Snagger

I just fitted mine inverted, and they look fine that way. Since the wiring will be custom and any identification stickers are added by you, then it's dead simple.

You enjoy a challenge, don't you!

You could try VehicleWiringProducts, but I have only seen two-way switches of that type. Why three way? Can you not set your fan to have a feed from the thermostatic switch and another parallel feed from the dash switch, so either can activate the fan? Do you really need to be able to switch it off from the cab? I would think that you could disconnect the feed or pull the fuse from the thermostatic switch if that goes wrong and just use the on-off switch in the cab, or do the same if you want the fan off for wading. It'd be much easier to source the switch and works just as well. It'd also prevent you from cooking the engine by accidentally leaving an "off/auto/on" switch in the off position. It works very well for me like that, using an X-eng X-Fan switch kit and an illuminated two-way rocker of exactly the type and position you're thinking of.

My thick cork one came from Rocky Mountain with the finned aluminium bottom plate. The thick card gasket would be quite sufficient, and I think I got that from Dunsfold Land Rover (excellent supplier).

Hi Doug. Richard sells OEM 2.5/Tdi rubbers as he found (as many others including me did) that many pattern parts have harder rubber, so yours should be either Gen Parts or from the same manufacturer. I don't have any useful measurements, but it was very noticeable that the chassis brackets were wrong - the engine rubbers had a severe distortion, with one bent forward and one aft. I looked at the transmission rubbers and also the engine position in the vehicle, and it was clear which bracket was at fault. With that bracket removed, and the others slackened, the engine and transmission was able to sit further forward and relieve the stresses on the three "correct" mounts. I could then fit the offending rubber and engine bracket without attaching it to the block to measure the longitudinal misalignment, which was exactly 1/2". The thing is, the all four are really in the wrong position, even now they all have the correct spacing from each other - I had real problems fitting my Tdi as I couldn't get clearance between the turbo elbow and the left foot well. It transpires that they fitted the engine mountings and gear box cross member in the 2.6 position (roughly 2" further aft), despite me ordering a chassis for a standard transmission and engine position with engine mounts for 2.5 engines (the gear box cross member and left bracket should have been standard 4-cyl 109, and only the right engine bracket of different spec). I managed to get everything to fit by having an 8mm spacer plate milled to raise the turbo up from the exhaust manifold, so everything is now clear from the engine, so this still doesn't explain the idling vibration. Apparently, TD5s vibrate quite a bit with their LT230 damper removed (bolts on to the PTO aperture cover). I have been given one from a scrapped TD5 Discovery by Rogers of Bedford. The bolt holes need radial elongation to match the smaller PCD of the Series PTO bolts, but, hopefully, it'll be a simple addition. If it makes a difference, I'll notch the mounting plate to allow it to fit the Roverdrive when that goes back on. While I was at Rogers, I also managed to get some 300Tdi mountings from a scrapped chassis. The rubber compound on these and on the TD5 Discovery's transmission mounts is far softer than the 200Tdi engine mounts. Series vehicles used the same rubbers on all four points (two for the engine and two for the transmission), either relatively small circular ones for petrol models or larger square ones with stiffer rubber (same as the 2.5 engine rubber) and sturdy steel encasement for diesels. I am wondering about my transmission mountings - I currently have SIII diesel rubbers fitted, but I'm wondering if fitting the petrol rubbers I have in my garage drawers might help - Defenders and Discoverys use much smaller rubbers for their transmissions than their engines, made of the same softer rubber, so their transmission mountings obviously have more "give" than the engine rubbers do. Perhaps the stiff diesel rubbers on my transmission are part of the problem, which still ties up with Glencoyne's suspicions of the transmission absorbing less of the vibration on Series vehicles?

Rumour has it that there is a Russian gang based in Daventry, but it could all be a made-up story.

