landroversforever

Long Term Supporters
  • Content count

    10,136
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    37

Everything posted by landroversforever

  1. Please do! I'm (slowly) doing the same conversion so I'd be interested to see what rakeway have done for the shaft? as that's the next bit for me drive-train wise. How long is their adaptor face to face? Edited to add that I've machined my own adaptor, albeit no where near as pretty!
  2. I've not got any way of moving it, but its welcome to rest up at mine if needed Fridge
  3. That's brilliant
  4. Well I was going to ask you about it.... but I'd not got round to it
  5. Looking for some opinions on the required amount of link separation on a 3-link setup. The only general rule of thumb I've found repeated on the internet is to have the vertical link separation at the axle as 25 of tyre diameter. This sounds reasonable and would mean I should be looking for around 9.25" at the axle. So my main question then comes down to the separation at the chassis. I have yet to mind much information out there on this, only one reference to chassis separation being 2/3 of axle separation. Is there a rough rule to aim for? Or do I need to just go with where the links fit and see what numbers that gives me? I'm also looking to triangulate the two lowers at the chassis end as this will do two things, reduce some of the load on the panhard rod and its also supposed to reduce axle walk. Has anyone got any experience of this? Upper link angles... I remember Bill saying that an offset left upper link will counteract torque roll of the body, does that depend on which way the link slopes? eg up or down to the axle from the chassis mount. I will add that I have absolutely NO space on the drivers side for an upper unless I do away with the diff and/or the engine mount Length of the uppers... the internet seems to suggest 75% of the length of the lowers as a general rule, I believe to mean the squat stays the same during travel? If I go longer on the length of the upper, I'll have less pinion rotation down and keep it pointing more towards the transferbox. Thoughts on this? I've got a wide angle GL/GKN prop but I'm sure sure how much it can cope with angle wise. Others suggest keeping the length similar to the lowers. Now for a brain dump of the thoughts I'm having at the moment, any comments are welcome : (I should add that I've yet to take a tape measure to the chassis, but this is one of the next steps) - Building a reinforced gearbox cross member to take the link mounts, keeping the lowers as tucked into the chassis as I can without sending the antidive sky high. - The reinforced (complete new build) cross member would be linked to a smaller cross member mounted from the holes in the chassis that the gearbox mounts use. That cross member then supporting the gearboxes and spreading the suspension loads back down the chassis. - Getting the upper single link on the passenger side as far up from the axle centre line as I can, dependent on space at full bump. - Build bolt on mounts for the lowers that pick up on the radius arm mounts (to allow me to revert to them for longer trips or if I'm doing lots of road milage). - Along with the previous one, one option is to build link mounts from a Gwyn Lewis style track rod guard, linked to the radius arm mounts. - Looking at the trail gear 'creeper joints' as they can be easily sourced in the UK from Off Road Armoury and have a little compliance in them. I'm not sold on the idea of a heim/rose type joint due to the inherent harshness given that its a multipurpose vehicle. - Looking to build in some adjustment at the mounts where I can, more than likely the uppers with maybe an inch of adjustment either way of the 'main' position. Not sure if I can build much, if any, adjustment into the lowers without making the mounts hang down a long way. - Aiming to have the truck as close to standard height suspension as I can so I'm aiming to be at standard height upto +1", with an absolute max lift of 2" (suspension.... tyres will give me 2" of height over my old BFGs) I'd rather the thread didn't wonder off into suggestions of a one-link, unless the discussions remain informative towards the 3 link if that makes sense. 3 link is what I'd like to go with. I think that's all for now .
  6. Afraid not Daan, I've only modelled the joints as a solid lump for a visual so they haven't got any moving parts. Are you thinking the lowers might go over centre and lock out?
  7. While I'm waiting on some bits for the project I'm looking at the exhaust design. So does anyone on here have any detailed knowledge of exhaust design? The Mercedes OM606 I'm using has sort of oval ports which are 615mm2 each. Now as I'm building a compound turbo setup I want to get the most from the exhaust that I can. Do my manifold tubes need to match the area of the port? and therefore be 48mm diameter or do they need to be smaller? At the moment I'm struggling to find any decent exhaust design tech stuff! Thanks in advance.
  8. Easiest option there would be to weld something on each end that overlaps the chassis a bit, perhaps part of the skid plate. Not sure what the clamping force would be for 4 M12s, but its going to be pretty high!
  9. Thanks Soren As you say, only time will tell how it handles. It might drive like a bag of sh!t who knows! I've tried to make the 3-link calc numbers around where they should be, but obviously limited when it comes to link placement on a standard chassis. Not sure where I would be able to add them, other than to say I'm probably going to be linking the two crossmembers together, either with some kind of skid plate and frame or just a bolt in frame. Thankfully the line of the arm in place (doesn't look like it in the above pictures though) is in between the upper and lower bolts for the crossmember so there should be little rotational forces on it. If I was building this onto a non-galv chassis I'd weld a bit of bar in front and behind that crossmember.
