Snagger

Glad you're still with us! Rest up, follow doctors orders and I'm sure you'll be fit again in no time. It's surprising the range of serious acute illnesses that can be dealt with with minimal life changing influences.

The outer seal is just a dust seal, but it still sits the same way around as if was holding oil in, so the lip points back into the timing case. It has to be that way around, otherwise the crank pulley wouldn't fit through the seal after refitting the timing cover.

Not only would you have to move the spring saddles, you'd need to weld on damper brackets, get a custom longer prop shaft and swap the brakes over too. That would leave you with with a very weak vehicle at more expense and difficulty.

SIII box is stronger than SII anyway (the SII lay shaft can shear more easily). You would need to swap the clutch too.

Yep, there's something wrong with the tensioner - not only is it where the rubber deposits are heaviest but you can see where one of the pulleys has been rubbing the front cover. It could be loose, the back plate bent or they fitted the slotted washer at the back instead of the front of the pulley wheel, putting everything out of line. A whole new timing belt and tensioner kit will fix it. Check the guide plates on the crank pulley are secure (spot welds can break) and not damaged. When you remove the pulley to replace the crank seal, use a puller into the threaded holes. DO NOT pry the pulley off as it will distort; it's very soft. You will need an annular drift to spread the load when tapping it back in - a plain drift will apply uneven force and distort the pulley.

SII and IIA boxes don't have synchromesh on 1st or 2nd - you need to double-declutch.

Good quality parabolics are every bit as good as coils. My 109 is on 3leaf front and 4 leaf rear Heystee springs with ES9000 (HD) dampers. It's heavier than standard because of the accessories and rebuild spec, but even empty it rides far more softly and smoothly than my wife's 2009 90XS Station Wagon. With some weight in it, the difference is even greater. I think it's very comfortable. I have 32psi on the front and 46psi on the rear 235/85 tyres, too. But I do estimate the empty weight of my 109 to be about 3-400kg more than standard.

Did you get sorted in the end, Mutley? Vass in Ampthill have mountains of used and unused old stock MoD Wolf rims with XZLs and G90s. I wouldn't chose eihter of those tyres, but the rims will be cheap. I like 235/85 BFG ATKOs - been using them for years; high mileage, plenty of grip on roads including in snow and ice, lots of grip on gravel and shale. They clog more easily in mud than MTs, but they're not too noisy or bad on fuel. I won't buy anything else now, having tried a few others.

That's why I said to check! It could be that you have them connected up reversed, all the same. I find it unlikely that the front brakes are operating normally though if you are locking rear drums. I suspect your calliper pistons are seized. Take the front wheels off and pry the pads back with a screw driver and have someoen pump the pedal to check each piston moves freely and isn't caked in rust and filth.

They have been standard on 90 Station Wagons for a long time, but fit 109 and 110 tubs (I have one in my 109). Google "Protection and Performance".

PDWA valve should not affect bias ever - it is a "pressure differential warning actuator" valve which brings on a warning if there is a difference in hydraulic pressure between the circuits, so it's there to detect, not cause an imbalance. However, if the valve has shifted due to activation, it could be partially blocking one circuit (some owners are under the misconception that it seals off a leaking circuit - unfortunately this is not true). I'm not familiar with the brake system on the 110, but the master cylinder more closely resembles the 109's than the late Defenders'. In that case, the rear brakes should connect to the end of the master cylinder furthest from the driver. Check this is still the case - on my 109, the brake lines crossed over to achieve this under the PDWA valve, not on exiting the master. Someone may have replaced the lines or "tidied them up" and removed the cross-over.

The huck bolts securing the floor to the lateral steel braces? You'd have to grind their heads off as their threads are just parallel ridges, not helixes.

My servo seems to have stopped working, but the car still stops on a sixpence. All the servo does is make the pedal easier to ress - it doesn't affect brake efficiency and certainly not balance. Go to a tester that knows what they are talking about - the clueless idiot you have at the moment knows nothing about brakes and could end up killing you.

The 300 exhaust runs through the 200 mount position, so no, it's not possible. The Defender version of the 200 may have clearance issues between the injection pump and the 300 mount, while the oil filter is almost certainly an issue.

As I understand it, slab on hardcore is OK, it's solid concrete that is the issue - a hard standing is not regarded as a permanent structure and so planning isn't required, but a solid surface is permanent so needs planning permission.

The Series box doesn't just "work" behind a Tdi, but with a short life span. It is entirely adequate as long as you don't drive like an idiot or combine too many gearing increases. Overdrive, 3.54 diffs, HRTC or big tyres are fine with a Tdi, just not in combination. That's based on over 20 years of using mine, running it up and down the Alps fully laden, not just motorways, and knowing plenty of people in clubs running V8s and Tdis. I also know a few people who regularly blow their boxes behind a 2.25 diesel. It is all about the driver, not the box.

I tried it with an old, dark welding mask a few years ago and it was good. The whole family used it in turns. But it depends on how dark your mask is.

Das, the point is not that there is anything wrong with going for an LT77 or stumpy R380 - they're quieter, smoother, leak-free and certainly stronger. The point is that it simply isn't necessary, and it's a lot of work. If you like the challenge of the conversion and can afford the time and parts, great. I'd prefer one to the Series box and an overdrive, but I can't do it without losing the vehicle's identity (too many other changes). Does that worry me? No.

Tyre walls are going to have more discrepancy than the rims. The bit to use is the vertical face of the bead seat, not the very lip of the rim, which as Mike says is prone to minor damage.

By the way, in your post at the top of this page you raise your concerns over raising the gearing by having 7.50 tyres. Tose are the standard tyre for the 109 and an option for the 88, and the transmissions on the 4-cylinder models are identical, regardless of tyre size or wheelbase. It really is nothing that should worry you.

I would use Ashcroft in that case, Nige, simply because the parts and labour are with one company; any problems the other way and you'd have the workshop blaming Ashcroft's parts and Ashcroft blaming the workshop and would find it a nightmare to get a repair or replacement.

Inspirational stuff, Jason. Being so candid takes a degree of courage, so hats off to you. Good luck going forward.

Strip it. The spring ends hide the areas above them, and without inverting the chassis, the nooks and crannies won't get done. And if you get it to that point, you might then consider galvanising or hot zinc spraying.

No, palm oil is just like soya for leaving black sludge all over the innards of the engine. Have a look around the Aussie SVO forums - they have been doing this for decades and are way ahead of us. Another thing I picked up from their forums was to be religious about frequent oil changes. You don't need special oil, but SVO getting past the rings, which is more common if you use SVO without heating it before injection on a cold engine or have gummed rings, polymerises the oil and turns it into an increasingly viscous jelly and ultimately a solid. I think they recommend 3-4000 mile replacement intervals.

Ralph, is the LR 5% recommendation not bio diesel rather than SVO? More to do with ethanol content than viscosity, the way I understood it. SVO doesn't have ethanol content, just high viscosity. I tried 25% SVO on a 300Tdi in the summer and it damaged the injection pump. It still ran, but the rpm hunted after that one trial and the pump had to be rebuilt. My 200 Tdi runs fine on rape seed oil, less powerful on sunflower, but that's with a heat exchanger to allow 100% SVO use (multi tank system). D not use palm or soya pil as they produce heavy deposits that will gum up the valves and rings.