6cyl SWB?

[Gazzar]

You could look at a stage one V8 axle.

I'd like to develop a nuts and bolts kit of CV axles in 4340, but time skill and money prevent me.

Also, the swivel housing would need slight grinding for the Ashcroft CV to fit 

 

G.

[Bigj66]

1 hour ago, Gazzar said:

You could look at a stage one V8 axle.

I'd like to develop a nuts and bolts kit of CV axles in 4340, but time skill and money prevent me.

Also, the swivel housing would need slight grinding for the Ashcroft CV to fit 

 

G.

Didn’t realise Ashcroft did a CV joint so will take a look. I was just thinking about modifying one from a coil axle.

[Gazzar]

Very expensive, very, very good.

You need s1v8 shafts, and early rrc sub axles, or a lathe. 

Lurk over on the s1v8 forum for details.

[Gazzar]

You can even go abs, if you want.

[FridgeFreezer]

8 hours ago, Bowie69 said:

Yes, removable, 5 wires....

Careful! Early EFI ones  (flapper & early hotwire) are but I think by soft-dash era it was all one humongous loom.

[Bigj66]

2 hours ago, Gazzar said:

Very expensive, very, very good.

You need s1v8 shafts, and early rrc sub axles, or a lathe. 

Lurk over on the s1v8 forum for details.

I asked Ashcroft and he just said to use S1 axles 😐Will take a look around.

[Bigj66]

3 minutes ago, FridgeFreezer said:

Careful! Early EFI ones  (flapper & early hotwire) are but I think by soft-dash era it was all one humongous loom.

Joy! Lots of unwrapping and re-wrapping then 😬

[Bowie69]

4 minutes ago, FridgeFreezer said:

Careful! Early EFI ones  (flapper & early hotwire) are but I think by soft-dash era it was all one humongous loom.

Oh

In that case a second hand Hotwire setup will be on the cards.... hardly a deal breaker then I guess....

RAVE would be able to confirm, download links in the tech archive.

[Bigj66]

I appear to be sorted with an axle 👍 With a S1 axle is the whole assembly swapped for the 4 pot one or just the halfshafts?

[Gazzar]

Well, that's interesting.

The diff pan is tilted forward at the top relative to a standard series casing, raising the propshaft to clear the bellhousing crossmember with the shorter gearbox front output of the LT95, but the sub axles and swivel pivots are in the same orientation relative to the spring mounts.

 

So, you could.....

But you could just swap everything except the casing.

Or you could keep everything except the entire shafts plus the stub axle, and grind away the surplus on the inside of the swivel.

 

What state are the half shafts in?  And have you found replacements for them, for when they die?

 

[Bigj66]

1 hour ago, Gazzar said:

Well, that's interesting.

The diff pan is tilted forward at the top relative to a standard series casing, raising the propshaft to clear the bellhousing crossmember with the shorter gearbox front output of the LT95, but the sub axles and swivel pivots are in the same orientation relative to the spring mounts.

 

So, you could.....

But you could just swap everything except the casing.

Or you could keep everything except the entire shafts plus the stub axle, and grind away the surplus on the inside of the swivel.

 

What state are the half shafts in?  And have you found replacements for them, for when they die?

 

Not yet as I haven’t seen the axle yet. I think KAM do replacement half shafts but will need to investigate further. 

[Gazzar]

Find out, cause I'd be interested.

Especially if they are made from something tougher, 4340 or similar.

[Bowie69]

My advice.... Don't let the project creep to drive train swap.

Fit the engine, drive it, if it breaks, fix the broken bit with better stuff.

you'll never get it perfect off the bat, so one thing at a time and you will get there in the end

[Bowie69]

Oh, and this was interesting:

http://forums.roversnorth.com/showthread.php?13182-Stage1-alternate-CV-successful-so-far

[Bigj66]

1 minute ago, Bowie69 said:

My advice.... Don't let the project creep to drive train swap.

Fit the engine, drive it, if it breaks, fix the broken bit with better stuff.

you'll never get it perfect off the bat, so one thing at a time and you will get there in the end

Good advice and appreciated 👍The box will be changed to auto if I can make it work. I know of someone who’s done it so at least now I have more info to go on. Rangy diffs naturally and the CV axle was to try and keep everything standard LR and have 4wd even though the series ones will do. A disc conversion was alway in the cards for safety. I’m not moving the front panel as I don’t want a 90 so if the auto doesn’t look like it will work then an LT77 or R380 will go in or even just keep the rebuilt series box.