This is a bit of an odd one. If you had a Discovery crank pulley, it would be pretty obvious something was wrong as it has only one groove and that sits well forwards. As mentioned, the water pumps are completely different, so you can't have a Discovery unit on there. There is a possibility that the water pump has the wrong pulley, since this is the only one out of line, but as I recall, the Defender pump pulley has four bolts while the Discovery pulley has only three and has a very different shape. The timing case and water pump of the Defender 200Tdi are very similar but not necessarily identical to the 12 and 19J engines, and it may be possible that a 19J pump has been fitted and that hey have different pulley alignments (though I doubt they differed - I would expect their parts to be the same as the engines share the same crank shaft, PAS pump, alternator and mounting brackets). It's worth enquiring with a parts dealer to see if the 19J and Def200Tdi have different part numbers for their pumps or pump pulleys, though. My bet would be on a dodgy pattern part water pump made with too short a spindle or the pump pulley from another engine being fitted, possible a Series' 2.25 engine.

They are genuine 2.5/Tdi mountings. I have also tried genuine SIII diesel mountings with no improvement. The vibration is fairly significant at idle, but is gone at 900rpm+. I never had any vibration problems with the 12J and had relatively little trouble initially with the Tdi, but the mounting rubbers were twisted because Marsland had fitted the right side chassis bracket 1/2" too far aft. I fixed that without damaging the chassis by removing the rhs engine bracket (2.5/Defender type), welding up the two bolt holes and drilling new ones 1/2" further forward, so the rubbers are all unstressed except for the compression from the engine weight. The distorted rubbers were replaced with new pattern then genuine parts at that point. Since doing that, the idling vibration has been a bit of a problem. The steering column shakes and makes a racket unless the steering wheel has light pressure applied to it (any direction), the gear stick rattles a bit and the sunroof vibrates visibly (estimated vertical movement of 2-3mm). The vibration is also quite apparent through the passenger seat, though the driver's seat is not affected. As soon as the rpm is increased a little (too much to increase the idle screw to that rpm), it all disappears and the vehicle is comparatively civilised for a SIII... I have tried adding a steel plate and RRC front axle vibration damper, and this has helped a little. I spoke to Richard at Glencoyne, and he has a plausible suspicion that the lighter SIII transmission (compared to the mass of the LT77 and LT230) may be the problem, so I'm now wondering about fitting mass dampers to the back of the transmission, much like LR did on the TD5 Defenders. I do think slightly softer engine mounts might help, though - LR did fit bigger, more supple mounts on the Discovery 200 engines and 300Tdi. I'd prefer not to have to cut and weld chassis brackets, given that it's a relatively new galvanised chassis, which is why I'm hoping there is a softer alternative to the Defender rubbers that fits as a direct replacement. I don't have an rpm gauge, so have to estimate the idle rpm, but it seems pretty normal. The engine isn't moving visibly at idle, but the vibration seems to be at some sort of vehicle harmonic frequency.

They are genuine 2.5/Tdi mountings. I have also tried genuine SIII diesel mountings with no improvement. The vibration is fairly significant at idle, but is gone at 900rpm+. I never had any vibration problems with the 12J and had relatively little trouble initially with the Tdi, but the mounting rubbers were twisted because Marsland had fitted the right side chassis bracket 1/2" too far aft. I fixed that without damaging the chassis by removing the rhs engine bracket (2.5/Defender type), welding up the two bolt holes and drilling new ones 1/2" further forward, so the rubbers are all unstressed except for the compression from the engine weight. The distorted rubbers were replaced with new pattern then genuine parts at that point. Since doing that, the idling vibration has been a bit of a problem. The steering column shakes and makes a racket unless the steering wheel has light pressure applied to it (any direction), the gear stick rattles a bit and the sunroof vibrates visibly (estimated vertical movement of 2-3mm). As soon as the rpm is increased a little (too much to increase the idle screw), it all disappears and the vehicle is comparatively civilised for a SIII... I have tried adding a steel plate and RRC front axle vibration damper, and this has helped a little. I spoke to Richard at Glencoyne, and he has a plausible suspicion that the lighter SIII transmission (compared to the mass of the LT77 and LT230) may be the problem, so I'm now wondering about fitting mass dampers to the back of the transmission, much like LR did on the TD5 Defenders. I do think slightly softer engine mounts might help, though.

Hi folks. Does anyone know of any other mounting vibration dampers that can be used on a 200Tdi Defender engine - I'm getting sick of the vibration transmitted to the chassis at idle.. I have been told of Ford Transit mountings with oil filled hollow rubber, but haven't managed to find any details. I was also wondering if any polyurethane bush company has made substitute mountings, as this would seem a very good sales opportunity, given the number of retrofits into Series vehicles and pre-Defender 90s and 110s.

