deep

That was quick! Yup, the standard one you show is the one in my catalogue. I saw that Santana one on EBay but it's not the same type as mine. I guess I could get another type, as long as I can get the right pulley to line up. I think they fitted the belt drive one because the massive 24volt generator meant things got swapped around. It has actually been a giant pain all round as I had to sort out a mount for a 12volt alternator on the "wrong" side of the engine too. Having a power steering pump and vacuum pump on the left side of the engine meant I couldn't just buy and use a standard alternator mount.

I am trying to stitch together an ex-Singapore military 1987 Land Rover 110 2.5 normally aspirated diesel and am getting very close. One sticking point is that the diaphragms in the vacuum pump are shot (which resulted in oil spraying everywhere through the exhaust orifice!). I tried making new ones out of oil-resistant neoprene but, after an hour, they split and did the oil spraying trick too. The pump is the belt-driven type used on 2¼ diesels and some military 2.5s. It is a Spanish item, branded "Autoplas" (see photos). Here in New Zealand it seems impossible to find these diaphragms or even a whole pump. One supplier got a price from the UK for a repair kit but it was something like 125 pounds, which seems insanely expensive for two diaphragms, suggesting it's the wrong bit. My parts catalogue shows a completely different kind of pump, so I have no part number to go by. Can anyone either point me to a supplier of these diaphragms or, at least, give me part numbers for the diaphragms, a repair kit or even a whole pump? Even a second hand pump could get me through the VIN process (to make the car legal for NZ roads) and could buy me time to maybe sort out an alternative electrical system. This project has wiped out all my funds so freakishly expensive alternatives are not currently viable! Thanks in advance....

Here is a 255/85-16 on the back of my 110. It's the same width and diameter, near enough, as a 33-10.5-15 or 33-10.5-16. Don't bother with a 15 inch rim, it's just a hassle unless you are making an off-road monster. Standard Land Rovers work better with a narrower tyre in most cases, so you're really better with a 10 inch wide tyre than a 12 inch. Drag/fuel economy and steering on the road are all better with a narrower tyre too.

I'd second a 255/85-16. I think they are a perfect compromise if you don't want to go all gung-ho and start seriously modifying your car. They roughly equate to a 33x10x16 if you want to use that sizing. Being narrower than a 285 or 12.5 means fewer hassles and the height is very useful. I have a set of BFG mud terrains in that size which are about to go on their fourth vehicle (a very hard wearing tyre!) and have loved them.

I've been in a similar position but possibly can't help as much as I'd like. In my case, I had a Stage One V8 with a fairly tired 3.5 V8. Early on, I changed the transfer gears for Range Rover ones (this being an LT95 box) and it took the sting off the performance but it pulled top gear easily. Later, I also fitted 255/85 tyres. I recall calculating the two changes upped the gearing by a whopping 25%, give or take. For all that, it worked, even with a fairly heavy trailer attached, though I concede it was over-geared. Then I fitted a 3.9. It was an e.f.i. but I took the injection off and ran it on carbs. With that motor fitted, the gearing felt perfect. It would happily pull a firewood trailer up a pretty decent hill at a good speed in top, which strikes me as being an excellent seat of the pants test! Top gear acceleration was really quite good, to the point where I wouldn't have dreamed of changing down to overtake a car on the open road. I'm not sure how the overall gearing stacked up against what you ask for but it must have been close. I'd say go for it. You'll love it if you do any sort of open road work.

The second one wasn't really up to the same standard. It wasn't bad in itself but they tried to repeat the formula (using a plane instead of a Land Rover and lots of other changes) and it wasn't quite as elementally delightful.

Interesting thread! I have a lifetime history of not quite finishing things so I've read through and taken the advice seriously. My current 110 project, which I thought would take two or three months, has been eight months and still is some way off. However, that is more to do with not evaluating it properly when I bought it (it had had the bulkhead replaced and just needed putting back together - how hard can that be?). However, I have a few things keeping me motivated: 1) all my "vehicle" money is tied up in it and it is worth very little until it's legal and usable! 2) It's in an open-fronted shed, leering at me several times a day. I can't ignore it or forget it. 3) I have a work car which costs me nothing to drive but I REALLY want to be driving a Land Rover much of the time. Yes, I do have an ultra-budget Series IIa which does good service as a (very) local off-road hack and my work car is also a 4WD but they're not good enough. I think some people lose motivation because they have other alternatives which are perfectly adequate for their uses, so their Land Rover project is only something intellectually stimulating or romantic. If that's the case, probably best to get real and move it on. Life is too short to waste it on pointless indulgences. Aim at a target you have a chance of hitting instead. The whiteboard concept is interesting. I use something much smaller but similar - a little black book, which has endless lists of jobs to do and things to buy. Every few weeks, I recompose the lists and it is hugely gratifying to see how much does get crossed off, even with my minuscule budget and limited attention span. The good thing about the book is I can grab it when I got shopping or head to the phone or computer to order yet more parts. My project has been one in which every time I complete a job, I seem find a new one to do. However, chipping, chipping, chipping away has made serious progress. Like everyone else has hinted - if you don't actually do some work, no work gets done!

