Snagger

I have these lockers on my 109 (which took a small amount of fettling in itself) and later installed sliders/sills. I trimmed the flange off the lower frame section, so it was just a flat bar, and trimmed the door. It leaves plenty of strength in the door as the U section of the door reinforcement is left intact. I used Tiger Seal along the bottom edge of the door but there were still plenty of spot welds between the skin and reinforcer, so the door doesn't lose any strength. Having seen the sills trimmed to fit unmodified lockers (the white 110 that did the African expeditions featured in one of the magazines), I think the door trimming is not only easier and cheaper, but also much neater and prettier. Have a look in the three photos here: http://www.nickslandrover.co.uk/ready-for-the-alps/

I would investigate Mini steering wheels - I'd imagine some generations have the right splines and they should eb the right overall diameter and depth for you.

I found the late Defender wheel perfect for the set up. The Tdi wheels are a bit big, but are at least flat rather than dished. Metro/Montego wheels fit the mid-era (200Tdi?) columns (same splines as Series III), but not the others.

I would say clutch and crank seal are a definite job. Anything else is on a case by case basis. Expect to do some work to the bulkhead and repairs tot eh wiring loom. Suspension bushes might be OK if not old, but it seems folly to refit worn bushes on the new chassis, so I'd budget for them (and engine transmission mounts if not in top condition).

Definitely reinforce them - the work involved is much less than that of rebuilding the whole car with broken limbs because the pedal box separated from the foot well. Frankly, it's something that Trading Standards might be interested in; the bolt holes will crack pretty quickly on a single sheet well unless they are made of significantly thicker steel than the original wells.

200 heads are not available from LR, 300 are. But you can still get 200 heads second hand or from remanufacturers like Turner Engineering. The 300 is a bit smoother and quieter, but it's greatest improvements are the crank driven oil pump (main brgs still lubricated should you break the timing belt, limiting damage typically to just the push rods) and the fact that you can remove the timing belt without the water pump, saving draining down (it's no bad thing to periodically replace the coolant from scratch, though, and belt changes are as good an interval as any). 300 heads do warp more easily, then suffering gas erosion, but as long as the cooling system is in good order, that shouldn't happen. So, it really comes down to ease and price. The 300 is more work and more common, so is cheaper.

If you join the forum, don't bother to fill out your profile, give no self introduction, ask about non Land Rovers, can't be bothered to ask a specific question, and then criticise the answers, then expect no more from me.

With a bit of luck, someone will run that welder around his neck as maximum amps.

I have an XC90. It is very good and 4wd, but it is an all weather car, not an all terrain car - it is for road use only, albeit snowy, icy roads.

Wouldn't it be best to shim the bulkhead position before fitting the sills? You need to bolt up the back end of the tub (leave the front loose for vertical adjustment to align with the curve in the side of the bulkhead), and then set the door aperture length by using washers between the bulkhead feet and outrigger. Once that is set, you can accurately and finally position the sills, using washers if necessary, to set their longitudinal position accurately to match the wheel arch position and to be symmetrical. If you don't do that, the gaps around the door edges will be uneven and the sills won't end at the same relative positions from one side to the other.

From what I have seen elsewhere, that amount of material is pretty common and even normal for infrequent oil changes. The magnets pick up almost all of the steel particles, but it looks worse than it really is because it collects with low density.

That's what I did. I don't think it's a coincidence that the procedure is two turns of 60deg, rather than some other angle. It'd save a lot of tools and time in the engine plant.

Oh, well played!

I'd recommend you stick with the standard 235/85R16 as they give the best overall performance and handling, though if you do a lot of driving along ruts, something taller may be useful (at the cost of some handling and fuel economy on the road) Wider is only good for sand but worse for road and mud, so avoid that temptation. You should be able to wind the stop locks in a little for better steering lock if you have standard tryes and wheels - LR tend to be a little conservative with adjustment, perhaps to reduce stress on the CV joints. Bigger tyres would need the stops at a lesser setting unless you used spacers, but they add stress to the steering components and wheel bearings/stub axles, so are best avoided where possible.

