110 boge suspension thingy & springs...

[jjojjas]

morning all,

Not been here for a few weeks.

My 110 (1993) CSW is just starting to seem a little low at the back. I carry a lot of weight sometimes...but then again, I did produce most of it....

I never noticed this before, sometimes the front seems a little high also. I'm assuming the boge thing that I know little about has died. Am I right in thinking I just ignore it and fit some new heavy duty springs all round? If so which ones do you recommend ?

I'd rather get this done soonish as I have a very long trip ahead fully loaded with a roof box on in a few month.

Jas

[Diff]

The original station wagon springs are only 180 lbs per inch and are helped by the self leveller. To check the leveller, load the rear up with a lot of weight, measure the bump stop to axle clearance, go for a short drive, stop and re measure. The leveller should have pumped the rear up so that the vehicle is level and the second set of measurements should have obviously increased.

As the leveller and springs get old, it may let the vehicle sag at the back if left unused for a few days, but may pump itself up as normal in use.

When the springs and leveller get tired or knackered, most people change the springs for the normal heavy duty springs fitted to hard tops because the replacement levellers are around £300. These are NRC 6904 with a red and a green stripe and are 15.55 inches long (passenger side), and NRC 6389 with 2 red stripes and are 16.02 inches long (drivers side).

Be aware that these are rated at 330 lbs per inch so give a much firmer ride. They will also lift the back of the vehicle a bit. Newer Landrovers are fitted with the same length spring on both sides. I would use the same length spring and would choose 2 of the shorter NRC 6904 springs rather than one of each.

Another alternative is the rear springs from the later 110s RKB101111 with a brown and purple stripe (fitted on both sides). These are 15 inches long and are a progressive spring 270 to 420 lbs per inch.

NRC 6904 and NRC 6389 are cheaply available from aftermarket suppliers.

Note that because the 110/130 rear springs are a larger diameter than those fitted to either the front or rear of all the other rover models, these are the only readily available standard Rover spec springs. Old man emu and some of the other after market manufacturers do make alternatives, but they are usually 'lifted' springs or even heavier duty.

If you fit heavy duty springs, it is best to remove the leveller, though many people don't bother, so it may not make much difference if it is knackered.

The front springs can stay as they are.

Regards,

Diff

[jjojjas]

Thanks Diff, an excellent post there. I'll follow your advice and try the hard top springs. Incidentally, why would you pick the shorter one over the longer one if you fitted them both the same size?

Jas

edited - ps. New springs fitted all round in 2003. Just started sagging and definately doesn't pump itself back up after a run.

[Diff]

Thanks Diff, an excellent post there. I'll follow your advice and try the hard top springs. Incidentally, why would you pick the shorter one over the longer one if you fitted them both the same size?

Jas

Because the 330 lb per inch rear springs are considerably stiffer than the originals, the back of the landy is raised quite a bit such that the whole vehicle is not level. The 1/2 inch difference in the length of the springs can make the rear look too high if you choose a pair of the longer springs, and it means when riding unladen on bumpy ground the springs are more prone to 'topping out' the standard shocks. This is because the spring has to be compressed more to get the shock fitted. ie there will be more pre load on the spring if you use the longer one. Just personal preference, that's all.

Regards,

Diff

[DaveSIIA]

Also worth removing the rear anti-roll bar if going for stiffer springs. Non-station wagon 110 didn't have have a rear anti-roll bar, and leaving it in with stiffer springs makes for interesting handling in extremis.

[jjojjas]

fair do's. I'll get the shorter ones.

I'll keep an eye on the roll bar. Most of mine is long road work or the odd rough track, The only time I see full suspension travel is with a jack under it..... good point though.

Jas

[Diff]

You can keep the anti roll bar if you keep the standard length shocks. It will help a little with the roadholding/cornering, but it does affect the axle articulation offroad.

BUT if you fit longer than standard shocks, one or both of the anti roll bar links can invert when articulating and jam up the rear suspension and produce very dodgy handling. If you fit longer than standard shocks and want to keep the antiroll bar, you need to space the chassis mounts for the anti roll bar down (by a similar amount to the additional length of the shocks).

Regards,

Diff

[western]

Also worth removing the rear anti-roll bar if going for stiffer springs. Non-station wagon 110 didn't have have a rear anti-roll bar, and leaving it in with stiffer springs makes for interesting handling in extremis.

Mines Brill on & off tarmac with OME springs all round & the rear anti rollbar fitted.haven't been stuck for lack of axle movement yet

[JimAttrill]

Just out of interest, NO 110 csw assembled here in South Africa had the Boge unit. They all had the Standard HD springs as above. The hard tops had the 130 helper springs as well. The latest TD5 110 csw springs are progressive and colour coded purple for both sides. These give a softer ride when unladen.

I disconnect my rear anti-roll bar if doing serious off-roading, a quick job. I rotate it rearwards and wire it to the chassis. It is harder to cross-axle the vehicle with the bar disconnected.