Hi folks. Does anyone know of any other mounting vibration dampers that can be used on a 200Tdi Defender engine - I'm getting sick of the vibration transmitted to the chassis at idle.. I have been told of Ford Transit mountings with oil filled hollow rubber, but haven't managed to find any details. I was also wondering if any polyurethane bush company has made substitute mountings, as this would seem a very good sales opportunity, given the number of retrofits into Series vehicles and pre-Defender 90s and 110s.

I suspect that much of the problem with K&N filters' reduced dust extraction is that they dry up. I have one fitted on my 109. It made a small but definite difference to the 12J NAD engine I had in there, using the 12J/19J style filter housing. I still have it in with my 200Tdi, and it must make even more difference with that. However, I have two small advantages that would otherwise see me fitting OEM paper filters. Firstly, I have a Mantec snorkel with centrifugal top which removes much of the dust from the intake point. Secondly, the retrofit nature of the engine installation and the mods required to fit a snorkel required the use of the 19J duct adaptor to fit the snorkel's hose to the filter housing, and that adaptor also takes the hose from the breather unit, so the filter is continually being refreshed by the oil vapours from the breather system. This means that my filter is kept lightly oiled, while the vertical mounting of the filter allows excess oil to pool at the bottom of the housing and be drained through the valve and drain pipe I installed. 19Js tended to suffer badly from filter contamination and collapse, but the K&N doesn't suffer in this manner (admittedly, the Tdi doesn't breathe as heavily anyway). So, K&N filters may be a bad choice for some applications, but a good choice for others...

I have one too. There have been lots of 200Tdi retrofits into SIIs and SIIIs, including my own. There are many ways of doing it, and useful searches other than this forum include Glencoyne Engineering, TerriAnn Wakeman's "Green Rover" site and my blog (nickslandrover.co.uk). There have been less 300Tdi installations because of a handful of disadvantages: the engine is regarded, perhaps unfairly, as being less robust than the 200, it doesn't fit the Series chassis mountings as easily as the 200, the turbo orientation makes ducting and exhaust fitting more difficult and they were genrally more expensive than scrapped Discovery 200Tdi engines. The 300 is actually a very reliable engine. The oil pump is far superior, for starters. It had initial problems with faulty timing pulley alignments causing belt wear or failure, but this was quickly rectified and any of those small number of affected engines still running would have been rectified already. The "P gasket" which connects the water pump area of the timing cover to the block can weep, and it's a pain to put right because the whole timing case has to come off to do it, but reassembly only requires a few new gaskets, so a DIY repair is not very costly. They also have thinner heads than the 200Tdi, which are more susceptible to heat warping and damage, and I suspect it's also the reason for the 300's increased frequency of head gasket failure (it usually blows out behind cylinder four and the rear of the engine), but it's not a regular occurrence and is easily replaced (the new laminated gaskets are much better). The other good news is that 300 heads are still available new, if needed, while 200 heads are not. What is very noticeable is how much smoother the 300 engine is than the rather agricultural 200. That's not just down to the mountings - the compression ratio, turbo boost pressure and fuel injection were all altered to give a much quieter and smoother engine that still gives the same performance and seemingly better fuel economy (though the figures are listed as identical). Installation wise, the 300 will fit in much the same way as the 200 fitting guides you'll find on the net; the fuel and electrical systems will be identical between the two versions. The flywheel housing may be easier to deal with as the 300 doesn't have the ladder frame between block and sump that four of the 200 flywheel housing bolts go into. I believe the SIII and 12/19J diesel flywheel housings fit the 300 block, and they will fit the Series bell housing (with the relocation of just one stud to a blind hole on the later housings). The tricky bit would be the engine mounts. While Discovery 200 engines can have their block brackets swapped with the 2.25 to use the existing chassis brackets, and the Defender 200 can still use the left mounting the same way (needing an new chassis bracket on the right), the 300 has completely different bracket locations and the 2.25 brackets can't be used. You will need to measure the crank front end position of the 2.25 (making a simple jig would be best) before removing it, cut away the chassis brackets and fit the Discovery's chassis brackets with the engine supported in its correct, jigged or measured alignment. Unfortunately, the left mounting is in the location occupied by the 2.25's exhaust, and the new custom exhaust will drop down through the space previously occupied by the 2.25 mounting. So, you'll need a custom exhaust (the intermediate and rear sections for a 2.6 6cyl work perfectly, so you just need a custom down pipe). The last remaining issue will be the duct from the air filter to the turbo inlet, which normally routes around the back of the engine with the filter mounted on the right hand head bolts. There is no room for this duct between the bulkhead and engine, and the duct will have very restricted space with the foot well and heater matrix causing difficulties. I think it'll fit, but won't swear to it. I think it would be a worthy conversion for a well used vehicle - the only thing I dislike about my 200Tdi conversion is the vibration, and you would avoid that with a 300.

