Jump to content

jessejazza

Getting Comfortable
  • Content Count

    7
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About jessejazza

  • Rank
    Newbie

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Many thanks - couldn't think what you meant at first until I went to have a look at a tubeless rim for my kit car (forgotten I had hidden it up on a shelf in the shed). One can see the bead groove is there from both the outside and inside of the rim. Took a pic but can't insert the image it asks for a URL. Couldn't see any stamping 'tubeless' on the rim. As far as putting a tyre on presumably for tubeless one needs to have an airline to get enough air in there to force the tyre over the bead groove? So as I am intending to fit myself I presume I have to stay with the tubed rim and get the tubes. I remember someone saying that if fitting tubes one should buy tyres (for inner tubes) that have smooth internal walls - I have never seen such things. Were the 7.50 x 16 tyres smooth on the inside?
  2. Many thanks for confirming my thoughts but I wasn't sure. In your pic (right) it would seem one can still get tubeless rims (looks recent). Appreciate your prompt reply as I have got to get some off ebay. Only using 235/85x16 as that's what was on there - presumably as no overdrive gives a little more leg. Currently got a set of 205/75x16 fitted and engine revs a bit high at about 40-45mph.
  3. I would be grateful if someone can provide some guidance. Just been out to check on my S2 LWB to find that it would seem that inner tubes are on each rim with 7.50x16 tyres. Presumably the 7.50x16 has a smooth inside wall suitable for inner tubes? For the S3 SWB it would seem the PO was running 235/85x16 without tubes. If I recall correctly for tubeless rims one should have a shoulder each side of the rim to secure the bead which this rim does not have. Are folk fitting tubes OR is it a question of getting away with it? Maybe this is why folk fit Compomotive rims which being more modern have the shoulder.
  4. My first attempt - must be an easier way. The last part i found was the hardest *****629 (last but one pic) I had to stand on the rim and use the 2nd crowbar to rotate the rim out of the tyre. Note the blue scissor jack has a nut welded on - makes a scissor jack a useful bit of kit (once one has cut off the silly loop and added a nut). The crowbars were Gorilla 36". I thought I would give it a shot when ATS quoted me £18 per tyre - I found trouble getting 235/85 x 16 and got some on ebay for £75 each (then found the added bonus of being commercial tyres). My kit car is on axle stands (rear on wheels) and I wondered if it was worth a try. Be grateful for any tips inflating as one has got to seal the tyre against the rim first.
  5. It is in the right place but had to use the adjuster kit RTC3176 on the rears. the original adjuster was much more robust.
  6. I have one that I hope to remove shortly if you haven't sourced one already. But I am in the Fens but not a problem to do by pallet freight.
  7. Many thanks for your replies - sorry not to respond earlier but had to go away and then sort out other things. As well as doing a bit of research. Now I seem to have sorted the pedal sink but have too much travel. It seems that I hadn't bled the system properly. In the sense that whilst I checked MC and put female connectors on the end of the rubber flexi with bleed nipples and got a rock hard pedal. [Bit 'belt and braces' but worth doing I feel]. It seems that the thread in the slave cylinders is a little iffy - as I was bleeding air was seeping back in or wasn't pushed out of the system from the flexi to slave cylinder. I found a male union was a better fit and so piped that to a 3-way with a blank and bleed nipple (as attached pic... perhaps only temp measure for now). I did buy a couple of brake hose clamps (good suggestion thanks - not having problems with brakes on any motor before it is one bit if kit I haven't had). I then bled the rear with clamps on the front - and similarly bled front with clamp on back. Hard pedal! - thus intending to cut down the travel of the piston slave cylinders. Released the clamps - still a hard pedal BUT travel is to about 1 cm from bottom. It would seem that suggestion of MC being incorrect is possible. The MC I fitted was one from a LR supplier dia 0.75" bore #90569126G TRW/Girling (SWB mine being a S3 88 1971 fitted with 10" drums all round) and #90569128 (for a LWB and after a bit of research it appears to be a 1.125" bore). [Most suppliers don't say what the bore is]. According to the parts manual these were for the single circuit system without servo. With the servo it seems there was only the NRC6096 BUT looking at the diagram it would seem it was a fatter cylinder and presumably 1" bore. If the