Snagger

I have a 109 with standard late SIII brakes, ie. trin leading shoe front drums, dual circuit and a vacuum servo on the pedal box. I'll be fitting a Discovery I front axle and disc braked Defender Salisbury axle. The rear callipers are the same on most late models. The front callipers differ between Defender and Discovery/RRC axles, with the piston capacities being identical but the Defender callipers being fed by one hose to each calliper and the dual circuits being split front/rear (like the 109), while RRC and Discovey brakes have a primary circuit to a piston peai in all four callipers and a secondary circuit to the other piston pair in the front brakes (ie. two hoses to each front calliper). On the RRc and Discovery, the rear brakes operate at a lwer pressure than the front, and a balancing valve is incoprorated between the line to one of the front callipers and the main line to the rear axle to reduce the pressure on the aft brakes. I believe the same occurs on the Defender brakes, but with the dual circuit split being fore/aft, the balancing may be incorporated in the master cylinder. however it is done, balancing of the brakes is imperative, or rear lock-up and skidding will occur. Brake pedal effort for a certain level of retardation is affected by not only the level of servo assistance (greater on coil sprung models' servos), but also on the design of the master cylinder. The SIII 109 dual circuit master cylinder appears shorter and wider than the Defender, RRC or Discovery units. that means that while their cubic capicity is similar, the amount of force needed on the pedal to p[roduce a specific level of hydraulic pressure is greater - the same psi but with more square inches needs more force on the pedal. I was hoping to be able to use the 109 master cylinder and servo with the disc brakes (both being very new and in mint condition), with a Discovery's balancing valve in the rear line, but it sounds like this may need excessive pedal force to achieve reasonable braking performance. We'll see at the time.

I hope you're not serious about option 2, asking us to endorse a criminal act. If the Discovery is rotten, then you could use it either to fund the 88 or as a donor for it. Breaking a rotten Discovery usually earns far more money than selling it complete. Be warned that any Series vehicle on coil springs loses all its chassis, suspension and axle identity points. This would leave you with a maximum of five points, assuming you rtained the original engine, transmission and steering, which is most unusual in these sorts of vehicles. If you fit coil springs, you need an SVA test, Vehicle Identity check and a Q-plate. It's much easier to use parabolic springs, which give ample articulation and comfort and don't affect the vehicle's identity or need complex alterations to fit, just new gas dampers, new U-bolts and, ideally, longer brake hoses.

Heystee also sells them, but at £160 a pair, plus VAT and shipping, getting your local steel fabricator to knock up a set is a better option.

And mine (1982 hard top 2.25 petrol).the switch in the photo is non-standard. A reverse light switch seems a likely candidate, if there are reverse lights on the rear body.

My understanding is that offset is indeed measured from the inboard rim to the centre, not the outbard rim. This means that standard LR rims have a significant offset, while aftermarket 8-spokes and modulars have nearly no offset at all, resulting in their tyre walls being in line with the wing panels rather than recessed. However, most people seem to understand this to be the other way around, referring to greater offset being how much further the tyre is from the vehicle's centreline. If my undertsanding is correct, then to move the tyre outward, you want wheels with less offset, not more. 7x16" 8-spokes or modulars will work for what you want, while LR 1-ton or Wolf rims should give you an extra 2" track (1" movement of each tyre outboard) over standard 109/110 rims and 3" track increase (1.5" each side) over 88" or 90 rims.

By rear drive shaft, do you mean you replaced the seal on the transfer box's output pinion, just inside the speedo housing? If so, unless you added a shim between the speedo housing and transfer box, or left the nuts loose on the studs, then this is not your problem. You could have left the drive flang nut a little loose on the transfer box output shaft - it should be tightened to 65'lbs, which tends to roll the vehuicle forward unless you engage 4wd and 1st gear and chock the road wheels. It could also be a fault in the prop shaft, like a bad UJ or imbalance. This normally becomes apparent at about 50mph on 109 rear prop shafts and can be likened to driving on the motorway rumble strip. If you have 1-ton rear shackles (not an uncommon mod for those trying to get a cheap suspension lift, and recommended foolishly by LRO staff), this can set up vibration problems because the prop shaft flanges are no longer parallel. Have a quick check of the wheel nuts and rear wheel bearings - it can sometimes be the simple things that go wrong, though I find it's almost invariably the expensive and time consuming faults that affect my 109.

