Snagger

I think that's exactly the lateral stiffness issue - that parabolics have less lateral resistance, and that the restored camber (having being flattened by the extra vehicle weight with the original two leafs) has increased the leverage for the axle to sway the springs. I also use 1-ton shackles, which may exacerbate the problem. The P38 box is not that dissimilar to the Saginaw or Toyota box. The mounting bolt lugs are very close to the tall, thin vertical shaft housing and are spaced enough vertically that you could run the bolts above and below the chassis rail with no drilling. On the P38, the box is bolted through brackets welded above and below the chassis rail, the lower bracket extending further down to double up as the panhard bracket. I took some photos of one at Rogers yesterday, so I'll try to upload them here. I believe the box is made by Bosch, and is reputed to be much stronger and more reliable than the Adwest type, and also to give lighter steering. That latter detail may be due to the hydraulic pressure, though - skimming through various forums, I have read that the Defender, Discovery and RRC system operates at 800-1000psi, while the P38 operates at 1500. So, I'll make sure I use a full P38 system mated to the Defender upper column (apparently the splines on the bottom of the column are the same, so the P38 link and UJs are a direct fit).

Remember that flat springs give the best ride, spring progressiveness and articulation, and the least bump steer, not cambered, so if you do go SOA, use it as an opportunity to achieve flat springs rather than a lift. Look at the 101 by way of example.

I saw a cap and Defender reservoir going on the For Sale forum, but it doesn't have the wiring tail and plug from the loom to connect to it. You may be able knock something up with some female blade terminals, though, as you don't have to disconnect the plug to remove the cap. http://forums.lr4x4.com/index.php?showtopic=87792 The cap will fit, and you can just bin the reservoir.

Halfords Professional tools seem very good - I have their 1/4 and 1/2" sockets, plus their metric spanners. My only issue with their sockets is that they only make double-hex sockets on the 1/2" stuff, which leads to a lot of rounded heads on seized bolts. They need to make single hex too.

A couple of problems with the pre-compressed air idea - firstly, it is potentially dangerous because the valves shoot out like bullets from the tank if hit hard; secondly, they're a one-shot deal, so once you've refilled a tyre, you're knackered, while a compressor will fill as many tyres as you need; thirdly, the compressor takes up less space and weight than just one tank, and; fourthly, when you hook up 120l of air at 10 bar, roughly 140psi, you will find it difficult to control the pressure of the charge to the tyre, but once the tank pressure drops to the same as the tyre's pressure, even if that's below the target, you're knackered again, so 120l of air will not be the result. If you want 30 psi in your tyres, and they have a volume of 80l, then you need a little over 160l of air at atmospheric pressure (2bar is roughly 30 psi), which is less than you have in your tanks) - you need that 160l (or more for higher tyre pressures) plus the 12l of the tanks at the same 30psi (24l), plus the internal volume of the hoses and valves (lets assume 1/2L equating to another litre), so a theoretical air volume of 185l in those 12l tanks. You'll need to pressurise them to 15bar just for one 30 psi tyre.

My gauges on my 109 and soft dash RRC do the same thing, and each has mint condition cooling systems. I think that jump is normal, perhaps because the gauge is more sensitive in the middle of its arc where is should normally sit

Do the chests come with those plastic inserts?

It is a water drain. The idea behind its duck-beak shape is that when the engine is running, the bill is sucked closed to prevent water being sucked in. When the engine is off, the bill opens and any water is drained out. There should also be one in the low spot of the heater intake and engine wing intake trunking.

I'd check the motor is getting the correct power by comparing it to the terminals on one of the windows that is working. If the power is all fine, then you need to check the regulator and motor for freedom of movement, or replace them outright.

Try speaking to Exmoor Trim or Undercover Covers - they'll probably make you a old pattern cover in the new materials.

Funny enough, I was wondering if it might e a Britpart one - they are one of the few BP components that I have been told by the fitters at my local specialist that are any good (the other being CV joints). Their CVs and rod ends have lasted well on my RRC. Still uncomfortable knowing their source, though, as I still lack confidence in anything they make.

If you hold the lock plunger up in the unlocked position and then try the external latch handle, does it work better? If it does, it's that spring. You can buy the spring on eBay - LR don't sell the spring separately and will only sell you a complete lock/latch mechanism for over £80! I put a repair guide on my blog: http://www.nickslandrover.co.uk/range-rover-classic-discovery-i-door-lock-repair/ The Discovery and RRC locks and parts are identical - it's inly the trim panel and interior grab handle that are different, and you'll figure those out easily enough.

Looking at what forces Wildcats and the likes' swivels are subjected to without failure, then there would appear to be a quality issue rather than a use issue. I had a pair of Britpart swivels on the 109, and their manufacturing was certainly substandard - their chroming was so thin it looked more like yellow zinc passivating, and their exterior surfaces were finely grooved from being turned on the lathe with the coarse cutter but not being finished off properly. They held oil initially, but I later had to go back to 1-shot as the seals wore a bit and oil was weeping. They didn't seem to have strength issues, having been used for years and off-roaded around mountain tracks with the vehicle heavily loaded, but I certainly wouldn't have after-market swivels again.

That much lay will be obvious when you find the culprit, but there is no single suspect. My bet is the painted splines on the box shaft, though. Been there, done that!

OK, Bill, I'll give it a go with toe out and see what happens. Thanks for the information - it might negate the need for a rod, though I have heard that PAS tends to make the axles move around quite a bit. I'm leaning towards the P38 system with a clamp-on mounting plate for the box - I can fit a panhard bracket to the bottom of the plate similar to the bracket on the P38, so it won't be hard to do if required. I need to get a friend to help take some measurements of the lateral movement of the axle by parking on some side-slopes and heaving against the steering.

