rick

Naa, they need the 3.2 five pot as used in the Ranger and BT50 for those of us in the rest of the world that are used to engines with larger swept volumes and better off idle torque. I wouldn't mind betting fuel economy might actually improve ith the bigger engine too. What the hell am I talking about, I couldn't afford a new Deefer even if my business doubled in turnover

Yep, they're a Patrol GQ or Y60 here, but the OP's one will be a Terrano.

Yep, and I wouldn't use 2.8 pistons as the bore size is bigger by about 2.5mm. I wouldn't trust the core thickness of a 300Tdi block to go out that far.....

Valeo is the OE clutch. I fitted an AP clutch 80,000km ago on the recommendation of a well known local Land Rover garage and it's still going ok, having said that the Valeo lasted 222,000km. (at the time a number of Valeo's were having centres fail) The Valeo plate's facing looked brand new, but the springs were loose as buggery, almost falling out The Pressure plate was knackered at that distance, diaphragm finger height was all over the place and the fingers were half worn through, slipper pads gone on the fork, etc. The reason the clutch came out was a broken fork.

Looks like the same stuff. http://www.eximo.com.au/flexi_duct/thermo_sunflex.php http://www.eximo.com.au/pdfs/SUNFLEX.pdf I used it to replace the terribly undersized inlect duct between the snorkel and air cleaner. I cut the restrictive outlet of the Safari snorkel off too.

Bloody brilliant tyre size IMO, and a touch taller than a 265/75. (admittedly bugger all in it, but they are taller ) BFG MT, Maxxis 762, Cooper ST, Dunlop MT and a few others are available in this size.

Yep, maximum legal tyre is 7:50/16. I'd hate to see how crowned a 265/75 would be on one.

I just coughed up in the finish and bought a Bearmach one. The genuine, Wabco ones just appear to be carp. So far, problem solved, but it's only been about six months. Hahahaha, I didn't expect the forum censor to come up with that

Yep, I'm a great believer in lots of castor. It increases directional stability and as you mention, rolls camber onto the outside wheel as the steering angle increases. The downside is it makes the steering heavier, which isn't a problem with power steering. Having said that, I've been too lazy to slot my balls

And he was wrong. Chapman and the entire British race car building industry didn't believe in toe-out either. Carroll Smith in his excellent series of Prepare to Win, Tune To Win, Engineer to Win, etc took Chapman to task over that and reckoned he missed some tuning potential. Plenty of us have played with ackerman over the years, I've used anti-ackerman as postulated by Chapman all the way through to having the intersection point as much at 2/3 the wheelbase on a race car, and almost always running ackerman helps turn in and negate understeer, particularly in low speed corners. In very high speed stuff it can be detrimental by having too much scrub, but steering angles are tiny when turning in at 130mph anyway and it was handy if you had a lose at that speed. One car I had used anti-ackerman as standard and it was an absolute bitch to push around the pits, the front tyres would just scrub, you would need three goes to get into a garage where another car with the same lock would steer straight in. Change the ackerman plates to zero, then 'classic' and it became easier and easier to manoeuvre when pushing. I think that example is more relevant to us than anything relating to high speed use.

The stuff I've used is a 'Thermoplastic, rubber coated polyester fabric' Temp rated for up to 150*, ozone, acid and solvent resistant and is a proper suction hose with a wire coil through it. It was cheap as chips for 2m nine years ago direct from the manufacturer, who makes industrial ducting. It has lasted all those years in the Deefer engine bay without failure. The car parts places wanted a small fortune for duct, so do what I did and google for 'industrial ducting suppliers'. I'm half a world away so it's pretty useless me giving you the details of the company I used. FWIW the stuff I used is 82mm ID.

Great idea on the freight forwarder, as Si said a lot of US companies refuse to freight outside of the continental US. One of the Aussies on the AULRO board tried to get some shockies from Paddocks last week and they refused ! The 'dangerous goods decl. was all too had for them. Another bloke had some sent a month ago, no problems and both sets were the same brand/part #'s.

Can you post up the wheel model number please ? It should start with 'ANR' and have four numbers after it.