I don't think wheel-debris damage is likely to be an initial issue, but stone chipping of protective coverings followed by rusting could be a problem. The sides facing the tyre would have to be thickly double-skinned, like the undersides of Series' fuel tanks to make sure that large stones didn't cause significant damage. My concerns are still that the location is too prone to accident damage, while the areas under the seats and behind rear wheel arches used for after-market 110 expedition tanks are less frequently damaged, and that the volume of space available doesn't justify the cost and trouble of fitting fuel tanks to these areas. Since the under-seat tanks can be fitted and serviced, repaired or eventually replaced with off-the-shelf parts, and they carry 12 Gal each, they are a much more practical solution. You would need to fit the out riggers that support the front ends of the tanks to the chassis, but the optional parts catalogue shows these as being fitted with rivnuts and bolts, so you'd be able to do that yourself even if you can't weld.

There are early SIIIs which are tax exempt (you still need to get the tax disc in the normal way, but it's issued for free). These 1972 SIIIs will have "L" registrations. The 300Tdi Discovery will not have any donor parts unless you intend to modify the Land Rover significantly. You can use a brand new replacement chassis, galvanised or painted, without affecting the VIN as long as you meet the DVLA and VOSA rebuild rules, shown on their website. In essence, you need to score 8 points to retain the VIN from any of the available points allocations: Chassis - original and unmodified (repairs allowed) or brand new replacement (with proof of purchase) of original specification - 5 points; Original in service suspension - 2 points; Original steering system - 2 points; Original transmission - 2 points; Original axles (both together) - 2 points (no points if only one axle retained); Engine - 1 point. So, you can make some changes without losing the VIN, but you can't fit coil springs (too many chassis alterations) and would need to be very careful about other alterations that involve chassis modifications - there is some disagreement over the interpretation of the rules on here, but I don't believe fitting a Discovery's transmission on steering is allowed as cross members have to be moved to accommodate them, losing to many points to make up the eight required. However, some report positively about contact with VOSA inspectors over the power steering changes; I simply have not had any response to my numerous enquiries into it. I think a SIIA on a galvanised chassis with parabolic leaf springs and a 300Tdi engine would be a very good vehicle, though - the springs don't require any alterations to any part of the vehicle and the engine would only require different mounting brackets on the chassis rails, which are unlikely to be considered a material change to the chassis' specification or design.

I have seen something similar done on a Merc G Wagen for water storage, but never for fuel.. I think its too vulnerable to damage from the wheel and from accidents, and also think that it'd be to heavy for the relatively weak aluminium skin to support if the tank was big enough to be worthwhile. I second the under-seat tank solution. MoD Series LRs have tin under-seat tanks, and LR offered it as an option on civilian vehicles, including rear-tank 109s. Special Vehicles even used the Series top-filled military/optional extra tanks under the right seat of the Tierra del Fuego Camel Trophy 110s (at least on the support vehicles). I have a pair of those tanks, like a MoD 109, in addition to the original rear tank, giving a total of 42 gallons of fuel capacity.

88 panels are the same size as the panels fitted to 109 and 110 station wagons. Since they fit 110 SWs, they must fit your panels. Make a card template from the new windows and play around with it before marking and cutting. Use foam tape on the back of the window lip to seal it against the panel and use sealed-end pop rivets. A rubber strip covers the rivet heads once installed.