  10. Here's the most up to date CAD assembly.... this is missing things which I've not bothered designing until the major parts of the design are finished, bits like the radius arm mount braces and the boxing in of the radius arm axle brackets. I also need to change the size of the Track rod box section to 100x60 to take the trackrod through it.
  11. I like that!
  12. Yeah, I'm just surprised its so small!
  13. That doesn't look like a very large cable to feed a starter?!
  14. Glad to hear its sorted. Got a build thread?
  15. Didcot plant I'm sure have engine hoists they rent out.
  16. I saw that on there the other day. What a beast! 😁 If only I had the cash!
  17. Jamie, thanks for the comments :). There's a bit more discussion in my build thread that isn't here about material thickness amongst other things so this lot should hopefully clear some things up! Radius on the track rod hole: Not really much point doing that, if you see the next point. There is going to be a 100x60x3mm Box running from outside-to-outside through all four radius arm brackets, and be fully welded to each of them. So not a lot of point radiusing the corners of the holes as they'd have to be tiny to let the box section in and then they're just going to get melted! Materials, everything is going to be S355 so stronger than your normal mild steel. Thickness - these haven't been decided yet, but with the cost of the laser cut stuff its not worth my time knocking up prototype brackets. So where others might use a cardboard bracket or a rough steel one, I've had them cut. So at the moment they're only I think 3mm or 4mm. They're most likely to end up at either 5 or 6mm. Radius arm brackets are going to be fully boxed in ~3mm S355, with weld 'washers' on the insides being one piece blending back into the track rod protection box section. As I want it all bolt-on, and to work with an unmodified chassis, I'm a bit forced as to where the links go so all I'm really able to work with is the AD by adjusting the chassis end of the upper link. Think I need to post another up date with some pictures. Working on a few bits at the moment: Track rod box section clearance with the diff.... or lack of. I think its going to have to be notched to clear and plated back in. I just need to make sure there is enough space for the track rod to pass through the guard to make removal easier. Got the track rod box section mocked up with some string. Main thing at the moment is to work on the narrowing of the upper link axle bracket. I've got 115mm between the side of the chassis and the side of the sump. And the bolt at the moment is the same! Once the upper link axle mount is sorted I'll tack it in position and pull the axle out to sort the rest on the bench. I'll probably check the suspension link to chassis clearance first actually, with some mock up steel links. Has anyone run a track rod guard where you needed to take the TRE off to remove it? was it a real pain in the arse?
  18. Well stick the findings and info in here then the thread is complete and a useful bit of tech for the future for anyone with the same issue.
  19. Not like the earlier ones where it has to pass through the support?
  20. I'd like to know too!
  21. Once it has burned up and created a smokescreen to slow the competition, it creates the necessary space for it to all move around.
  22. Albee have a distributor in Waterbeach if that's any use? http://www.albeegascylinders.com/suppliers.php
  23. I use Albee as they've got a couple of places near me, one only 15mins from work. The Albee cylinders are 11L @ 200Bar and 13L @ 300Bar for the larger one. Can't remember what my bottle price was, but the gas is about £60 a fill on the 11L. Also worth bearing in mind that the Albee ones come with a regulator attached to the bottle, not sure how many others do. BOC argon ones at work do.
  24. All good comments! There are a few reason why I want to go the compound route. Some reasonable, some 'tart-ish'. Firstly I want the power and availability of power that compounds will give, the big Turbo I want for my power level won't have the spool characteristics I want. And visa versa for the small turbo. Annoyingly the popularity of the Mercedes engines has balooned since I decided to go that way so I basically want to go one better! Which I know is probably a bit childish but oh well . My goal is a lovely flat torque curve as early as I can get it and 400bhp. Which I don't think id get even with a decent modern turbo. And another from the tartish perspective is so I can say I've got twin turbos in the pub etc. I'm also enjoying the challenge of the design/research and having the final product that I've built. It shouldn't be too bad with the 3-Link, its never going to stick to the road like my Mini does but with the X-Deflex and the OME shocks it should handle reasonably well. The wheel and tyre combo at 57Kg a corner is going to swallow some power too when I need to spin and clear them. I'm mainly looking at the Holset turbos as that's what the Merc lot have experience with. They also seem to pretty efficient from what I've read. Twin scroll ones also only seem to be the larger ones from what I've seen. Any thoughts on a VNT turbo that can spool low and flow the air needed for the top end Bowie?
  25. If I can do what I want mechanically then that would be great :D. I was otherwise wondering about using an Arduino.