CB was fitted to the SWB it was a 0.75" bore and the LWB one was 1" bore. This is where I am 'at a loss' - there is more movement in the slave cylinders with 10" drum setup than the 11" drum setup. LR had no reason to fit a MC with 1" bore to the LWB - being physically larger does not affect the brakes... the weight does and that is why it had 11". Land Rover spent ££££££ in research? So I have tried to apply some logic and physics to the situation. Along with my kind neighbour, pair of G-clamps and a vernier. Let's consider MCs (I have used aluminium alloy in the past - just prefer them as when new they are a sealed bag. Steel tend not to be and may have sat around in a parts store for a while). Stroke length of alloy ones I believe are 1.4" (3.556cm) whether they are integral reservoir or remote. I've bought the extension housing for integral ones and then found it can be cheaper to stay with the remote ones - prices of reservoirs seem to wildly vary. [maximum swept volume for MC I'll call msv and slave cylinder swept volume I'll call sv, csa is cross sectional area]. Using cm, cm2 and cm3 as it is easier to visualise. MCs 0.75 (3/4") =1.905 csa=2.850 msv=10.13 0.875 (7/8")=2.2225 csa=3.8795 msv=13.795 1" =2.54 csa=5.0671 msv=18.019 Note: certainly a big difference between 0.75" and 1" I wasn't expecting that. Slave cylinders 10" drums front 1 1/4"=3.175 csa 7.9173 With G-clamps applied I reckoned the front piston moved 1mm and the rear moved 2mm (new shoes fitted). Per slave cylinder that's 3mm (0.3cm) sv=7.9173x0.3=2.3752 two drums total is 4.7504 rear 1"=2.54 csa=5.0671 sv=5.0671x0.3=1.5201 two drums total is 3.0403 Total sv 4.7504+3.0403=7.7907 msv was 10.13 so a mere 25% (approx) spare. Hence why I have a hard pedal about 1cm of the floor (if that). S2 setup 11" TLS front with conical adjuster on rear. front slave cylinders are 1.125"=2.8575 say 1mm travel each if adjusted properly. Estimate but not wildly out I trust. csa=6.413 sv=6.413x0.1=0.6413 front 4 cylinders total sv=2.5652 rear slave cylinders (assume 1" dia) say 2 pistons per cylinder each move 1mm csa=5.0671 sv=1.0134 rear total sv=2x1.0134=2.0268 Total sv=2.5652+2.0268=4.592 If 0.75" MC was fitted it would seem that there would be hard pedal almost 1/2 way down approx. S2 conversion setup 11" drum TLS front with 10" SLS rear (Post 1980 fitment on SWB I believe). front sv (4xslave cylinders)=2.5652 rear sv (2xslave cylinders)=3.0403 Total sv = 2.5652+3.0403=5.6055 If 0.75 MC was fitted hard pedal would be a bit more than 1/2 way down. Whilst mere estimates I must be in the right 'ball park'. Let's look again at the 10" drum all round and allow for an extra 0.5mm movement. front sv=7.9173x0.35=2.7711 both sides=5.5421 rear sv=5.0671x0.35=1.7735 both sides=3.5469 Total sv=5.5421+3.5469=9.089 Note: 9.089-7.7907=1.2983 So roughly an extra 0.5mm of movement in each piston reduces MC capacity by 13%. I don't understand how the 0.75" MC can be adequate for the 10" drum. I noticed the #90569128G bore 1.125" was fitted later to the LWB (presumably after the CB was dropped - I gather they are the ones that give trouble with bleeding). I bought an alloy 1" which I fitted yesterday and then loads of rain! This morning 0900ish bled the brakes and WONDERFUL hard pedal about 0.5" down which is what it should be at least on any motor. Even better no doubt with the #90569128G but that I think is a steel one and I prefer aluminium. Thanks for your advice - as I don't know some of Landrover history I would be interested to hear if others have the 1" MC or what arrangements they have. I had no trouble bleeding, I did about 3 pedal pumps to clear the air (I listen for the spurts), and then adjusted the bleed nipple so it will just pass fluid thus giving some resistance when the pedal is pushed - always worked perfectly for the past 30 years. Only other problem I have had was yonks ago when at a union connection the pipe has been slightly bent and then the flare seal does not seat properly.
  8. Can't see how you could possibly have found it on google when all the photo had was a date. Even though photos are public on a forum it is still out of order to steal. This occasion you've been caught

    - didn't you think someone with a photobucket account would be posting on LR forums. I do normally watermark - this was a friend's landrover that was posted for someone's...

  9. i found it via Google and if you don't want people seeing it don't post it. or if you don't want people copying and using the photo, copyright them in future.

  10. so what, i found it on photo-bucket. if it was privet, then don't post it on the internet, goodbye

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We use cookies to ensure you get the best experience. By using our website you agree to our Cookie Policy