Like I said, the cap from a scrapped Discovery fits the SIII reservoir, so any leak will bring up a warning light before you lose the brakes. I doubt the scrappy would even charge you for the parts. It's a very worthwhile and simple yob - just run a feed from the green wired (fused) terminals in the fuse box to a dash light, with the bulb earth running out through to the reservoir cap, the other cap wire running to earth.

It'll be apparent if you check each component systematically with someone else rocking the steering wheel. It won't be the damper. Look for worn rod ends, worn UJs on the link between the steering column and the PAS box and for play between the PAS box output shaft and the arm fixed to it - the latter is a prime candidate because recon boxes often have painted shfats, and as the paint wears off the splines, it creates play on the arm. Removing the arm and thoroughly cleaning the splined shaft with a wire bush before refitting (with a little grease on the splines) works wonders. Hopefully, you may have caught it before any damage to the splines has occurred.

If you want a stay-clean paint for the roof, have a look at boat hull paints - some of them have algae inhibitors as well as non-stick surfaces.

I'm glad to hear the Mrs is on the mend - it's an awful thing to be suffering and the stress must be immense. Great stuff with the roof. I think I'd have done something more akin to the Rugged Guide idea that seemed to get a few laughs - with the struts tidied up a bit and the lateral bracing following the roof line rather than the gutter line, it'd be very effective in raising the whole of the roof to head height in the tub area. As far as sealing the join between the lifting section and fixed front section, you wouldn't - you'd use a channel inside the roof, fixed to the front section, to collect all water and drain it out through some drillings to the outside at gutter level or some drain hoses running down the B-pillar to the underside of the vehicle, like the sunroof drains on RRCs and Discoverys. That channel would also be the bottom attachment for the front weather curtain. There are many viable solutions, but yours is looking especially neat for a DIY job.

I have just gone back to the linked thread with GaryMV about the parts quality. Ironinc that the discussion on page 3 about not having adverts had posts separated by an advert! I pity Gary's position in that thread - he would have to be careful not to say anything that could jeopardise his job (or legal proceedings) while trying to give the responses we wanted; not an easy balancing act, and he did seem to get some unfair personal vilification in tone, if not in direct wording, especially about the damper turrets, so it's no surprise he left. If someone of similar position comes back, we all need to be very careful not to alienate them but to keep them on-side, ideally eliciting sympathy to our wish for sensibly priced good quality parts. I too avoid the blue box of woe. One part that I do use on my 109 and RRC from them, though, is their CV joint. That i on the basis of the destructive testing carried out by Ashcroft Transmissions, revealing that the Britpart CVs are tougher than the OEM or genuine parts. I do wonder, though, if it's due to a lack of hardening, making them more able to take enormous torque in the test, but also making them wear more rapidly in normal service... As for copies of successful designs, like the Allmakes turrets or Scrapiron's entire range, that's just how business works and the whole reason for patents and copyrights. These companies make cheaper replicas because they don't have to worry about development costs and early marketing where you have to convince the public of the benefit of a novel idea. If they infringe patents or copyrights, then they have that financial issue and may have to close down that product line, so will face costs anyway. If they improve on an idea, we get a better product and they get the trade. Sadly, where an item doesn't have a patent, there is no legal protection. Complaining about morality is futile - business doesn't work that way. We have a choice as customers to pay the original designer or the copier, but out of two identical products, the cheaper will usually win. The lesson is that the developers of new products also have to go through the hassle and expense of patent approval, which acts as a disincentive. It also pushes the price up for the customer. It's not good, but that's the way it is.

Check the axle breather is clear, too, as a blocked breather is a prime cause for the plastic hub cones popping off or leaking (that and a lot of heavy braking heating up the hubs and swivels).

Green is for the front, red for the rear. They are different sizes, presumably to prevent them being connected to the wrong axle. Are you fitting the PDWA valve and warning light? The idea is that a leak in one system produces a Pressure Differential, which slides a shuttle inside the valve block, pressing on a plunger switch similar to the brake light switch giving the Warning Activation. PWDA, you see? I'd recommend against it, to be honest - they're unreliable and cause a lot of extra aggravation when bleeding the system. I'd suggest using the level sensing cap from a Discovery or Defender, which is much more reliable and will pick up a very small leak that doesn't produce enough differential pressure to activate the PWDA system but does drop the level progressively. It's also easier to fit and doesn't need the self test relay. Just get the wiring tail from the donor's loom so that you have the plug to connect to the cap.

Yep, the castor angle was very carefully set up to match the standard 3 degrees of the SIII axle and, I believe, as used on coilers. I have set the tracking to to-in. The reason for this is not the track rod position but the fact that it's usually 2wd, so the wheels are not driven - that means that their drag will tend to pull them back to parallel. With 4wd, you set toe-out because the wheels' thrust pulls them forward to parallel, regardless of track rod siting.

How about keeping things simple and using decent quality parabolics, which will give a much better ride and handling whilst also being much thinner. Then use slipper plates to make the clamping plate under the springs more streamlined and less likely to hook any obstacles, with the U'bolts cut flush with the ends of their nuts, level with the bottom of the slipper? It'll give a small lift to the chassis, too, so that cross member won't hang up, but all without any adverse effects or major effort.

It looks pretty thick, so shouldn't be a problem other than the bump steer it'll have - the link needs to be as close to horizontal as possible, and kinking it like that doesn't cut it; the ends are still at different levels, so it'll behave like a diagonal link. Kinking it like that just makes sure it clears suspension and chassis parts.