That whole film is just brilliant. It was actually on TV here a few weeks ago. I don't think I could tire of watching it!

That kit would almost certainly cost more than the whole Land Rover cost! I'm not worried about the gearing - it would be rare for it to do more than one mile on road! It's very much an off-road workhorse.

Just on that little aside about Holden engines, my SWB Series II has a Holden 202 fitted (3.3 litre six cylinder for the uninitiated). It is a very nice engine for a Land Rover, though the carburettion falls apart on steep hills and it REALLY feels like it needs another top gear! It's gorgeously simple and compact though. A very popular conversion back in the day.

Hmm, I don't know anything about the 55 year old version but did read a couple of decades ago about the same concept of a powered trailer being trialled and maybe even used in anger (there'll be someone here who know for sure) with the military forward control 101s. It was in an article, with photos, in Land Rover Owner International. I think power to the trailer came from the PTO output on the gearbox. From what I remember, the concept worked in certain situations but they had trouble with the trailer pushing the tow vehicle around sideways in slippery conditions. Of course, with modern torque balancing solutions, those problems could be overcome easily enough by a big enough wallet...

I had a 109 2.25 diesel and it hit the governor at around 60 m.p.h.. It held that easily, even up a slight slope. A slightly bigger slope would kill it though - they don't produce that much power. Sounds like you are definitely down on power and there's plenty of advice above on what to do. Personally, I'd replace all my filters and check I had full throttle travel before tinkering with the pump and timing, mainly 'cos I'm lazy and don't like making work for myself without good reason! Is your steering that bad? If you've come from a modern car with rack and pinion, very direct steering, a Land Rover can feel a little vague, plus they do move a little left and right on bumpy roads due to the geometry of the linkages. We all get so used to it that we don't even notice it. Having said that, there are a lot of points at which play can develop (wheel bearings, swivels, tie rod ends, steering relay, drop arm, steering box), making for quite a dance as you go up the road.

Hmm, now I come to think of it, they did trial using Land Rovers to pull trains. If what's left of my memory works, I believe traction was an issue but some decent weight was moved. Not that practical in this context...

I rescued a stranded, six ton horse truck (TK Bedford) with a standard Series 3 88" many years ago. It needed a hill start too! The basic Land Rover chassis is very robust. The most obvious restriction is, as others mentioned, the brakes. Less obvious is the transmission strain. A random broken half shaft a few weeks later almost certainly was caused by the tow. (It was a bit of an emergency - the truck engine had died on a near blind corner and it was losing brake air pressure. The quick tow was the best call.) I'm not sure a 110 chassis is any stronger than a Series but the drive train is and the brakes muuuuuch better!

Random photos to go with the previous post...

Hey Cam, Nice to hear from you and see the old photos. I was pretty septic when I sold the old Stage One, because two time wasters promised so much then, at close of auction, I got much less. Then the bloke who bought it couldn't stop grumbling, which kinda pee'd me off as it was better than advertised and he bought it blind! Still, I made a healthy profit on it. The 110 I replaced it with (ex Singapore Air Force normally aspirated diesel) will be much more practical, if I EVER finish it. That's proving to be extremely annoying but a story for another post. I have done a bit of work on your Land Rover but never get around to posting up on here 'cos I am hopelessly disorganised and still haven't got a secretary (true story). All my plans for anti-wrap, traction control and stronger axles came to nothing when a more urgent project turned up and it's quite likely I will have to sell it to pay for VINing, registering and road taxing the 110. We'll see. Anyhow, along the way, I have done some work on the old IIA. I rebuilt the front bumper, spent a looong time making a rock slider on the driver's side, which I then removed because the petrol tank split (it had had a soldered repair right where it bolted to the chassis outrigger). I sorted the steel for the passenger's side and that was going to be next on the list before the 110 turned up. The plan had been to connect the rock sliders to the front bumper, giving protection to the front wings. It could happen one day yet. I never replaced the wings but have the bits here ready for the job to happen. Meanwhile, the design makes the front bumper look too wide, ho hum. I had to redo the starter motor. It turned out to be impossible to get new brushes, so I got the wrong ones and ground them down. Works perfectly. I also replaced the fuel pump. A leaky diaphragm was causing petrol to seep into the engine, diluting the oil and explaining the high oil level and general smokiness (it doesn't smoke at all now). Lucky I knew about that issue with those pumps from way back. Trouble is, I couldn't get a kit for the pump any more (they used to be so common), so replaced the pump with an electric one. It works. I have learned that getting parts for old Holdens is nowhere near as easy as getting parts for old Land Rovers! I also got an original hand brake adjuster, still in its old-school wax paper wrapper, but haven't fitted it yet. It's a pain using your hand on the accelerator pedal when you need to do a hill start (REALLY tricky when trying to get to some firewood on the side of a slippery hill and you also have the world's dodgiest clutch!) but I just haven't had time to sort it. Ditto the clutch, which I am now convinced has a sticky cylinder. I had to take off the wider rims as they were tearing on the rear guards, despite some gentle relieving. It's back on 7.50s but it actually suits it and they work so well. They are better tyres than what it came with. The 255/85s will eventually go on the 110. I seem to have tyres for Africa right now, but still need one good BFG MT to match the set. The biggest change has been to fit a soft top. An amazingly nice friend gave me a full tilt and most of the sticks I needed. I made up the rest out of scrap. It proved to be brilliant in the summer, keeping the interior cool when I went down the river and partly discouraging my dog from jumping out. Only partly because I haven't yet fitted any door tops (I do have one for the passengers side now, thanks to a generous forum member). It was also helpful when we had a cloudburst doing some firewood. Only one of us got wet at any moment.... All in all, I feel I have been super blessed having this Land Rover over a summer in which my Stage One was gone and the 110 just taunted me by not magically coming together, despite many, many hours in the shed. I could still get firewood and get to the good swimming holes. It proved much cheaper to run than any petrol Land Rover I have had before, in those off-road conditions and has been pretty reliable, starter motor issue aside. I'll hunt out one or two photos and post them soon.

