tugboat

Simple question - is there a significant difference between the standard (i.e., non military, non 1 ton, non six cylinder) 109 series 2a/3 chassis and the station wagon version? By significant, I mean body attachment points, side member shapes etc., not fuel tank positions. I'm looking at the possibility of using a station wagon chassis with a truck tub.

Nitriding will only affect the surface hardness, ie, it's done to reduce journal wear, not to improve the shaft strength. It's a long time since I looked at the manual but I seem to remember very twitchy comments about radiusing the journals and I suspect that that's been the sticking point - sharp transitions give localised stress raisers of 100s of percent, add in zillions of oscillations of load and you have to worry about fatigue life. Seems like Land Rover thought it was too much.

Try 50/50 acetone and ATF fluid. I came across this suggestion for penetrating-oil-max on some US forums. Used it for the first time a few weeks ago as a last resort and it saved me from having to destroy a yacht's stainless propeller shaft with a forged steel coupling seized onto it after 33 years of use. Keep it away from oil seals though - some of the polymers don't like acetone.

First of all, "plain aluminium", by that I assume the 1xxx grades which have >99% Al, are poor for structural applications. Even these nominally pure forms still depend on small proportions of alloying elements to raise the strength above that of treacle. That's not to say that Land Rover didn't eventually use one of these grades, but Birmabright is definitely not plain aluminium. Anyway, I've been digging for more on Birmabright. The name covers a range of Al-Mg alloys produced by Birmetals. Two types were used by Rover in body panels, BB2 and BB3. The main alloying element, to enhance strength, is magnesium, 2% in Birmabright BB2, 3% in BB3. In fact, the Al-Mg alloys are typically eight times stronger than a 1xxx series aluminium in its soft condition. BB2 was used in Land Rovers and in a number of panels of Rover P4s, the slightly stronger BB3 in the bonnet and boot of the P6. The current designation of Al-Mg alloys is the 5xxx series. The only spec I can find for BB2 gives it simply as 2% Mg, 0.25% Mn, balance Al, but I expect there are some other smaller traces in it and these could be crucial in terms of corrosion properties. The main features of BB2 and BB3 are: good finish, good formability, good strength, ability to be work hardened (i.e., the metal is further strengthened by being deformed into panel shape), excellent corrosion resistance (including marine applications), resistant to stress corrosion cracking. In short, just what you would want in car body panels! 5251 seems to be the near equivalent current standard alloy but, as I said, those smaller fraction elements in the composition could be important for corrosion and I haven't yet turned up a full spec for BB2. The key question remains - did Land Rover change the spec of the body materials from BB2 at some time since the Series 2a? Wish I still had access to that XRF gun.

Yes, the blisters - not all that bad, to be honest - are generally closer to steel components, suggesting that there's a galvanic driving force. If the later steel grade is more chemically susceptible to corrosion than previously then, even although it will have the same galvanic potential as the original, it will be tending towards sucking electrons out of the aluminium at a greater rate. Hadn't thought of that possibility. Another factor which may be significant is the paint treatment. The 81 SW has been resprayed, but what appears to be the original finish is peeling in some hidden areas, eg under the bonnet, leaving bare aluminium visible. The old 109's baked finish seems virtually bonded to the metal, almost as good as anodising, albeit it's thin enough to polish through if you're not careful. I guess this was discontinued at some point. I have to say that I'm very surprised at the state of some 90s and 110s I've seen, now that I've started to pay attention. I get the feeling that the problem has become worse.