[Bigj66]

Looked for a disc brake conversion for the BW but it looks like they only do them for the LT....😐

[Snagger]

11 hours ago, Bigj66 said:

Not yet as I haven’t seen the axle yet. I think KAM do replacement half shafts but will need to investigate further. 

Not for a while now - KAM no longer exist, unfortunately.

[Snagger]

9 hours ago, Bigj66 said:

Looked for a disc brake conversion for the BW but it looks like they only do them for the LT....😐

I was under the impression that the LT230 and BW used the same drum brake parts, which would suggest the same conversion kit would fit both if it's mounted off the same four bolt holes that the drum back-plate used.  Hopefully SimonR can clarify it for us.

[Bowie69]

No, other bits of transfer case are in the way.

The drum works perfectly well if serviced and not continually dunked in muddy water. The lever arrangement is way better on the RRC as well.

 

[Bigj66]

1 hour ago, Bowie69 said:

No, other bits of transfer case are in the way.

The drum works perfectly well if serviced and not continually dunked in muddy water. The lever arrangement is way better on the RRC as well.

 

I was looking at it from a space saving view but yeah, I thought they were similar design too.

[Snagger]

On 06/06/2018 at 4:04 AM, lo-fi said:

You need a much longer front prop to reach the LT230, as the extension piece carrying the front output is much shorter, despite it being quite a bit longer between the main box and the rear output flange. This causes problems with the front prop fouling the crossmember under the bellhousing, usually solved by taking a chunk out and putting a plate in to 'scallop' it to clear the prop. Ugly but effective. 

To answer your question about the conversion kit and the auto box: It depends. Yes, it should bolt up in theory following that logic, but... The input gear on the series box is supported by the output bearing of the main box - the main box obviously having been built with this on mind. The LT230 (and I'm sure the same must be true for the BW) has a fully supported input gear riding on bearings inside the transfer box. The main box simply has a splined shaft which fits into the input gear and sees none of the radial or axial load imposed by the transfer input gear. Ashcroft have clearly decided that the LT77 and R380 are strong enough to cope with the load on the output bearing with whatever arrangements they have in the series adaptor. Whether the same is true for the auto box, I don't know. I'd email in a question to Ashcroft and see what they say before making any plans. 

Notched bell housing cross members were used by LR for 1-Tons and WD (MoD) 109s.

The Ashcroft conversion kit has a replacement rear bearing carrier for the Series transfer box that acts much like the one on the LT230 in supporting the rear of the main shaft with a big taper bearing, much more supportive than the small roller bearing in the Series' original rear bearing carrier.  Suporting the output gear would support the ZF's shaft in just the same way as an LT77's.

[Snagger]

On 01/06/2018 at 5:57 PM, Bigj66 said:

If I use as much fuel as a V8 I’ll be a happy bunny 😀

Actually, one thing I was looking at was fitting the Weslake head and cam maybe off this 3.0 to a standard 2.6 LR block. I’m told it’s a straight swap and these heads were fitted as standard to the North American 6 cylinder engines. As I understand it, the head is where most of the gains were made with this engine and using a 2.6 block would eliminate all the problems of trying to match the flywheel to the crank. I may even be able to bore out the 2.6 slightly, skim the head etc to increase power output further. I’m not sure the extra 400cc of the 3.0, although nice to have, would make a huge difference to the overall performance of the vehicle.

 

While the tuned 2.5s or 2.8s are never going to get the smoothness of a V8 and will fall slightly short on performance, it'd be a very simple installation with all standard mounts, flywheel, housings, plumbing and so on.  It won't affect VIN or the new MoT exemption points, either, and won't have the cooling issues than can affect the V8.  It would be well supported, though, with few custom or rare parts.  It's not an ideal engine, but it is practical from some perspectives, and the high cost is not much different from getting a Turner Tdi, before you even look at rebuilt fuel injection parts for the Tdi, and you'd be looking at similar quality of rebuild, so it's not as unreasonable as it first looks.

[Snagger]

On 05/06/2018 at 4:02 PM, Bigj66 said:

As I mentioned in an earlier post, I’ve seen a lot worse than I have in front of me on the Rangy and it may well be that a specialist restorer would take a different and more positive view than mine. As it stands at the moment it will need rear floor, rear arches inner and outer, rear side panels, inner and outer sills, rear seat base but maybe a good second hand one would do, front inner wings and possibly footwell repairs based on the wet carpets, rear tailgate, roof as it looks like someone has been dancing on it in stilettos 🤬and some chassis repairs.