If you are really worried (with brakes, you certainly don't want to be too casual), getting an opinion from a professional could be a good investment. Who that professional is, sadly, seems to vary from place to place around the world. Land Rover brakes being fairly simple, an ordinary garage with a good reputation can be a good start. A Land Rover approved dealer should also be good but it's not a given. Or a specialist brake workshop should be ideal. We have them in New Zealand, not sure where you are. All they do is brakes and clutches and they tend to get to the guts of the problem pretty quickly. An opinion is usually cheap enough - you don't have to pay for the repair there and then!

One possibility is inconsistency with your booster. If the booster isn't working, the pedal will feel firmer than if the booster is working. You could be losing vacuum quicker than the vacuum pump is producing it, so the brakes feel firmer the more you use them, even though the retardation is less. You'd work that one out pretty quickly if you just went up a quiet road in, say, second gear and accelerated a little, then braked hard, then accelerated and braked hard again, repeating a few times. If the vacuum pump isn't supplying enough, the pedal will feel harder but the amount of effort you need to apply will increase each time. When you say everything has been replaced, does that really mean all new cylinders, pistons and seals? Because it is possible there is a slightly sticky cylinder somewhere. They can drive you nuts! Easy to check on disk brakes by taking the wheels off and levering each piston back into the cylinder with a large, flat screwdriver - it should be smooth but with some weight to overcome, not sticky. A gentle push on the pedal should get them back out very smoothly, or they could even creep back out as you watch. With drums, you take off the wheel and drum, then get an assistant to gently and progressively push the pedal down. If only one shoe moves, try pushing against it while it's out and the other should then move easily. Don't push too far or they will pop out and make you VERY grumpy! Disc brakes don't "know" if you are reversing or going backwards, unlike drums (front drums have more bite going forwards), so the reversing thing suggests that another possibility is a loss of pedal when parked, the pedal then comeing back with use. So that could be some slight internal weeping in your master cylinder, though it seems unlikely.

Hey Reece, the wiper motor is out of my military 110 - it looks like it would go into the right spot on my Series II so should work. I've also got most of the 24 volt bulbs I pulled out but not much else that's 24 volt. Hope to be up in about a month. Got a bottle for you still...

I've got a 24 volt wiper motor you can have...

You might be right. That Cortina stayed well jacked-up for as long as I could remember! Dead opposite from the current teenager trend of lowering everything...

I well remember helping some friends use the sledgehammer technique with a MkII Cortina's springs when I was a teenager. One leaf broke and exploded upwards, knocking my mate out cold with blood streaming out of his head. A quick trip to hospital and he survived but I would NEVER do this again!

Just curious. What sort of fuel economy did you get on that particular run?

Potentially, you are connecting the battery cable to the wrong post on the solenoid on the new starters. They may look the same as on the old starter motor but could actually be wired the other way! That would make your motor spin when the power is hooked up but the starter wouldn't actually engage until you also fire the solenoid. Potentially! There should be a relay between the key switch and the starter solenoid. If that is a bit faulty, it may not be supplying much power to the solenoid. That could still be enough to work the new starters but not the old one (see comment above about testing the voltage). More likely, though, is that your old solenoid is sticky and needs a clean or replacement (as also mentioned above). I'm not a sparkie but have had some starter issues to test my brain lately...

Thanks for that. The other issue I have come across is first gear falling out on the over-run but that might not be common (though I think I've seen it in two boxes, from clouded memory...). All good to know. My Series IIa has a 3.3 litre six in it and the previous owner wasn't kind to the car but the box is still very sweet. I don't think any of them are that bad are they? Now I am about to start using a LT77, which had a terrible reputation. I wonder how that will pan out!