101 coil spring - diesel conversion

[Wouter]

Hey,

I'm looking for info/pictures of coil spring and diesel conversions on a 101 Forward Control.

Which axles were used ? Which diesels ? I'm thinking of fitting a TD5.

Does anybody has info ? Who did these conversions ?

Thanks,

Wouter

[Litch]

The only coil sprung 101's I ever saw both used RR axles, springs, arms etc with rims which had a greater offset thus keeping close to the 101's track (they were 5-stud obviously). The use of the weaker axles shouldn't be a problem unless you are constantly running the vehicle at its all up weight in which case modification of the original Salisburys would probably be required.

The TDi was a popular conversion but I believe the GMC 5.2 V8D also made it into one or two though I think lack of space made this a VERY tight squeeze.

[FridgeFreezer]

I know very little about 101's but I would be very reluctant to replace something as beefy as the 101 axles with Range Rover units, it would be far better IMHO to weld coil mounts to the Salisburys. I believe you can buy many of the bits off the shelf as chassis / axle mounts from the likes of paddocks.

Ignoring the weaker diffs & shafts, the RR axles are not designed for the weight of the 101 - even 109/110's have Salisburies on the back so they're obviously there for a reason.

The RR diffs will also put your gearing through the roof, especially with the stock 9.00x16 tyres.

[Litch]

The two coil-sprung 101's I regularly saw which used RR axles didn't seem to have any paticular problems but then again they were mainly used as off-road vehicles and weren't used for hauling heavy weights around. While the conversion wouldn't have suited me (my own 101 was regularly hauling heavy loads around & towing) it did seem to be very successful as long as you knew what use the vehicle was going to be put to.

With regards to the strength of the axles they were ok under a RR and an empty 101 is not a heavy beast at all, once again I stress that as long as you didn't want to load the vehicle up I can't see why they shouldn't work very well (and they did). The standard leaf-springs provide no articulation unless you load a few hundredweight of sandbags in the rear and lifting rear wheels was a very common occurance so more pliable coils would be a great help off-road (with that high COG they were a handfull on the road I believe). In addition you would have disc-brakes all round and the narrower track is easily widened using different rims and/or wheels spacers. Gearing isn't a problem as 4.7 diffs drop straight in and with the increased under-axle clearance (the under-diff clearance on a Salisbury is about 1-inch less than on a Rover axle) would allow the use of a more modern size of tyre (probably slightly smaller in diameter thus reducing the gearing slightly) with a better tread pattern than the most common ones which were available in 9.00x16 (these were bar-grip, Petlas block type & XCL of which the XCL was the most successful).

Like I said, this conversion wouldn't have suited me and modifying the Salisburys would have been the way to go but it certainly seemed to work for the guys who owned the vehicles and indeed one of them was used as a Comp motor which got to events under its own steam so it must have been quite reliable.

On the plus side you gained a softer ride & all round disc-brakes while on the down-side you lost load-carrying capacity and possibly a small amount of track. Worth it? I wouldn't bother and would rather make sure my brakes were working well and the rear leaf-springs were able to articulate as much as possible.

[lakshan]

I am converting a S2 109 forward control in to a 6x6 coil sprung tdi.

I am from sri lanka and have not much of experience on these stuff. I will post photos to u guys when its done.at the moment i am on the process of convertion.

I think it will be the only 6x6 109 forward control..are there any records in anywhere for this spec.

thanks

lk