Jump to content

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Eightpot said:

So I take it you have a 3.5 V8 with LT95 at the mo?

No turbo charged LD28 as @Gazzar posted a few posts back (2.8 straight 6)

Not sure why but I think I'd prefer to keep it diesel, suits the vehicle more. It's not a daily driver at the moment, well I don't do any daily driving at the moment (irrespective of lock-down) having been effectively locked down for a month before hand due to a litter of Lab puppies.

It's going to be a work truck between my place and my parents farm. I, rather ironically, have appear to have landed on 3 leads for LT95 PTO kits :ph34r:. After having another quick think this afternoon I think it's going to be a relatively quick win to convert it into a tipper which will make it even more useful. But longer term I plan on building various demountable bodies for it (one being a camper) so that's where a slightly higher cruising speed will be nice.

I might be a bit prejudiced but my only significant experience to date in a straight 6 was a 2.5 BMW lump in a P38 (not mine) and it was a gutless piece of carp that needed revving the nuts off to do anything resembling usefulness. If the LD28 is anything like that then I'll be sorely tempted to whip another crank into one of the crankless 300Tdi's I have lying in the barn because the one I've got in the 110 at the moment was an utter transformation because someone's tweaked the pump.

Part of the reason why I'm thinking about alternatives prior to even getting it on the road is what I'm going to do for chassis protection which it needs. The chassis is in decent nick but there's a lot of surface rust (nothing more substantial than that). I know the chap who runs CLH Trailers very well and provided I don't want to do any welding to the chassis I'd be tempted to whip everything off it, get it blasted / cleaned up and then drop it off at CLH to get it galvanised, as long as it's dropped off before a Tuesday 9am it'll be back by Thursday lunchtime at cost.

Once stuff settles down and I have some workshops / garage that is usable I might be tempted to grab a cheap L322 and start working on a standalone ECU in the background.

All vapour builds at the moment :rolleyes:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still say, drive it, use it. Change only what winds you up. That thing will be happy at sixty five, irrespective of engine.

You've a lot to do in one life time. Pace yourself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, missingsid said:

Not true, the LT95 was first used in the 101 with both a straight 6 and a V8 for production. The 101 Bellhousing and Input shaft are 4 inches shorter than the RRC one.

Yes, I suppose he could get a short bellhousing one.  I'm not sure how easy those are to find though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Ed Poore said:

Once stuff settles down and I have some workshops / garage that is usable I might be tempted to grab a cheap L322 and start working on a standalone ECU in the background.

All vapour builds at the moment :rolleyes:

Not sure that you will like the LD28T. Good reliable engine, but had to be revved as I recall.

The M57 in the L322 is much torquier. Very easy to make standalone, for a gentleman with your skills !  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Eightpot said:

Assuming it's not a daily driver then my own thoughts would be go with a 3.9/4.6V8 just for quick low cost/simplicity and enjoy the extra poke.

I'd vote for this too - for the low miles the truck is doing, almost any old V8 will be an easy win and have the grunt required. Also it's all parts-bin stock standard stuff in standard locations.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, FridgeFreezer said:

for the low miles the truck is doing

Yeah, at the moment. Knowing me it'll end up doing quite a few, this year I thought I'd be cutting back on mileage except by the end of Feb I'd been to Scotland and back twice, the Lakes and back once, North Wales and back three times, Surrey and back twice in the 110.

Shame some muppet just sold a 4.6 :blush::rofl:. Although a 4.2 or 5.0 supercharged has always been a fancy of mine...

Garage first...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't do the 5.0, a mate had one fitted in a disco 1...... It got 7mpg with gentle driving.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Bowie69 said:

Don't do the 5.0, a mate had one fitted in a disco 1...... It got 7mpg with gentle driving.

What AJV8 5.0 as fitted to the 2009MY Sports and Vogues? Surprised because I know a few people who had them (admittedly in the original vehicles with a 6 or 8 speed auto box behind them) and would get twenties if cruising. And, OK, probably marginally more aerodynamic but still a 2.7+ tonne vehicle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies, it was a 4.2 supercharged now I checked.... :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Shabs at Syncro is now doing alternative ratio gears for the LT95, might allow some flexibility?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Retroanaconda said:

I think Shabs at Syncro is now doing alternative ratio gears for the LT95, might allow some flexibility?

Useful to know. Well it's insured as of today and MOT booked for Thursday and provided it passes then on the way back it's going to collect a load of feed for the farm so put to use immediately :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bowie69 said:

Apologies, it was a 4.2 supercharged now I checked.... :)

That's still shockingly bad unless there's something wrong with either the engine or his right foot...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed, a friend had a 4.2 and driving that like a loon with an osmium right foot and that would do about 12mpg. Normal cruising around would be high teens, low twenties, in a Sport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, FridgeFreezer said:

That's still shockingly bad unless there's something wrong with either the engine or his right foot..

I would be tempted to agree.... Part of the problem I am sure was the fairly small wheels on it compared to the very much more modern 20" rim mobile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The LT95 is quite obviously 18 more bettererr than the LT77.

 

Another vote for just drive it here, you can always tweak the pump, you have nothing to lose. Considering my truck cab 90 tips the scales at ~1900kg I think your looking more like 2600kg, that's roughly what my transit tipper weighs.

 

Will.

Edited by muddy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ED

 

Interesting you mention the 2.8 Cummins. I was interested in this lump; but have shelved it completely due to cost, complexity of installation and appalling fuel economy...

I would suggest that, as you intend the vehicle for a workhorse, that you look for a reliable, easy conversion. I mentioned earlier that I replaced the 2.8 IL6 Nissan in my RRC with a 3.3SD Turbo. It was a bolt in swap. However it has now become a rare engine over here. Although speaking to a mate in Spain, he asked 'how many do you want?'

Alternatively, due you really need fuel economy? If it was my vehicle, I would either fit a 300tdi in, or go back to a V8.  All up weight can be pulled easily, by a smaller, low power engine. Power is for when you need to go faster.

The 127 units favoured by the Aircraft Research Establishment/Qinetiq, back in the late 80's, early 90's, were all 19J lumps. They were single cab, with a laboratory in a quad tech on the back, towing a 2.5 tonne generator. I drove one of those form Salisbury plain, to Cape Wrath back in the early noughties. It would happily sit at 60 mph on the motorway, with the odd change down for hills. On the little roads up in North West Scotland, I found it to be fine, as long as one allowed for what it was. Fuel economy was reasonable. Cab comfort was truly appalling

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 3.3 is a sweet unit. Grunt. Torque.

Mine was the N/A, the turbo must have been fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Gazzar said:

The 3.3 is a sweet unit. Grunt. Torque.

Mine was the N/A, the turbo must have been fun.

I wouldn't say 'Fun'. It was ludicrously reliable; there was  comfort in knowing it was just going to work, no matter what. It was also good on fuel.

It's about 95 bhp in standard and about 170 ft/lb; I intercooled mine; as I was doing long journeys, often towing. It really suited the O/D as well.

Oddly enough it's a 3.2 litre, just called the 33

one of my top ten vehicles to own is a SWB Datsun Patrol 160, with one of these in it. Preferably one of the last models, with 110 bhp and the bigger clutch. They look good, have eliptic leaves and are just cool

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a red one. The n/a. White top. Full bling. Chrome alloys, bfg muds, spots, black windows. I loved it. 

I was young, but it was a very cool truck, when everybody else was driving Micras and fiestas at the time.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We use cookies to ensure you get the best experience. By using our website you agree to our Cookie Policy