Despite my 1970 2a having been used on heavily salted roads all its life until its engine popped about 20 years ago, and then having been "laid up"/dumped outdoors on the family farm ever since, it has no aluminium corrosion. On the other hand, the 1981 109 SW I bought recently for spares (but may in fact get through an mot) has quite a few pockets of blisters. And looking at Defenders on the road, quite a few surprisingly new ones are riddled with corrosion around this part of the country (wet, salty, west coast of Scotland). Was Birmabright dropped by Land Rover when the Birmetals company closed up shop in 1980? Apparently, the name covers four possible specs, just to confuse things more (BS5056A, BS5083, BS5154A and BS5251). Unfortunately, I'm no longer working or I'd have access to an X ray fluoresence gun which simply by pointing at the surface gives a direct readout of the alloy content and then we'd know. If there actually is a difference, it would be worth knowing when it kicked in if, like me, you're on the look-out for second hand body bits.

Welcome advice, guys. I hadn't realised electric pumps were being used - nice easy fix, Julian. And sounds like the linkage issue is simpler than I'd imagined from read a other forum posts, thanks Phil. I've a spare bulkhead with some linkages attached, should be a crank or two on it. And I may actually have some 33c ends kicking around. The thread on the 33c is 3/16 UNF. I picked up some brass hydraulic connectors that size a few weeks ago which I've drilled and tapped one end to hitch 33c Morse cable to more easily sourced stainless M6 threaded rod (boat story). I'll have a look at my bits and pieces later today. Drawn to the electric pump in the longer term if I can't source one immediately - throttling a diesel is not too clever!

As per a couple of my posts below, I bought a 1981 S3 109 2.25 Diesel SW earlier in the year for spares but found it to be too good to break. I've finally put a couple of days into it and one issue I knew I'd need to tackle before trying for an MOT is the lack of vacuum at the servo. It has the original throttle setup on the manifold but no signs of any linkage. Instead, bizarrely, it has a choke cable leading from the dash to a Heath Robinson mod around the throttle itself. I gathered from the PO that his predecessor had fitted this as a "starting aid". (Nuff said.) How it apparently passed several years of MOT tests like this is beyond me. The options I can see are: a) look out for some replacement linkages (likely to be a prolonged search); b) make up some mountings and fit a belt driven Peugeot vac pump, if I can find one (bit of a pain); or c) change the master cylinder for a non-servo unit. I'd prefer to do the latter - I've never had any issues with non-servo 109 brakes - but there seems never to have been a dual-line non-servo master cylinder option or I'd just buy one. Also, complicating things a bit, I gather that if the original standard setup was with a servo, then the fitment of non-servo brakes will result in a fail and so I need to know if the servo was an option or standard in the S3. I'm in a bit of a hurry otherwise I'd go for the vac pump option. All thoughts appreciated.

Thanks for that - I'll check over the metric/imperial implications now before starting.

Slowly working towards getting 'Project B' under way. Having bought the (too good ...) '81 LWB SW for spares for my original project to get the '70 2A 109 I've owned since '76 and laid up about 20 years ago, completely rebuilt, I've taken forum members advice from my first post a few weeks ago and have begun to get in about seeing whether I can get the SW MOT'd without major treatment. I got hold of a set of almost unused OE Defender wheels with standard Avon Rangemasters - tried them on the SW on the private road up to the farm and what an improvement on the perished, oversized General Grabbers it came with! Engine seems to be excellent except that it's obviously pulling some oil into the cylinders when idling hot for very long periods. Not a lot, just briefly a bit of lube oil smoke when it's revved, and I'd put my money on valve stem seals, but as I've a very good 2A diesel head lying somewhere, I was wondering whether I'd get away with a quick change over rather than a top overhaul. Or is the head on the 5 bearing S3 different? It's probably ok for the MOT (I think it only just edges into a tighter emission test at 1981) but as I've a spare head I might as well fix it as easily as I can get away with. Thinking about it, I've an unused set of Lucas exchange injectors from yonks ago for the old 109 somewhere too.