The Tdi and Series coolers were built to work in different circumstances. The Series oil cooler is a bypass system were most of the oil from the pump is sent around the engine but some is sent through the oil cooler and directly back to the sump. The Tdi cooler runs in the supply side of the engine - the pump provides oil pressure to the filter housing, and from there the oilstat diverts the oil through either a direct path into the engine galleries or via the cooler into the galleries, not the sump. The flow restriction needs to be less in the Tdi system as the engine needs sufficient oil to pass through the cooler for supplying the galleries, and the tolerances on the bearings themselves provides the flow restriction to ensure the oil spends sufficient time in the cooler to shed its heat - the Series cooler needs to have internal restrictions as it dumps straight into the sump. My previous post was just speculating that the Series cooler can shed more heat because it is bigger and is surrounded by high flow cold air, not very hot water. While the amount of oil that could pass through the Series cooler may be less than the Tdi cooler, I was wondering if would still work because a smaller amount of oil cooled by a much greater amount could bring the overall oil temperature down to a similar level. It worked on my 12J, but as I said, that didn't have a turbo trying to cook the oil. What I have seen on my Tdi, though, is that once the oilstat opens, the oil pressure to the engine drops significantly, and I believe it's because the oil stat is partially blocking the direct oil path through the filter housing in an effort to divert the oil through the embedded cooler, which still has a significant restriction.

I would clean the metal faces with brake cleaner, and apply RTV sealant to the gasket, not the blue Hylomar non-setting sealant, with a 2mm bead on one side of the gasket, applying a 2mm bead to the plate, positioning the gasket onto the plate and then applying another bead of sealant to the top of the gasket and then fitting the plate while the sealant is all still wet.

There should be a thick card (1mm-ish)or cork (2mm-ish) gasket (both are available from different suppliers). These panel joints are very prone to leaking, usually from distorted edges to the steel plate rather than ali casing faults. Check the flanges are flat on a bench or with a straight edge, repairing as necessary.

I'd be more concerned about the oil pressure than the temperature - if the temperature is too high, you'll lose pressure, but if the oil temperature is OK, it won't reduce the viscosity and pressure. However, if there is a flow rate problem with using the Series oil cooler, then this will reduce both the temperature and pressure of the oil entering the engine (the oil will be flowing too slowly to maintain the pressure, but will benefit from the extra time in the cooler to be well cooled), so a temperature indication could be giving false hope. Of course, fitting both pressure and temperature gauges is a better, if costlier, alternative. You'll need a t-piece to connect a pressure gauge - it fits into the filter housing where the pressure switch currently sits. The pressure switch and pressure gauge sensor/capillary tube then connect to the T. The temperature sensor goes into the filter housing aperture fitted with a brass plug on the 12J/19J and 200Tdi, and I assume there is a similar fitting on the 300Tdi (the housings are different, but comparable). Make sure you get the sender for a 12V Series vehicle if you use the MoD style water temp/oil temp/fuel qty main gauge, or just use the sensor that comes with the gauge if fitting a 2" separate gauge. I had no trouble with oil pressure or temperature using the Series style oil cooler and rad on my 12J (which uses the same oilstat and hoses as the 200Tdi). With the Tdi, though, using a brand new rad/oil cooler, thermostat and rebuilt engine, I get a significant pressure drop off as the oil temperature reaches the last part of its climb to the middle of the "normal" arc on the temperature gauge, which matches the pressures observed by every other Tdi owner I have had a reply from when asking what pressure they get at high rpm well into a run - my 12J gave 55psi hot or cold at 1500rpm and 25psi at idle when hot, but the Tdi only matches that with cool oil, dropping to a maximum of 37 psi at 3000rpm and 13 psi at idle. In all honesty, I think the far bigger air cooled SIII oil cooler does a better job than the Tdi's small rad-embedded cooler, which is trying to dissipate heat into the 80oC+ hot water of the rad header tank. Therefore, the required flow through the SIII cooler is small compared to the required flow through the Tdi cooler, making any restricted flow inside the cooler irrelevant, and the oil stat will open the cooler path less and restrict the direct cold bypass flow through the filter housing less, allowing maintenance of high pressure while achieving similar oil temperatures. However, while it's operating water and oil temperatures were the same as my Tdi's, it has to be remembered that the 12J's oil system doesn't have to cope with a turbo charger which draws a significant proportion on the oil pump's output (dropping its unregulated output pressure). The 12J needs less oil cooling, too, being NA, so perhaps, the pressure was maintained better than the Tdi because the oil cooler circuit was essentially not being used and the oil was allowed to flow relatively unrestricted through the could circuit direct path inside the filter housing. What I can assure you, though, is that the Tdi oil cooler system is also restrictive. If you do fit oil pressure and temperature gauges, I'd be keen to know how you get on. I have a suspicion (and nothing more than that) that you will see very healthy readings - I'd wager the Tdi had an embedded oil cooler only because it was cheaper to manufacture and much cheaper to install than two separate heat exchanger units like the MoD FFR Series vehicles had.

