Snagger

I've had pumps and injectors rebuilt by "DieselBob" and have been pleased with the results. I can recommend him to rebuild yours. He does have heavy duty alternative parts for some of the higher wear prone Bosch parts, and I don;t recall them costing much extra. I think I paid about £50 for a full pump rebuild, and I think that may have included injector overhaul too, but it's hard to remember as it was back in 2008!

It's likely to have been well serviced, but hire cars are badly abused by customers. Condition is everything, so take a thorough look underneath to check for corrosion or mud buildups in the nooks and crannies (take a torch and small mirror to help the inspection), and look for dents in the chassis cross members and diff pans, and for bent steering rods. Also look for any signs of stretching or distortion on the tow hitch assembly and the chassis where the hitch assembly is attached. If they're all good, and the test drive seems good (especially at speed, where the vehicle is likely to show any signs of being thrashed), then you should be alright. I haven't heard anything negative about SHB, and it's in their interests to maintain the vehicles properly to avoid recovery, repair and compensation claims from break downs. Many private Defenders are also abused and thrashed, and many are poorly maintained, most notoriously farm vehicles, so don't be put off by this one's history. Other than that, inspect it like any other second hand Defender - check for operation of all gears and services (lights, wipers, heater, accessories and so on), look for corrosion of the bulkhead (around the vents, foot wells, windscreen clamps and door hinges) and the door frames and skins, cracks in the wind screen frame, movement of the spare wheel on the back door, play in wheel bearings or steering components, pitting of the front axle swivels, brake disc condition, tyre wear patterns, leaks and so on. Listen for a big clunk when driving off - if it only does it when pulling away or braking, then it's probably the A-frame ball joint on the rear axle, which is not too expensive, but if it happens on each gear change, it's the gear box ad transfer box wear (not so common on such a late vehicle, but a hire vehicle that has been thrashed or towed overweight trailers could suffer).

Sounds likely - the earlier single button fob alarms failed with age, especially the fobs themselves, but the two button system is much more reliable. The spider is a frequent fault, though - I had a spare that a forum member used a while ago. As i heard it, the spider failure is usually due to a dry joint, so opening it up to resolder any joints that show damage or corrosion could work. On the Discovery mine came from, it was mounted on the heater matrix housing inside the dash, but I have no idea where it is on a Defender. It's a black plastic box about the size of a cigarette packet with a bundle of black wires coming out of it, as I remember it (I didn't pay it much attention, since none of my vehicles have one).

I know it's not helpful to natas (and I apologise for that), but remember, everyone, that posting information on an open forum how to bypass immobilisers and alarms is not going to help us with vehicle security, especially since Defenders are so high on the theft lists. Please consider carefully the wisdom of posting any information of such a nature!

At least it gives you more leg room in the driver's seat - the left foot well is quite cramped with pedals in it.

I didn't know about that numerical designator - good to know! I think you're wise to go for the high temperature and duration product with high oil resistance - it's astonishing how hot transmissions, especially the transfer box, get.

I would use the proper bearing seating compound rather than a thread lock. I think I used a Locktite product. It cured my oil migration, and hadn't been used by LR (it was a factory recon unit). Sorry to hear it didn't seal your unit, Jeremy - maybe your oil weep is getting through between the oil seal collar and the main shaft, or between the seal and the casing? The ends of the collar and 1st gear bush would need to be very smooth and even to be oil-tight, and if either has any notches, nicks or taper, then oil could get through into the shaft splines and migrate back to the transfer box. Eric, it sounds like all your synchro problems are due to the cage and rings. Distorted baulk rings would cause the problems you have, and could have been due to poor assembly or just from being dropped or hit with a mallet - they're surprisingly easy to distort.

Double check the tappet clearances and the timing sprockets (front cover off) to make sure the valves are opening the correct amount and at the correct time - a tooth out on the cam shaft could cause such problems. Black smoke is usually indicative of airflow restrictions, over-fuelling (unlikely if the settings are returned to standard), advanced fuel timing (unlikely if the engine starts easily) or a bad spray pattern from dirty or mal-adjusted injectors.

Anywhere steel frames contact aluminium panels, use rubber gaskets or duct tape over the primer to isolate the metals - don't rely on the paint or silicone sealant as they break down in time and will lead to electrolytic corrosion. Don't use thick applications of seam sealer for the you either, as it will just distort the skin.