I agree. there is nothing wrong with the hub unit, and the baulk rings look only slightly worn. What would stop the synchro unit working is the lack of pressure applied to the rings by the hub because of the missing springs, as I outlined above. If you have replaced the unit, keep this one as a spare and re-spring it.

The springs hold the outer synchro sleeve central to the hub member. The gear level (via the rod and fork) slides the hub towards the desired gear, and the springs carry the synchro rings to the gears' synchro cones, apply pressure to the contact faces and causing the gear and hub rpms to synchronise. With missing or broken springs, the hub cannot press the baulk rings against the gear cones, so no synchronisation will take place.Broken or missing springs will result in the same symptoms as worn baulk rings - the gears will tend to crunch on engagement unless the change is made very slowly or the clutch is double de-clutched to allow synchronisation. These springs do not hold the gear selection engaged in any way and have no influence over jumping out of gear, which is due to end float or bearing problems.

I have TIConsole (Heystee) parabolics on my very heavy 109. They're about 12 years old now, but have not sagged. I'm very pleased with them, but they're damned expensive. Rocky Mountain are a good brand at much more reasonable prices. As said, you need a kit with new gas dampers and new U-bolts (the original bolts will be too long).

To my knowledge, it's impossible to combine HRTC and OD - the gear diameters are different, so a mesh between the OD output gear and the HRTC intermediate cluster would be impossible. You could use either HRTC or OD with 3.54 diffs, and a Tdi would pull it in high range. There are two big issues, though: The first (easily overcome) is that the speedometer needs recalibration. The second is that fitting 3.54 diffs increases the low range gearing by the same 35%(ish) as in high range, which makes controlled hill descents off road a problem.

I used a Defender lower dash during the rebuild of my 109 because new SIII dash assemblies are so hard to find. There is a problem with its bulkhead side - the Series bulkhead has a big scallop just above the throttle rod linkage assembly, and the SIII dash has a corresponding scallop. The Defender dash has a flat back. You either have to remove the bulkhead's scallop and plate the gap (as I did) or remove the scalloped section from the SIII's dash and graft it to the Defender dash (not at all easy). The grey plastic vent panel from a pre-2002 Defender fits a SIII dash, though I found I had to shave the left edge of the aperture for the right side vent flap lever. Both vehicles use the same instrument pod, so fitting a Defender instrument panel is possible once you have altered the wiring to match. The gauges will be incompatible, so you'd have to replace the fuel gauge and temperature sender units with Defender units. The speedo should fit the Defender pod, though the difference in display aesthetics would look odd unless you fit Smiths Industries fuel and temperature gauges. The Defender top dash will fit a SIII (may need a small amount of trimming, but not much), though it will leave the untextured top edge of a SIII instrument pod exposed.

Yes - the turbo cooks the oil. If you fit the engine as a "DI", then you can ignore the oil cooler as well as the intercooler, which is one of that option's main attractions.

No, rotating the turbo's compressor housing only works on the 88 -the 109 has a deeper chassis section and will not clear the compressor casing. You have to use Defender 200Tdi manifolds and turbo.

The US has a bit of paranoia about copper brake pipes. The truth is that though they're more easily damaged than steel pipes, they're also more resistant to corrosion. As long as the pipes are routed with a little thought and given protection where exposed to likely damage, then they will be unlikely to cause problems. I used copper-nickel pipe on my 109, and would not have done so if I had any belief that steel pipe would be safer.

I'd wash the air filter in petrol, dry it and refil with clean oil (be careful not ot overfill it), check the valve clearances and slightly retard the injection timing. Check the fuel system for contamination - if it has stood for a while, it may have water or fungus, and replacing the fuel filter will help.

