Engine replacement

[bill van snorkle]

The earlier series 2 boxes are supposedly stronger but have no synchro on first or second.

Jon

There was a bit of misinformation bandied about in the series3 days, and the above is one example. The series 2/2a boxes weren't stronger than series 3 boxes, they were in fact weaker and layshaft breakages were common even with standard engines,in addition to 2nd gear failures on higher powered vehicles, where the ring of dog teeth that engages with 1st slider would shear off. Series 3 boxes never snapped layshafts in half nor did the dog ring teeth shear off, but very poor synchro clutch design on all the pre suffix D boxes gave gearchange and jumping out of gear problems for around a decade of vehicle production. For normal light to medium duty use these issues made the series 3 box more troublesome than series 2 boxes, but the earlier box was certainly weaker for heavier use.

Bill

Edit. Oh and Chris123, 101 boxes are short bellhousing versions of the LT95 4 speed as fitted to earlier RangeRovers. They can be identified by noting that the main gearbox and transfercase housings are cast as a single one piece unit. These were never fitted to 2.25 litre engines for the military or anyone else AFAIK. ENV gearboxes were sometimes fitted to military specials, but I have never seen one so cannot elaborate further.

[rtbarton]

Isn't there a difference in the strengths of the transfer boxes? Doesn't one have a thicker shaft in the intermediate gear?

I broke a SIIa halfshaft clean in two, but that was due to bump starting a Perkins 4203!!

[bill van snorkle]

Isn't there a difference in the strengths of the transfer boxes? Doesn't one have a thicker shaft in the intermediate gear?

I broke a SIIa halfshaft clean in two, but that was due to bump starting a Perkins 4203!!

The series 2 and 1 models had a smaller diameter intermediate shaft and bearings, but I have never seen a broken early shaft in nearly 40 years of repairing LandRovers so the larger bits are there to prolong bearing life rather than resistance to breakage.

Bill.

[Chris123]

Okays, more bulkhead talk here:

Rather than cutting up the SII bulkhead I've got on it, I think I'll try with a later one and fit that. I think there are a couple of advantages to this; firstly it means the land rover is off the road for a minimum amount of time, and also it means if I ever want to revert the land rover back to standard it's just a nut and bolt job (well mostly). (I also don't have to relocate the military fuel change over valve).

I do have a Series III bulkhead around which needs a bit of patching up anyway, but I don't have the dash for it. So the plan is to make up a custom dashboard, out of steal and aluminium fronted. Clocks will have to stay in the middle, but I can make lots of room for things like, err... switches and other stuff which doesn't exist yet.

Looks like I'll be

convincing the parents that they need

buying a welder and teaching myself how to use it now

Any thoughts on this?

Cheers,

Chris

[rtbarton]

Looks like I'll be

convincing the parents that they need

buying a welder and teaching myself how to use it now

Any thoughts on this?

Cheers,

Chris

This is a good site for welding advice Good Site for Welding Advice

[Chris123]

Gawww, I've been offered a perkins prima turbo engine, and overdrive, with all adapter bits required for a bargain price. Unfortunately I've done the sensible thing and taken up this offer, which has left me with a weird feeling, cos I don't often like the sensible option.

Nonetheless, I shall be taking all this V8 and welding advice and applying it to a later project, which is currently just a rolling chassis.

Thanks,

Chris

[FridgeFreezer]

From what I recall of the engine bunfight thread, the prima conversion lets you bolt a Rover 220 lump in - lots of horsepowers, more torque than a V8 and TDi economy to boot. Perhaps that's a sensibly silly alternative to the rather too sensible diseasal lump?

[Abe]

e with most of the comment here

I would go the diesel route either a 200 or 300tdi

if you can source a clacked-out disco for as many parts as you can and then you will only be forced to buy the un-salvagable bits

I have a 300tdi in my 1971 series three (admitted sitting on a Classic RR chassis.) as i wanted disk braking all round

with the 200 / 300tdi motors there reliable not to thirsty and run cool - additionally you can use the disco radiator that has a in built oil cooler in it - In my case i went one step further and had a enlarged Fearn intercooler - if your series is old enough to get by the old-timer Reqs then remove the disco cat and you will have yourself one frugal-flyer.

One thing i would think about is gearboxes

do you want to stick with the original series boxes?

if you go with the later disco / defender boxes - dont use a disco main box as the short stick can be fun but involves a lot of fabrication work to get it to "fit" within the cab- better to source a re-con main Defender box with the traditional defender long stick change.

by all means keep the disco transfer box if you want to have higher ratios or sell it and source yourself some 265/75/16`s which will help - mine has these plus the higher ratio disco transfer box and still is nice to drive although has more "grunt" due to the intercooler

hope the above info helps

Happy Trails

Abe

[Chris123]

Bum!