Taking the plunge now! Ok, so I bought the s3 109 sw a couple of weeks ago as a non runner source of spares to feed into the now-derelict 2a which I laid up about 20 years ago and which I finally decided to have a go at. but ... the sw is probably too good to break. I'm thinking the first thing to do is spend the sensible minimum and throw it in for a test and take it from there. I've still to check it out thoroughly but, for sure, I need to sort out the handbrake and I want to get rid of the wide wheels and tyres - they're not legal, even if it passed several mots with them, as they extend noticably past the bodywork, and I want to revert to as near standard as makes financial sense. I've driven quite a number of lwb s2s and s3s over the years and, frankly, most have had dreadful vague handling compared to my old 2a, coupled in some cases (e.g., this sw) with ridiculously heavy steering. The only difference which set mine apart from the others was that from when I bought it in 76, right till the end, I kept fitting 750 Avon Ranger crossplies. I wasn't being a purist, it's just that that's what it came with and I tended to change only one or two at a time. I'm now kicking myself for giving away its two legal and two almost unused Rangers a few years ago. And, of course, they're no longer made (and, no doubt, would cost an arm and a leg if they were). So I need s3 or, preferably, tubelesss defender 5.5 rims - easy enough. But what tyres? 99% road use. Direct as I can get to the Avons in feel (Honestly! True!). And "original" level of heaviness in steering, which was perfectly ok to my mind. 235/80s and wider look far too wide. 205/80s have smallish rolling radius. And 7.50s are nominally only 190 wide but, at least in the crossply case, were of almost 100% aspect ratio. Any suggestions?

Ok! Ok! Advice taken! Except I've gone a step further after I came across a 5 bearing diesel non-runner. It's been laid up three years just a couple of miles from here with a S3 109sw attached. I bought it yesterday so now I have two... I've managed to repair the starter and fired it up this afternoon. Clean looking engine, sounds good, steady idle and started on first punch after not having turned over all of last year. The chassis has been welded in the usual places but it's been very neatly done and looks good. Bulkhead looks fine too. Body straight but internals could use a bit of tidying. I'm having it transported over to the farm tomorrow. Dilemma - bought the sw for the engine and spares for my old 2a but it's probably much too good to break. I'll get in about it in the coming weeks and see what it needs to tidy it up for mot and take it from there. I've a feeling it may good for a few more years on its present. I'm guessing the general view is going to be that I need to get them both going now!

I've owned my 2a 109 diesel as second owner since it was about 5 years old (mid 70s). It had quite a hard life in daily use (250k miles or so from 1970 till about 1988) and then it was used intemittently, unlicensed, on the nearby farm of my close relatives and has remained there ever since. The end came some years later with what sounded like a run big end. After a long spell of lay up, I got round to investigating and found broken rings and a cracked piston had gouged a deep groove in a cylinder. Since then (late 90s?) it's been lying outdoors in a pile of farm junk and is now a ruin with no engine, rotten chassis and bulkhead, and the hard top was given away. The body panels are remarkably free of dings though. The (crash) gearbox, a Rover replacement before I bought it, has since had another rebuild by me after a broken layshaft, and the rear diff and half shafts were also new in the previous ownership (as I said, it had a hard life!). Frankly, given its high mileage and the abuse inflicted on it, I'd long since written off any thoughts of doing anything with it after the engine blew. But now ... Now, though, I'm taking early retirement, and I'm maybe up for a challenge. If I take it on, it will be all 1970 2a, i.e., with original gearbox, axles and bulkhead, etc., but possibly with a 5 bearing 2.25 diesel. I've dug out the last v5, a duplicate from the mid 80s, in my name and with my current address, as well as the one issued when I bought it in the mid 70s. I phone dvla last week and explained that I was either going to restore it or scrap it, and asked for its current status. I was told that its record is incomplete and that I should either simply send a v62 and £25 for a new v5, mot and tax it and that's it, or send a letter saying it's scrapped. So I need a new chassis, bulkhead rebuild, and an engine (btw, its never had an engine number recorded on its v5, possibly because it was first registered as Goods) as well as a complete overhaul of the rest by myself .... £5k-ish? Having searched around this forum and others, I'm sure I can make this administratively very difficult if I want to but, otherwise, is it really as simple as that?