Snagger

DO you have similar regs in Malta to us in the UK, then, Grem?

Welcome, Mikey! I hope you'll find this to be the best forum. I have used several, and this has by far the highest level of technical knowledge, aptitude and experience of the many I have frequented, and is also much more positive in its attitude than most. There are people on here who can deal with issues on the tiniest details on standard systems to the most radical of modifications. I look forward to seeing some of your pictures of the work on your Series - it's always good to see them being rescued and restored to road going health. Oh, and at the risk of getting told off for bringing up the taboo subject of SVA test and regs, just make sure you know the rules about the use of a second hand chassis as opposed to replacing a rotten chassis with a brand new one - the rules are very different in each case.

You won't have any problem with the washers. Proper spacers will be much better and will give you peace of mind, though, and might stop quizzical looks at MoT. Do yourself a favour and have the installation checked and signed off with an engineers report and forward it to your insurers - it would cover your backside if you have an accident and doesn't cost much.

How about using stainless steel? It's more difficult to weld and cut/drill, but is should last longer. As for the wood, don't do it - even with spacer washers, it's a humidity trap. The same an be said for the after-market aluminium chequer-plate cross member covers, which just promote the corrosion of the cross member that the plate has been applied to hide. I think all you can do in your environment is repair (or ideally replace with a new galvanised version) your chassis and coat it with red oxide and marine paints on the outside and annually steam clean and spray the inside of it with old engine oil, which should give some protection but not trap the salt in place once it gets in there like wax would.

I had a look at those photos, and it looks to me like he used 300 stub axles with the 110 hubs. This means the shorter stub axle is not seating the outer race on the smooth section of stub, so is not supported properly, and the whole lot is only shown as secured by one nut, not the two required. I don't think that's a safe installation if the photos are showing the hub fully pressed on. As I said before, and as Grem did on his, you retain the original stub axles and shafts, all you change is the hubs and the spacer washer that goes behind the first hub nut, replacing the original very thick washer with incorporated rubber seals used on the 110 axle originally with a Discovery equivalent, filled a little to press up over the nose of the smooth section of the stub against the wheel bearings.

It would, but I suspect Western may have used the dimensions used by Gremlin and me, who both used the same solution, and not realised the different dimensions of the Defender callipers until final fitting. You'd have to ask him, though. I did use washers during the initial build up to see what would work, but once I had worked out the plan, I went for a rigid spacer as I think it will be less likely to bend the mounting bolts. Washers should be OK, but in Western's position, I'd probably make up new thicker shims or a second shim to add to the first, which would work just fine.

I found two alignment problems, both mentioned already, but for clarification: 1) The 90/110 front hubs are slightly wider than the Salisbury drum braked hubs, so you can't use the thick spacer washer from the Salisbury under its bearing nuts. I used Discovery spacer washers to press the wheel bearings back against the stub axle, with the inner edge bevelled with a file to allow it sit over the beginning of the smooth section of the stub axle - if you don't bevel the washer, it won't press against the bearings and you'll have way too much end float; 2) The position of the calliper relative to the disc is way off, needing either spacing to move the calliper and its bracket inboard, or milling of the bracket to move them outboard, depending on the choice of calliper and disc. I used 110 rear/RRC and Discovery front discs, with Discovery/RRC rear callipers. It's not an ideal set up as the disc is a bit thick and has a larger radius, so clearance is tight in the calliper, and when the rim of the disc gets rusty, it'll have to be cleaned up to maintain that calliper clearance, but it clears at the moment. I used a 6 or 8mm shim on the mounting brackets. With Defender callipers, the offset will probably be much thicker - the thinner hubs would put the discs further inboard. That is where Western has had to use washers in addition to his spacers.

It's held in by self tapping screws along its bottom and over ends (exposed) and two bolts on the top into the bulkhead, for which you have to remove the grey plastic trim and the parcel shelf trim. The grab handle and lower fascia edge trim are just screwed in place (one screw or bolt behind the oval badge in the upper part of the grab handle). You'd also need to disconnect the Bowden cable operating the vents in the fascia from the lever, which is simple once you detach the lever panel from the upper fascia. The lower fascia is steel, it's only wrapped in vinyl. depending on how far the rot extends, you might be able to just unscrew its bottom and side edges and wedge it away from the bulkhead with the top still bolted up.

Are the battery leads clean? Do you have an isolator anywhere? You might have a wrecked battery that is getting only a surface charge but is not deep charging - running a battery completely flat can do that.

You won't hurt the heater system by welding from within the foot well. Don't glue the repair in - the foot well needs proper support, especially on the driver's side, as it supports the pedal boxes, which take a lot of force - a botched repair could lead to the pedal boxes coming away and a complete brake failure as a result. The "blower trough" is normally on the passenger side, though, and well away from the foot well. Are you talking about the plastic engine air intake in the wing panel? Jut remove it for the work to be done, as you'll need access to paint and protect that side of the repair once the welding is done. Cut as much of the rot out as possible, and use plenty of wax on the overlaps afterwards to hold its return at bay.

If it was that effective, don't you think it would be standard for car manufacturers to fit them from new? Never mind that it'd be legislated, the manufacturers all want to give the best economy figures for sales and tax purposes.