Again, all doable but at a price - and then double it. And all this before a respray or any mechanical work.

If I do decide to upgrade the S3 then at least I would have a good known engine, box and diffs to fit and wouldn’t have to put up with someone else’s bodged work or cut wiring looms. It seems to be the items of trim etc, especially those unique to the Softdash that are hard to come by which are in demand and fetch good money so I’m sure that these, and the remains of the body, suspension and axles would be of interest to someone else looking for a good donor for their own project.

As you can tell, I don’t rush into things so will take the time to listen to advice and consider the best option.

What is the benefit of the L230?

I beg you not to rob the RR for the engine and transmission.  RRCs are still getting rarer, and the soft dash is a particularly nice car, arguably the best LR ever made, and also thin on the ground.  If you can't do it up, then companies like Kingsley Cars (there are other comparable restorers but I don't remember names) will buy it, probably at a very fair price and more than the cost of an engine and transmission from a Discovery or P38.  Just remember that the transfer box on a P38 drops to outputs on the left, opposite from all the Series, RRC, Discovery and Defender types, so you would need a different transfer box if the rest came from one.

I am in much the same position.  I have a soft dash with significant corrosion to parts of the shell, but the rest is good.  I can't weld, and the little bits of panel corrosion and the respray are all beyond my ability.  The mechanical stuff I can do.  But the cost of professional restoration of just the shell and body is prohibitive to me.  I'll have to do a council run welding course and buy or borrow a mig welder.  Perhaps you could do the same.  YRM do most of the shell repair panels, and there are a couple of other sourced for rear wheel arches.  Even Paddocks are doing parts.  The boot floor is different from a Discovery, but you can replace the bulk of the RR's with a trimmed Discovery panel.  Don't give up on it yet, but please don't break it; even though I could do with a few bits from you for mine, I'd rather see yours restored.

As for the LT230, the benefits over the BW for installation into your Series is that it has several different ratios that can be chosen to suit the different diff ratio and tyre size of the Series, and it can be adapted to run 2wd/4wd like the Series unit instead of always being 4wd.  With 4.71 diffs and 7.50 or 238/85 tyres, the BW will be a bit undergeared - it gives about the same top ratio with the ZF locked up in 4th as a Series transmission in 4th with overdrive engaged, which is also loo low behind a Tdi or V8, but too tall with 3.54s (which is why Defenders use the 1.4:1 LT230 in place of the 1'22:1 of the RRC and Discovery) 

You could use the BW unit if those ratios don't concern you or you go for 4.1 ratio diffs, and if you're worried about the steering kick of the front axle or its long term robustness, you could use FWH to disengage the front drive.  It's a bit of a botch, but would work.  The snag is having to exit the vehicle and engage 4wd before you get onto the slippery stuff and the potential for mucky hands from doing so...  It's something I have looked into a lot - I have the SIII transmission and Roverdrive, but also bought a 200Tdi ZF from David (HonitonHobbit) and a BW from Bowie to do to my 109 exactly what you're proposing (except with a Tdi instead of V8).  4.1 diffs would work perfectly for either of those transmission setups, giving gearing very comparable to a Defender.

[Snagger]

One more thing: if you're extremely keen on having the BW, then one way around the CV joint issue also gives the clearance over the bell housing cross member, and with several other big advantages, but at a cost.  Fitting coiler axles to the leaf springs works very well and will give you a vastly reduced turning circle (at least 30% improvement I reckon - my 109 will easily turn tighter than a 90, never mind an 88"), disc brakes and a bit more lateral stability.  It even brings you a free set of 3.54 diffs that you can take a punt on being a bit over geared but will also accept the 4.1 ring and pinion.  The cost is that they're longer, so the wheels and tyres will protrude a little, though not too badly if you stick to standard steel wheels.

The reason the bell housing cross member issue goes away is that with the inclined diff of the coiler front axle, the prop shaft sits almost horizontal.  That can cause UJ asymmetry issues and vibration, but it should be possible to phase the yolks to reduce it or even use a double cardan joint up front.  The other issue is that this can foul the right side engine mount, depending on engine type.  It's certainly an issue using the 12J/19J/Def200Tdi with the low mount that sweeps under the injection pump, but I think other engines are probably OK.

[Gazzar]

Shame I'm not still doing Landrover work for people, I'd love to take the rrc on.

I've done a 2 door, sills, inner wings headlamp box and bulkhead.

I like that sort of work.

G.