And where does that let the intersection point fall in relation to the wheelbase ? (classic ackerman dictates the theoretical intersection point continuing from the angle of the steering arms being the centreline of the rear axle) I've always assumed coiler front ends had their ackerman based on the 100" wheelbase and they used the same angle arms across all colier models (it's the same swivel housing isn't it across models of the same vintage ? I've never checked the part #) If that's the case, the 110" and 127" wheelbases have increased ackerman, which IMO isn't a bad thing at all as I'm a great believer in increased toe out on turns.

Although if he's already running 265/75's he should be on a minimum of a 7" rim. I did say should be. Unless the 265 is a typo and he meant 235's.

I know, I know. I read it on an internet forum, everyone agreed to it and the resident forum guru confirmed it, so it must be true !

In another lifetime I assembled some engines for a Formula Ford engine builder here and we did a fair bit of dyno testing. Prior to this I'd raced, built my own engines and engine dyno tested them too. I always ran a 88* t/stat and aimed for around 90-95* running temp. It made most power there. The bloke I later worked for had found the same thing, and IIRC we were the only stupid idiots out here to run t/sats and our engines were known to be very strong. Didn't seem to have the overheating problems other seemed to have too. We also used Redline Water Wetter or Neo's equivalent, but can't say, hand on heart it made a difference.

All true. I've proven those high pressure regions on a Patrol and Deefer with wool tuft testing. Lifted the trailing edge of the Patrol bonnet and all the wool tufts flew back under the bonnet (as I expected them to) Undid the blank cover on top of the RHS wing of the Deefer and we had massive turbulence and inversion, ie. the wool tufts were going back into the hole, not going out. A hole in the side of the mudguard behind the front wheel (where the air inlet is for the engine, but opposite side ) seems to work well at evacuating the underbonnet air. Another observation re fin pitch, a mate of mine was one of the engineers on the Aussie Perentie 110/6x6 project for the ADF back in the eighties. The first lot of rads they used resulted in overheating. They'd increased the fin pitch to increase the cooling capacity over standard. They then reduced the fin pitch, ie, increased the fin spacing to cure the problem. Goes against theory in reducing the surface area, but it worked. The engineers felt the air was packing up in front of the rad at speed with the increased fin pitch, my theory is that the underbonnet air pressure was too high and the air wasn't escaping fast enough, reducing air flow through the core. As already mentioned, you need pressure differential for flow. I'm wondering if the reduced fin pitch allowed more air to be forced through, (less resistance to flow) helping to push the underbonnet air out faster, much like Tdi's overheat here when travelling at speed if their viscous fan is buggered. Install a new fan clutch and problem solved.

Or do they just source from from Turbo Technics as BAS does ?

Some pads come 'pre bedded' these days, which is a misnomer as they still need to be faced off with the disc surface, but they've had the resins already burnt out of them. The Yanks use the term 'burnished' which is probably more accurate. When bedding discs you are burning out the resins and binders used during manufacture to hold the friction material together, as well as depositing a micro layer of pad material onto the disc face. You can either just drive around in peak hour traffic for a couple of hundred km, or if you live in the country as I do, just put the pads through a couple of green fade periods, ie. get up to a pretty decent speed (over 100km/h) and hammer the brakes untill just before a dead stop (but don't stop, keep moving) and repeat untill the car won't stop,(usually only one to two more fade periods) then continue driving without touching the brakes for ten-fifteen minutes, then park it up to let everything cool down to ambient. Obviouslly you want a dead quiet bit of bitumen for all of this. Pads and discs should be well and truly bedded after that. FWIW a lot of blokes out here are going back to the Lockheed/TRW OE pads. More dust but consistent and no noise.

Slotted discs work well, and if towing or just using the vehicle in really steep, mountainous country, help and I've never had a problem with the slots clogging in 9 years and 230,000km. Drilling is something I'm very much against, it's just asking for crack propogation and disc failure.

I wonder how much the compounding differs from the UK/Europe to us in the east ? Our aftermarket Ferodo 4WD pads come out of Thailand Excellent pads but the rears squeal like a Banshee with dust on them, and considering I drive a hell of a lot of gravel that adds up to buckets of unwelcome noise [edit] FWIW one of the engineers at DBA (Disc Brakes Australia ) advised me ten years ago to stay away from EBC. In their testing they found them to be too inconsistent batch to batch, but bear in mind this was ten years ago. His recommendation was Ferodo.

Roughly 25,000km/year ATM and have run the Tdi for the last ten years. I'm a tradie too, the Deefer usually tares out at 3000kg with all the tools and parts I carry.

deleted