Hi folks. I hope someone may be able to help with some issues. I have rebuilt my gear box after third gear was stripped. The box worked mostly fine on refitting, but jumped out in the over-run in fourth. Suspecting that the main shaft and primary pinion may not have been perfectly in line (a worn spigot bush having caused the same symptoms when I fit the Tdi), I stripped the unit again and rebuilt it with new bearings for the entire main shaft and a new spigot bush, assembling the entire transmission as standard before hoisting into the vehicle - last time I assembled the transmission in sections onto the engine, ad the play in the pinion bearing may have allowed the bell housing to be fitted slightly misaligned to the flywheel housing. Another new spigot bush was also fitted. Now, when the main shaft rear nut is tightened the last quarter turn, it locks up the gear box. With it slightly loose, the main shaft turns happily. I suspect that for some reason, the first gear end float has disappeared, so tightening the nut is clamping the first gear between its thrust washers. Any other ideas?

Sorry, miss-read it!

The right hand stub axle is for a Salisbury axle, the other for a Rover axle. You need a Rover front axle stub. Try asking your nearest supplier for a quote on a Bearmach new part - they shouldn't be too dear and at least it won't have any wear or pitting on the seal or bearing surfaces.

I'm recommending omitting the seal in order to lubricate the drive flange and half shaft splines, not the bearing.

2007 Defenders do't have Salisbury diffs, and nor do most TD5s - they have a 4-pin short pinion Rover diff, as used in the P38 RRs. As for backlash in a 300,000 km unit, replacing the bearings won't refurbish worn gears. That doesn't indicate a poor design, though - most cars are on the scrap heap with half that distance, so a little backlash is easily forgiveable. And yes, Salisbury units are the toughest standard units fitted on Land Rovers.

Shouldn't be any problems with either seal type as the pinion flages are the same size on all years.

Clutches are a weak point, apparently. Our had to have a new rear window as the high level brake light was u/s. and the wiring in the left wing repaired (short between lights and horn) repaired, I had to remove the inner trm to refit hard top securing nuts that had come off and align the front doors and front wings correctly as they were way off )the wings have been droopy ever since the 300Tdis). As for the underside, the factory corrosion resistnce is nil, so we had it properly done and I stripped back, zinc primed and painted the rear cross member.

Being as suspicious as Bill was that the 3.54 diffs were a contributory factor in my gear box's failure, I have replaced the 3.54 diff in the 110 rear axle with a 4.71 diff from a 109 axle. The manuals make it sound terrifyingly complex, but it isn't. KAM Diffs' website states that the shims used for setting the pinion depth in the casing are to sort out the tolerances in the casing, the pinions being machined accurately enough that you can just use the existing shims even when changing pinions. My measurements of pinion depth in the old and new casings were within 0.02mm, and to be honest I don't think that was any more than measurement accuracy could manage. The same is true of bearings - they are very accurately machined and can be replaced without shim adjustment. As for the diff carrier, the 4.71 and 5.54 units were almost identical in overall width, including their bearing races, and didn't need any shim adjustment - the 4.71 slipped straight in (with the aid of the axle spreader) and the mesh was correct from the original shimming in its original casing. This matches up with the experiences of two others I found on the web who had fitted 3.54 diffs to their 109 axles, going the other way from what I did. I wouldn't be so certain that they can normally be transferred so easily, and may often need shims adding, removing or transferring from one side to the other, but a test fit to check for end float and free rotation with the spreader and pinion removed and a mesh check with engineers blue (or emulsion paint) will quickly tell you. So, apart from the huge amount of torque needed to crush the collapsible spacer to set the pinion bearing preload, which would be OK with the flange lever tool and a breaker bar, it really isn't a difficult task, just heavy! I need to get the speedo calibrated again, though, but at least swapping the front diff is simple. SO, It's back to the standard gearing, plus overdrive, which makes it a bit revvier, 10% thirstier and a lot noisier at 60mph, but it drives more nicely again. Fitting non-standard ratios requires the use of 3.54 carriers and special gears. KAM say their gears are different thicknesses form standard, so the carrier bearings need shim adjustment for sure, and possibly some trimming of the housing with a grinder. Their non-standard ratio pinions are still a straight swap, though.

EP 90 in the swivels will lubricate the bearing in the neck of the swivel, but not the stub axle if the seal is fitted.

It's a good idea to leave the seal out to allow lubrication of the shaft and drive flange splines - it makes them last many times longer than if the seal is included. Just make sure you fit the plastic cover on the outside of the flange with a bead of RTV sealant.

The flange may have a small variation in thickness which could upset the position of the nut on the pinion threads, but make alignment marks before you undo the nut anyway, and then measure the depths of the flanges as best you can for comparison. I doubt there will be much difference. The collapsible tube is sodding tough and merely holds the inner races of the bearings apart against the pressure of the nut, with the nut position setting the bearing preload. If you replace the flange (and seal if required), then doing the nut up afterwards with a standard ratchet will not apply anywhere near enough torque to further crush the spacer - even with a breaker bar it takes a hell of an effort (just did one the other day). Just do the nut up as tight as you can with the 1/2" ratchet and it'll be fine.

A very smart idea.

Try to think of DC electrics in plumbing terms. The voltage is akin to the pressure and the current is like the flow rate through the pipes. It's not a 100% accurate analogy, but it works well enough. In this case, imagine you have a shower to connect up. It makes no difference to the shower whether the header tanks in the loft carry 10 gallons or 100 - it is only the pressure caused by the height of the tanks above the shower that affects the pressure. In the same way, the capacity of a battery will not affect the performance of the starter motor as long as the voltage is correct. The only difference is that a small capacity tank, or battery, will deplete faster.

Excellent - a nice cheap fix that worked properly!