Very neat, Grem - that mounting looks indestructible. One thing of minor concern, though, is that while you have mounted the PAS box high to get the same amount of protrusion as the relay had, the fairly straight drop arm looks very close to the dumb iron. Wouldn't a swan-necked (Defender?) arm give better clearance between the TRE nut and the dumb iron and also give a flatter drag link, resulting in less bump steer? I can see the need to mount the PAS box up high to ensure clearance from the diff as the suspension flexes, but like most things, one solution can bring around other issues...

My recommendation would be to use the wiring diagram suitable for your vehicle in original form and return the wiring to standard, making repairs where necessary. Once that's complete, you then need to make a hand full of alterations to the engine loom. The petrol ign switch is fine for powering the starter motor solenoid, though some people prefer to add a relay to that circuit. Personally, I don't see the need and kept mine directly connected. You will need to re-route the thick white/red wire from the ugn switch to the battery tray mounted solenoid to the solenoid blade terminal on the Tdi starter motor, which may include the need for extending the wire. The temperature sender wire should already be in the right place and the right length. You will need to fit the 2.25's sender to the Tdi as the Tdi's sender is not compatible with the Series gauge. The white/pale blue ign feed to the coil needs to be extended to reach the fuel solenoid on the injection pump. The white/brown oile pressure warning light wire should reach the pressure switch in the Tdi's oil filter housing. The alternator wiring can be left connected to the starter motor ring terminal. The battery's positive cable needs to be rerouted directly to that same terminal, omitting the original tray mounted solenoid. The battery may still fit in its original position, but most people generally refit it under the passenger seat. The dash feeds (heavy brown wires) are connected to the starter motor ring terminal, with the alternator and battery cables. That just leaves the heater plugs. You can either fit a separate harness with a heavy duty switch or light duty switch and heavy relay (50A+) to run directly from the battery to the no.4 heater plug (fit a fuse in the system), or you can use the timed relay from the engine donor to avoid any extra switches - if you can grab the loom and connector block along with the relay itself, then you'll be able to fit everything more easily, but if not, here's a guide of how it connects up: Looking at the bottom of the relay and it's terminals, all but one are parallel. Hold the relay so that one odd direction terminal is at the top; 1) That top terminal is for the yellow and black wire to the glow plugs; 2) The big terminal at the bottom is a fused feed from the battery (brown); 3) The left large terminal is connected to the II position of the ign switch or the white wires in the fuse box; 4) The small upper left terminal is connected to a thin white/red wire that spurs from the starter solenoid control wire (to cancel the heaters when starting the engine); 5) The big right terminal connects to a body earth (black); 6) The small right lower terminal connects via a thin yellow and black wire to the dash "cold start" warning light.

One solution to that angle cross member and engine removal space would be to cut it off again leaving an inch or two attached to the chassis rails and then cut a fresh full-length cross member, drill some bolt holes in the remaining stubs and have it a removable cross member, or even just use flitch plates to re-use the same length of angle in its current alignment. As for the Britpart rod end, I have a deep distrust of that brand, but in fairness, their rod ends are quite good - I put a set on my RRC five or six years ago, well before I started my self-imposed boycott on their brand, and they are still absolutely mint. I'm sure you'd be keeping an eye on all of the rod ends on your routine servicing, so it won't need any special treatment.

I think you just fill out the details change section of the V5 and send it to them, but they may ask for a headed letter from an independent garage confirming the change (it's an anti-fraud measure).