Snagger

There are another couple of points against spacers, other than a general perception (rightly or wrongly) of them being dangerous: 1) they have a habit of the nuts securing them coming loose, so you have to frequently remove the wheel to re-tighten them. Though the inside of the wheel will prevent the nuts undoing far enough that the spacer and wheel could come off, they will allow the spacer and wheel to move and knock on the studs and hub, which could eventually result in the studs shearing, and; 2) it's a pain to service the brakes because you have to remove the spacers from the hubs too, which means twice as many nuts, and undoing the spacer nuts is a bugger because the hub just spins because there is no tyre contacting the ground to keep it still - you need to lock the brake on using the shoe adjusters.

Thanks, fellas, I'll give the 10K a go.

Sorry - it's a 1995 vehicle with about 150,000 miles. You think it might be something on the induction side, rather than fuel, then?

Hi folks. I have a 300Tdi that surges at between 1800 and 2200rpm. Its a bit like a novice drive fouling up the clutch when pulling away in first, kangaroo-ing away. It can happen with gentle throttle acceleration or at steady speed, but is worst on the over-run. I have just replaced the fuel filter and a failed lift pump, and fully bled the system, and while it now starts better and the surging has slightly reduced, it's still very noticeable. Is the injection pump history, or is there another (cheaper) possibility to consider first? Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

My 7x16 8spokes have an offset 2" greater than a LR alloy or Discovery steel wheel and about 2.5" more than Wolf rims. You can see why adding spacers was far too much. I did get a small amount of scrubbing on the top surface of the stub axle where the inner race sits, which could well have been down to the loads from having the tyre centre off set from the bearings' central axis, but it only occurred on one out of the eight bearings (pre spacer fitting), so could just be that the bearing was a bit stiff and spun up once. I used steel spacers because I don't trust aluminium with these forces.

I had a set of steel 30mm spacer when I finished my rebuild, in addition to the 7" 8-spokes and 235s/85. It was fine at speed, but below 10mph it was near impossible to turn, and below walking pace it was impossible to turn the steering wheel. I ditched the spacers and just kept the wheels. WIth standard rims, though, they'd be fine.

Does anyone know if a 200Tdi Discovery master cylinder will bolt onto a SIII servo, or if the complete Discovery master and servo assembly will fit a SIII pedal box without alteration?

It sounds possible, but the Series arms will not be at the correct angle to get the full Ackerman angle - they're a bit too close to parallel to eachother, while the wider tracked coiler axle needs them to be canted out slightly more. However, given that LR didn't make different swivels for LWBs and SWBs (or intermediate 100" in the colier instance), then it suggests the exact angle is not critical. I suspect the SII/SIII arms were set at a compromise between the 88 and 109, so using these on a coiler axle on a 109 should give close to ideal angles, but the short wheel base of an 88 in addition to the wider track of the newer axle will give a more significant deviation from the ideal, with the angle of toe-out in a turn being too small. It'd certainly be better than using the cast arms, though.

Mine has police rear springs fitted by the previous owner. He didn't get round to doing the front springs, but did offer to give me the parts as part of the sale. The front is still on standard springs now, and the mixture gives a very slightly tail high poise that looks modest but sporty - it certainly gets rid of the ugly tail sag that RRCs have. The "lift" is much less than 2" - probably closer to 3/4". I have DeCarbons on each corner (again, by the previous owner), and find the handling very taught and precise. That siad, it did get a bit woolly as the old suspension bushes wore out. I'd bet that's where your problem is, not with the stiffer police springs.

Not me - that was RobHiCap. I just used the elbow for the back of the turbine casing on a TD to fit to a Def200 turbo, as it's the same part. But as Phil says, since the 200 and 300 parts are interchangeable, and a 19J manifold system has been fitted to a 200Tdi with a bit of trimming and a few clamping bars, it should go.

It's a very expensive kit, and the PAS pump is very vulnerable unless you can get a an alternator bracket with pump mounting from a 19J or Def 200Tdi. I have never tried one, but I have been told it has a bit more lag than the normal LR power steering systems. It does have the huge advantages of not requiring any significant chassis mods, and retaining the original steering gear, replacing only the drag link, so you don't have to worry about complex work or losing vehicle identity points. It also behaves just like the standard steering if hydraulic power is lost.

I think you'll find that the track rod is longer on a Series axle than the distance between the left and right swivel pins, which is why the Ackerman angles work and the inner wheel pivots much more than the outer. If you were to fit the lower pins/steering arms on the wrong swivels, then you'd get the negative Ackerman angles (as well as needing a shorter track rod). Unfortunately, as the coil sprung axle swivels have cast-in arms, rather than bolt-on ones like the leafers, we can't swap them from side to side to reverse the cant on the arms.

Post added to enable e-mail notification (ignore this reply).

