Snagger

Supporters
  • Content count

    4,215
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    14

Snagger last won the day on June 4

Snagger had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

157 Excellent

1 Follower

About Snagger

  • Rank
    Old Hand
  • Birthday 01/22/1973

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://nickslandrover.co.uk
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Location
    Dubai

Previous Fields

  • Interests
    Aviation, militaria, sub aqua, sci-fi

Recent Profile Visitors

1,324 profile views
  1. You surprise me!
  2. Mine protrude 30mm, which looks fine. I don't have the tubular additions.
  3. I'd go with what Bowie said - a solid top pin would keep dirt out better, and you could probably sell the sensors for the same price as new pins if they're in good order.
  4. Bowie's right - performance filters are OK in clean environments, but anywhere dusty needs paper.
  5. Pity. They're ideal.
  6. I can't remember where I saw it, possibly something SimonR designed (it is his kind of simple but ingenious solution), but you can buy (or make) Z section steel plates that sit inside the front edge of the doors, secured against the frame by the hinge nuts, with the other end behind the door seal flange when the doors are closed. That prevents the doors and hinges being undone from the bulkhead, as Tanuki highlights, which is the thieves preferred method of getting at the doors. The hinge bolts that run through the door are harder to defeat as the nyloc nuts inside will spin with the bolt, unlike the captive nuts in the door pillar... The other weakness is the rear windows, so any other work is a waste of effort unless you do something about them.
  7. I'd first try loosening all the transmission and engine mounts and pulling the transmission forward as far as possible before retightening to see if you can gain some clearance that way. Next, I'd look at making a crank in the operating arm so that its splined end stays where it is but the clevis pin end is forward of the cross member; this would likely need the arm cut off and a spacing section welded at 90 degrees to give the arm a Z section. Obviously, that welding quality would need to be high.
  8. As far as the 200 engine and Series box are concerned on the SIII, don't worry about the strength of the transmission. The SIII box is quite capable of handling the 200Tdi, with turbo, as long as it's in reasonable condition, replenished with oil regularly and not driven stupidly. There was a lot of scare mongering on the net a decade ago, but I ran this combination on a heavy 109 for a long time and only broke a gear through my own foolishness, and many other have had the same experience. At the same time, many people continue to break SII and SIII boxes with bad driving behind a neglected and worn out 2.25 engine... I do know a handful of people who have done the "DI" conversion on 88"s and been very pleased with it, so do whichever suits, but don't be scared off the turbo because of the gear box.
  9. That sounds like a very strong combination, and I'd guess at the weak spot being the C&P gears (other than the drive flange splines), but the pegging should help considerably to deal with that. I suspect the Salisbury would be stronger, but not by enough to be of concern, but as robust as Salisbury axles and diffs are, you're right about age, use and potential neglect taking their toll, and also quite right that it'd be a heavier (if simpler) job. But IIAs are classics now, so keeping the original axle with some invisible upgrades is a big deal, and this way you don't have to worry about brake line unions of different specs and other unforseen detail issues that complicate swaps of large assemblies, and you have the confidence of new parts.
  10. The Mill Services type use strips that you drill yourself for the rear mountings, only the front is set by them for lateral position on 109 versions. I am assuming the same is true of the 88 versions. That is just a length of angle welded at 90 degrees to the inside face of the sill with a large bolt hole to pick up on the bulkhead A-pillar bottom bolt. If you have the sills made to stick out, then you have the option to drill a second hole to move them flush with the body. I suspect if you have them made flush, you will not have a long enough bracket to drill a new hole to move them outward if you decide the body needs more protection. I think you're right that flush looks better, but their protection is compromised, and the flexibility to ove the may be useful.
  11. I would plumb for the late "2.3" SIII engine exterior, as that was also 5mb and both blocks have the external reinforcing webs above the sump line that are missing fro the 3mb engines. I would be curious to know if you could just swap the crank shaft, cam shaft, rods and pistons from the 2,5 in to a 2.25 5mb block - the 2.5NAD, TD and 200Tdi all shared the same crank and cam shaft, amongst other things, so it's possible that this would apply to the petrol models, given that the volume increase was due to the increased sweep from the new crank. Anyway, given that the later oil filter housing can be installed on the old engines, I see no reason the reverse would be a problem. I suspect the old manifolds would bolt up, needing the stud holes drilling a little wider at worst, though they may strangle the 2.5 a little. The alternator mounting is the same and engine mounts would be a direct swap with no alteration. The flywheel housings should be interchangeable if you want to swap them, but I don't know about the flywheel itself, and that may decide whether the older style starter with separate solenoid can be used. I'd be surprised if the timing cases can't be swapped, allowing you to use the four bladed fan, but I used that fan on a 12J by enlarging the bolt holes in the fan hubjust enough to fit the slightly different pattern of the 12J pump's flange.
  12. Nice to see progress. Any plant to paint the chassis? It might make it less attractive to thieves, especially if you do a rust-effect paint job!
  13. I'd always wondered about that small hose. Does the manifold have coolant in the side walls? I presume it's to reduce icing when the engine is warm, rather than to cool the induction system?
  14. It must be much easier than this, but it's not simple, certainly. The rear axle on a 109 is simple enough, but the spring position on the 88 interferes with the diff housing on a Salisbury and probably needs a complicated shape scalloping from the inboard side of the rhs mount to clear the diff housing on a Rover rear axle, just like the front axle on both wheel bases. Then there is the steering rod clearance over the leaf springs, the custom length drag link and the prop shaft front UJ angle and proximity to the engine mount... Still, I'd take all of that again compared to the effort involved in this! Lovely work, DR.
  15. That is a great job for a complete DIY fabrication. If he can get the fabric to be self tensioning, so the wind doesn't ake it flap noisily, it'll be better still. I have a vague plan to do something similar, but using a flat plate of the same plan as the gutter channel extending about 3" inside the roof line and then having upwards lips of a couple of inches, essentially a perimeter of angle section around the top of the body to attach the fabric, and then extend the inside of the gutter upwards to make attachment points for the upper edge of the fabric, the aim being to achieve a similar result but with a near invisible alteration to the exterior when closed - just the outer edge of the angle, which should be only 2-3mm. I like these pop roofs in principle, I just don't like the way they change the lines closed. Option two is a full-length vertically extending roof using the same method, but folding that much fabric over the windscreen would be a challenge without a huge "shelf" at roof line on the front (not impossible).