thanks guys, aprreciated. for some reason my gut tells me earlier RRC? stupid question, does a series drum braked hub look anything like a disc brake hub? these pics are of the matching hub and stub. lets just try and id these first

are you sure they were "testing for a sports model"... or just celebrating the original and its designer Charles Spencer KIng

Hi all, I have some stubs and hubs from what I believe a coil sprung rover rear end. Numbers stamped on the stub I can see HRC 1363 and on its matching hub HRC 1362. These are what I can tell wide bearing, they do not have a large cut out hole in the outer edge face of the mounting surface. They have the key way rather than large flat.I believe them to be rear as they have the outer lip on the mounting surface and no allocation for the bronze bush etc. The other hub I have has stamped 571764 or could be 571784. These are just hubs no stubs with them. There is approx 3mm difference in overall height between these two hubs I have. The WMS to rotor mounting surface distance is the same for both, the bearing distance is the same for both. From what I can see the longer one is longer on the seal end of the hub. any help appreciated cheers Serg

Filler neck hole.... nope dont have one of those. 90 rear section.....hmmm I seem to remember saying that would be expensive and hard to find...... 90's were not sold here until late in their run. Engineering will be required only if I finish the damn thing lol I have a few other mods up my sleeve to do so I figured once in, all in Landroverforever - thanks, that would be great. Im assuming the LR measurement is to the inside web of the rear crossmember as the way its drawn is not to a exact line on the drawing, but the rear cross member has the flanges overhang the inside web... is the rear 90 fuel tank td5 onwards, or were they tdi?

no idea what a IVA is? Probably doesnt apply to Australia?? A 90 rear chassis section would be hard to find here and worth a second mortage but heres the measurement even if LR doesnt use the rear of the rear cross member as the reference?? http://workshop-manuals.com/landrover/defendertd5/panel_repairs/land_rover_90_chassis/