Yep - that's what I meant; the type you see on Rogue Traders and such, preying on OAPs. Sorry if I offended the rest of the industry with a badly written point! In addition to jerboa's post, think carefully about what mods you want, now and potentially in the future - it's easier, cheaper and neater to build them in during construction than to try to fit them later; many later mods not allowed for early on will result in a poorer quality job. A god example was the chassis I had built for my 109 - I had them incorporate outriggers for forward fuel tanks so that I could fit multiple tanks (long range and for dual fuel use). Had they been retro fitted later, it would have been less accurate, the welds weaker and the galvanising heavily compromised inside and out in the chassis rail areas to which they are welded. Modifying the rear tub for a different shape and much thicker floor and incorporating new seating, storage and a bulkhead removal bar was also much better done before the tub was fitted. So, even if not fitting the mods during initial construction, try to have the vehicle built up with provision for the mods to be installed easily at a later date.

That buggers my theory up, then! My RRC has thin flanges and small cone, but 24 splines. The Discovery axle I used on the 109 had the round metal dome flange/shaft ends and 12 splines...

My concerns are related to the snatching jerboa commented on - they are twin leading shoe, and so will pull them selves on to some extent with the pedal pressed in a bit. They may end up too sharp, giving too sensitive a pedal. As said, a brake swap can make a huge difference to the vehicle, but so can the 24st empty vehicle weight difference between 88 and 109V8.. LR used 11" drums on late SIIIs, essentially 109 rear brakes on the front, with 10" drums at the back. In good order, they are very effective. I can see the desire to uprate the brakes for an 88" that tows or load carries a lot, but I think a standard SIII 109 system would have better avoided over braking. Hopefully, these concerns will be unfounded, though. As for an MoT pass being adequate for insurance purposes, it won't. The insurers must be specifically informed about any and all modifications, and an engineer's report would prevent the police or insurers pinning the blame on your brakes. In a serious accident, the vehicle would be inspected with a fine toothed comb, and it's highly likely that any mods would be picked up. That would render you uninsured if not declared, and thus personally liable for any costs or compensation of an accident. It's also good from a safety perspective to have a second set of eyes closely scrutinise a mod, rather than give a cursory MoT inspection. It's not worth the safety and financial risk.

Hah - I'd not noticed before. I'd just assumed you had LHD, being a Clog and all...

Wasn't it the post rationalised axles that had 24 splines? That's what my 1982 axle had, with rationalised hub sand stubs...

If I'm not mistaken, most 200Tdi and earlier Defenders used 10 splines, as did the 200 Tdi Discoverys and era of RRCs. They should be identifiable by the hub drive flanges - if the Defender hub is the thick type with the longer plastic cone, or Discovery/RRC hub is the domed single piece hub/shaft with no plastic cone, then it's an early unit, 300 Tdis and later have thin drive flanges on the front with the short cones and on RRC/ Discovery and 90 a flattish integrated flange/shaft with no cone or the same thin flange and small cone on a 110 (but their rear diff will be incompatible anyway). That's my understanding, and bears up with the vehicles I and my friends have, anyway.

You'll have to change your login name to 80Watt!

I'd be slightly worried about fitting 2.6/V8 brakes to an 88", as they might be too powerful and tend to lock up if you press the pedal too hard. The standard brakes for the vehicle should be able to lock up if the pedal is used very hard, so these could need very sparing use. I'd have recommended using standard 4-pot 109 brakes instead, but as long as you're careful, you should be alright. I'd recommend testing them on an empty road once installed to see how easy they are to lock up so yu can avoid nasty surprises later! It'd also be worth getting them tested at an MoT station and a letter or report written to confirm the installation is safe - it could save you backside legally and financially if you later have an accident.

He should decide what he wants the vehicle for, because that will dictate its type and specification. Once decided, he should write it down and work out the details of exactly what he wants, researching with advice or experience from as many sources as he can to pin down the exact specifications, like vehicle type, wheel base and body type, then engine, transmission, suspension and steering systems, and finally accessories. Don't go into a dealer/builder without a pretty good idea of what you want, as they could easily persuade you to buy something inappropriate which will earn them a fortune, perhaps even a vehicle they already have in. It's not just the financial services and roofing industries which participate in mis-selling!