I would try another battery first, as it may not be keeping up with the starter's demand and allowing the fuel solenoid to close wen cranking.

It sounds like you are tyring to keep the original SIII identity. As long as the new chassis is brand new, unused and of the same spec, then it counts as the original. SO, you need to score three points out of the mechanical components. I'd recommend you forget PAS and fit your original steering (refurbished, of course). That's two points. If the parabolics were previously fitted to the SIII, then you can claim their two points as they're regarded as in-service replacements - they don't have to be factory original, they just can't be brand new. That will give you another two points, exceeding the required total of eight. You can fit the engine,transmission and axles. The only problems is that in fitting the LT77 and LT230, you'll have to modify the chassis' cross members. That would technically lose the chassis' points, preventing you from using the SIII VIN.

Thanks, Matt.

The standard sizes are: 2.25p - 1.25" (I think, maybe 1.5"); 2.5nad - 2"; 2.5TD/Tdi - 2.5" Going smaller reduces top end power but increases torque. It can also increase engine temperatrures and cause the cooling system to struggle. Going larger reduces torque but can increase BHP. I think a 200Di would run fine with a 2.25 diesel manifold and standard SIII petrol exhaust.

I have an LT 230 inmy garage. How can I tell what ratio it is without dismantling it, please? I think it has been rebuilt, so serial numbers may not be applicable. Can I determine the ratio removing nothing more than the rear or bottom plate?

Sounds interesting, and I'd love to see pictures of yours too. I also got a Defender's removable cross-member, so could theoretically cut away the SIII bell housing and gear box cross members, fit the LT230 with its standard mounts as a cross member in itself, and fit the Defender circular section cross member with tubular bolt hole sleeves to the main rails. I think!

Matt, I already have a 200Tdi in my 109 and will be fitting later axles. I also have a rebuilt Defender LT77 and LT230 in the garage, and have been considering fitting those to the 109 to match the 3.54 diffs and give a few other advantages. Would you mind posting some pictures of how you modified the cross members and the cab floor/tunnel cover so that I can get an idea of what's involved, please? Oh, and what do you do about the speedo? Does the Series drive cable fit the LT230, or the defender drive cable fit the Series speedo, and did you need to recallibrate it?

Genuine lights have thin red fibrous washers under the screw heads and black rubber washers inside the screw holes that press up against the backplate's screw "prongs". They are there for exactly those reasons - sealing and crack prevention.

I went for the fully blown Tdi installation on my 109. With the roof rack, roof spots, bull bar and bonnet spare adding to the aerodynamic drag, the vehicle runs out of performance at about the same point as the govenor restricts the engine in 4th with the OD engaged, assuming flat ground and light wind. Up long hills of over 5%, it starts to struggle to maintain 60mph when heavily laden (with a roof tent cover used to contain all the rack stowed items as aerodynamically cleanly as I can). Using 3.54s would leave me overgeared, despite having the turbo and intercooler. A 200DI would run out of performance much earlier, so is unlikely to need the taller gears if used in a similar fashion.Towing seems to have relatively small effect on performance from the few times I have used my Sankey, but the 3.54s would raise the low gears and reverse enough to make maneouvering while hitched up a fair bit more difficult. A small increase in my gearing would be beneficial for motorway cruising, but that could really only be acheived by fitting 3.54s in conjunction with the LT77 and low ratio LT230 I have in my garage - they would offer lower low ratio gearing for off road use while giving a higher top gearing. Using 4.1:1 diffs or 9.00 tyres would give me a 10% gear increase which would be fine on road, but is still too tall when descending steep mountain tracks; even with the standard ratios and the high compression of the Tdi, the engine was still racing away on many descents in 1st low in the Alps, needing frequent dabs of brake, which is not ideal on loose surfaces.

Try Bailey Morris in St Neots. They're a prop specialist, but not just 4wd, so don't add the usual "4x4 premium".