Been trying to fit a prima engine, but it don't fit! Or at least I can't get it close enough to the gearbox to bolt up. We've moved the gearbox as far forward as possible, and the transfer box now meets the gearbox crosss member. Pushing the engine as far back as possible there is a gap of about an inch and a half between the engine and the gearbox meeting together, and the rocker cover at this point has met the bulkhead.

Soo, does anybody have any ideas as to what might be causing it, or even better a solution?

The machine is ex-mil heavy duty, and the only differences I can think of that might have an effect are:

military bolt on g/box crossmember - are these any wider or located in a different place?

heavy duty springs and shackles - could this cause the prop to settle in a diffrent place, altering the g/box location?

Different bulkhead? But I'm not aware of any differences

I'm pretty certain the adapter plate is okay, as the distance from engine mounts, to end of bellhousing is the same as on a standard LR engine.

Cheers,

Chris

[Les Henson]

Have you also replaced the spigot bush? If I remember, it has to be replaced as well as the input shaft nose on a L/R gearbox is the wrong diameter. I saw a picture once of the replacement spigot bush which was held in place by a big washer off to one side to retain it. If the engine gets to within an inch or so of locating onto the bell housing, this is usually a sign that the clutch is misaligned on the clutch plate/spigot bush. You quite often see people wiggling the engine or gearbox all over the place in order to get the two together, but all this is doing is putting strain on the various components and getting nowhere. Careful alignment is critical and once all is aligned the gearbox should slide to within 5-10mm of the engine. Then progressive tightening of the bell housing nuts should pull it the rest of the way. If you can't see anything else that's stopping the two from going together then the alignment will be your problem.

Les.

[Matt !]

Hello,

just to add my 2p's worth here, im running a 109" SIII with a tuned 3.5 v8 on su carbs and the standard gearbox, there is no way that i am Mechanicaly sympathic with it, and the gearbox is still doing fine, i get very good mpg 20+ on a run and i have no problem at all with water, i regually tow a tripple axel ifor trailer with allsorts on it, I say go for the V8 and you will not regret it, the fantastic noise and the power.

but as regards the problem fitting the other motor, as before clutch alignment, check check and double check

and one last thing if you do go for the V8 kit, get the flywheel aswell, they have to be re drilled for the clutch and the spigot bearing is a bigger one than the standard V8, there was a chap selling the spigots on ebay the other week.

thanks

Matt

[JSG]

I've got a carbed 3.5 V8 running through a standard SII gearbox as well, not startlingly fast but very satisfying

[Chris123]

I'm pretty certain that it's all aligned correctly, and the spigot bush is a custom machined bult on job. I will however have a bash at removing it all and re-aligning from scratch. However I think that my main restriction is that the rocker cover is meeting the bulkhead, before I can get the engine close enough to engage the gearbox.

grrr... I really shudda gone for the V8 route now

[Mark]

Is there any scope to take the gearbox mount rubbers out, and leave the engine mounts off whicle you get the box and block aligned and connected? You can then jack and wiggle the two together to get the engine and gearbox mounts in...

[Chris123]

Aha! gave it another attempt and managed to get it to fit, is as tight as a monkeys arse though! Had to use a crane and two jacks to level everything out.

To the pub now

Cheers guys!

[tiagoc]

Been trying to fit a prima engine (...)

Chris, maybe this comes too late for you, since you've managed to fit it already, but still might be handy (if you don't know it already):

Perkins Prima diesel engine conversion for Series Land Rovers

[Chris123]

Hey people,

I'm going to resurrect this cos I've got the diesel running and have a decent machine (but need to take it out again to do an oil seal), however I still have the urge for a V8...

I've bought an 88" with a naff chassis and engine, and I've also bought a 3.5 on carbs, which I'm going to rebuild slowly (this will be a slow project, and there's definately no rush). As the chassis is shot I'm tempted to find a rolling 90" chassis (coil springs etc.) and drop the v8 and 88" body onto it. As I prefer the looks of the series with the indented grill in all honesty. I recognise it will be tight with the v8, but it's gotta be do-able.

I imagine this won't be too simple, and that some of the chassis/body mounts may have to be tweeked. Any idea where the extra 2 inches will occur? I was thinking it may be easier to fit the 88" front end fairly straight forward, and a cut down 109" tub?

Also, I have no gearbox, what would be the preferred gearbox to keep an eye out for?

Thanks,

Chris

[Serious Series]

This is a good site for welding advice Good Site for Welding Advice

RT Barton That welding link is brilliant I paid for CD which was nowhere near as good as whats on there.

Thanks for brilliant post.