Be warned there are two different type, one for pre-rationalised axles and one for post-rationalised. This change was in 1908, and has three differences - first was that the seal land on the earlier part was removable, but not on the later part, the second was that the inboard and outboard bearings were different sizes on the early design but identical after rationalisation, and the third change is that a slot was machined in the outboard face of the flange, on the opposite side to the slot in the threads, which aligned with a hole in the backplate to allow oil leaks to drain away without contaminating the shoes. So, make sure you get the right version! My rationalised axle stubs also had the groove around the flange edge so I don't think that means anything - the stub in the photos is the early type as the inboard bearing land is thicker than the outboard - the newer ones lack that step.

Is yours RHD, Koos?

Your plan should work fine, but replacing the faulty parts would be better. I'm more concerned with the reason for their damage, though. To cause that damage, the centre hub must be sliding skewed in relation to the cage. The only things I can think of that could allow or cause that to happen are an excessive gap between the synchro cones on the third gear and input pinion, allowing the cage itself to misalign inside the box, a bearing or shaft wear issue allowing the hub to run out of alignment, or a selector fork/rod fault forcing the hub out of true (which should be contained by the shaft splines inside the hub anyway). I think you might want to compare the length of the old cage to that of the new one, by sitting it on the third gear and putting the pinion on top and measuring the difference in total stack height; I'd wager that the failed cage is a pattern part that was made too short, preventing the synchros from keeping it aligned. Use a bearing seating compound, similar to thread lock, to set the rear bearing in its carrier - it shouldn't be moving about as you describe. Then use more of that compound to seat the carrier in the casing - it's in the LR manual, but even LR didn't bother, and it's the source of the oil migration from gear box to transfer box: use the compound and you gear box refils will only have to be done every 12,000 miles for replacement, not replenishment.

Yep, as JBS says, you only need to replace the brass ball - the pin shouldn't wear, and the spring is only there to keep the hinge halves close together while you fit the hinge, making door alignment easier. There isn't much adjustment on the door side- the hinge position really just adjusts on the body side. That mean the spring doesn't need to be applying much force, and the old spring will be shorter. I have just had this issue myself, and I was going to replace all the service bits, but the spring was being difficult, so I just reused the old one. Unfortunately, I have had to replace the upper hinge in its entirety as the recesses for the brass ball were also worn, and a new ball did not take up the slack - the hinge had some lateral play, allowing the door to drop its lock side 1/8". The hinge is over 30 years old, though, and the bottom hinges are OK. So check for that play with a new ball fitted, and make sure you grease the parts on assembly.

A thread for the archive, me thinks! GKN overdrives don't enjoy a good reputation for reliability, perhaps because they were designed for smaller, lighter vehicles which don't work as hard, and they need more frequent servicing than their unaltered schedules state. It seems some of the guys here have them cracked and are getting good reliability as a result, with a little more care than the manuals dictate.

I have heard from mechanics that the GKN is prone to cooking its ATF and needs frequent replacement. I was also told that solenoid failures are not uncommon.

In you position, I'd just remove the spacers. If you look at simple trigonometry, for a set length horizontal span (chassis-axle position) and hypotenuse (panhard), then the smaller the vertical disrance (springs), the smaller the angle between horizontal and hypotenuse, and the less the variation in horizontal distance for changes in the angle (axle articulation). Once you get the panhard past about 10 degrees off horizontal, it's going to start having a strong effect of pulling the axle across as the weight comes off the left wheel. Hence my suggestion of modifying the panhard brackets, but you would also want to modify the steering to keep the drag link close to horizontal and as parallel as possible to the panhard. Basically, you've lifted it too high. It's fine on an Icelandic 110 with monster tyres because they don't do much cross-axling on the stone and ice plains, but work the suspension so the panhard rod is moving about, and you'll get these problems. Simply fitting a longer rod will merely hide one symptom, but you'll probably end up with the right side spring doing the same thing when the right wheel is dangling, merely swapping the problem from one side to the other. The only solution is to bring the panhard road and drag link closer to horizontal. Whether you do that by modifying the brackets and steering box drop arm or just removing your spacers is up to you.