Hi folks, I have post this question in the Discovery forum because it's more likely to get a useful answer than in the Range Rover side. I have a late (soft dash) 300Tdi RRC, which has similar wiring and mechanicals to the 300 Discovery. I am getting frequent problems with starting - the starter motor cuts in and out, banging away on the ring gear. The starter motor, battery, factory alarm/immobiliser and the foot well starter relay have all been replaced with no effect, so I'm confident that none of them are at fault. The problem seems worst in the cold weather, especially when damp. I have a Microscan immobiliser in addition to the factory unit. In attempting to bypass it, to eliminate it from the list of possible faults, I found some alterations to the dash wiring that have nothing to do with the additional immobiliser. I'd like to remove them, just in case they may be the cause of the trouble, but want to confirm that they are redundant - I think they may have been for the previous owner's car-phone. There is a relay that has a red power feed from the brown wire on the brown plastic connector block next to the steering column (I think that brown wire runs to the ignition switch). The relay appears to be controlled by a brown wire spliced to a brown cable with yellow stripe on a main harness connector block. The relay's earth is fitted, but there seems to be no output. There is a redundant single 27A wire running along the rights side sill which may have been connected to this relay, but is coiled up in the bottom of the foot well. There are also a collection of in-line fuse holders spliced into a connector block with a redundant small connector block for all these fused wires at the end. Again, these appear to be added, not factory, and I'm guessing at them being for the phone system. Can anyone shed any more light before I pull them out, please?

The problem with that idea is still the Ackerman angles - the ends of the arms need to be outboard of the swivel pins if the track rod is in front of the axle, but they're canted inwards for the aft rod position. That means that when you turn, the wheels will toe in sharply, instead of correctly toeing out to reflect the different wheel path radii.

If you can post some photos, it'd be inetresting to see the differences.

It's a really bad idea to try to charge an NAD. LR uprated the pistons, conrods and big ends to cope with the additional stresses for the TD, and it was still very prone to cracking heads and pistons. A converted NAD will be worse. One melted piston in 32k is surprisingly good, but I doubt it'd do 100,000, so won't justify the cost and effort. I have had a 12J (2.5NAD), two 19Js (TD) and now a 200Tdi in my 109, and would strongly advise against trhe 19J or any turbo charger modified NAD.

Does this always happen having parked the vehicle in the same spot, facing the same way, especially if the weather is damp? If one side of the vehicle is more exposed to the weather than the other, it's common for a little surface rust to form more on one side than the other, with the result you describe.

That sounds like oil contamination of the shoes, probably through a weeping hub seal. It could just be the seal itself, or could be the seal land (the thicker part of the stub axle that the seal runs on) having a wear groove. If your axle is 10 spline, then you just need the new seal and a seal land collar. If you have a 24 spline axle, then a damaged seal land requires replacement of the stub axle, as it's not a separate component on the later axles.

I think I just answered your post on the other forum, if you use the FI moniker. The engines pull a SII/SIII fantastically well, and will not risk the transmission while doing it. The mpg will be about the same as with the NAD. Its problems are the propensity with which it cracks pistons and heads. turner Engineering insist the engine is OK, as long as it's religiously maintained, especially the coolant, oil and fuel systems, including regular injector cleaning and callibration.

My 109 is pretty heavy, with all the extras and the thick tub floor. It must have weighed very close to the 3.5T limit on the Alps trip, but the drum brakes coped without any trouble at all - sensible speeds on the way down on the roads and the drums didn't even get hot, while all the disc braked Defenders had been driving faster and had cooked brakes. The main reason I want Defender axles is for the steering radius and CV joints - the disc brakes are a much lower issue on the wants list. I'm told the Rocky Mountain is easy to fit. Their kit doesn't need any machining, from what I understand.

Some people who have used Discovery mounts on their conversions have said that mine vibrates less than theirs. it could be the injectors, but it could be the mounts too. Either way, apart from the fact that Marsland cocked up the chassis brackets' alignment, the 19J mounts work well. Since your engine is a good one, not just a pull-out and drop-in swap, then the rubbers may be worth swapping - they aren't that dear, and it'd be simpler to try 19J rubbers bfore going to the trouble of fitting Discovery mounts.

Sorry - i completely forgot until surfing just now. The photos aren't great, being taken in the dark (and cold!) - let me know if you need more taken in daylight.

I suspect the vibration is as much due to the condition of the engine and mounts as the type of mounts used. I have relatively little vibration, despite using 19J rubbers instread of Series or Tdi, as RJBlank saw at Glencoyne's workshop. Then again, the engine was rebuilt, I have new injectors and the engine is set up dead right. Try setting the timing and valves as accurately as possible and flushing the injection system with a cleaning additive before you worry too much about the mounts.

I'll do it later today for you.