As far as the snorkel goes, it makes no difference. I used a Mantec plastic type as the steel tubed versions tend to rust badly under the powder coat and I don't like Safari snorkels or others with ram tops; I prefer the cyclonic mushroom types as they help prefilter the air a little and are better at keeping water out. As for the filter unit, I'd recommend a 300Tdi Defender setup, which is a cylinder with brackets that are held by the right hand side head bolts - it uses dead space (unless you have aircon, but even that might not e an issue), so you wouldn't have any space issues with the Discovery 200 engine having a wider accessories section than the Defender version. You would still use the wing side intake, whichever side it is fitted (200 was on the left, 300-Tdci on the right) with whatever hose will reach (might have to go aftermarket or mix and match between models). Early 90s (12J and 19J engines) didn't have side intakes, so you might have to either replace a wing outer panel or cut a hole in the existing panel (make a paper or card template from a later vehicle to get the position ans size right, remembering the joggled flange hidden by the perimeter of the plastic grille where the screws fit. If you do go for the 300 filter system, then I'd recommend the 300 and later right hand intake and snorkel if you have plain wings on an early vehicle, just so the intake hose doesn't have to cross the engine on the way to the filter.

Were the filters changed too? They're usually ignored. It could also be a piece of dirt in the hydraulic selector mechanism, dislodged from somewhere harmless by the new fluid.

The main shaft is likely bent, and even if not, severely weakened. I'd say it'd be dangerous to use it.

Check the condition of the flexible hose - a pinprick hole could be too small for fluid to escape, but it could be sucking in air on he pedal release.

I don't understand why people use companies with names like those. They sound like gash operators. Likewise, I don't understand people buying parts on mail order from breakers. There are many ways of checking up on a company before you do business with them, and if spending thousands, surely it'd be responsible to do so?That there are con men littering the motor trade is no new revelation. There are only two names in the UK with a good reputation for engine rebuilds, one more so than the other; Turner Engineering and ACR. They cost more than others for a reason - they use decent quality parts, they replace anything remotely questionable and they have decent tooling and staff. Choosing on price means you're going to get an engine made of worn out parts, poor quality pattern parts and cut corners on the workmanship. These con men should be punished, and hard. But owners have to stop thinking they're being clever by finding a cheap deal - quality costs, and on assemblies like engines and transmissions, it costs a lot, but is less costly than doing it on the cheap and then having to do it again properly. The same applies to sourcing parts; how many threads have we seen over the years complaining about poor quality parts, usually from the same notorious wholesaler? But, do most heed the warning and buy OEM or Gen Parts? No, they keep chancing the carp because it's cheap. In doing that, they spend more in the long run, encourage that supplier to keep churning out rubbish, and contribute to the failure of the better quality suppliers who can't compete with the low prices, buggering the supply chain for all of us. For god's sake, you get what you pay for!

Duncan, my 109 is on 1-ton spring hangers and shackles with parabolics. I set the castor angle at exactly 3 degrees, and needed the axle saddles only high enough that the inboard edge of the right side saddle bottom was flush with the diff housing neck; taller than standard series mounts, but as low as you can go to fit the springs without scalloping the axle housing. That gave me 1//4" track rod clearance over the spring tops with the chassis supported and the axle hanging on the springs, and more when the springs bear weight. If you have 1-ton shackles, they should achieve a similar result in conjunction with the G2F dumb irons.

Merlin Motorsport will also stock standard length braided Goodridge hoses.

DO you mean Limestone, like the Series and early 90/110 roofs and wheels (and occasionally the whole body), or light stone as in desert camoflage (this being the military section)? I'd put white for the former and beige the latter.

The dampers will put a torsional load on the front axle when moving, but that should be controlled by the radius arm bushes, so while moving the dampers inside the springs would reduce that torsion and the forces on the bushes, I can't see that it's a "must", after all, the dampers and suspension work just as hard with the air springs as with coils. There is no change at the rear.

It's going to be awfully tall on parabolics and raised mounts'shackles. I don't think you need any more than 1-ton shackles on the front to keep the spring flat with the G2F dumbirons. I'd then look at the back end being a similar lift but no more. You could just fit extended shackles, but I don't think that is a good option as the spring will be inclined, giving increased bump steer and also causing a lot of stress when lateral forces are applied to the long shackles; I think you should use nothing longer than 1-ton shackles and extend the hangers at the front end of the rear springs by the same amount as on the G2F dumb irons. You should also be using revolving shackles at the back to match the G2F dumb irons or you'll be putting all the articulation through the front springs only, wearing them out far faster than if the articulation was spread over both axles. Whatever you do, keep the rear diff pinion parallel to the gear box axis probably a bit nose down with the suspension lifts, but you'll have to check, and keep the swivel pin inclination at 3 degrees. If you expect to use the vehicle in a way that creates a lot of axle articulation, then I'd use dampers with eyes at each end but would mke an axle bracket that rotates the pin so that it runs along the vehicle axis instead of the axle axis.

Look inside the tubes - if they're threaded all the way to the end, then you need fully threaded rod ends, if the first 1/2-3/4" is smooth, then you need the shouldered rod ends.