coil springs

[FridgeFreezer]

Since when did the DVLA crush vehicles that had been modified? I thought they just asked you to SVA it and issued a plate accordingly (probably a Q).

Back on topic, we've established you want to keep your vehicle as a Series (good man) and that you want more comfort and disc brakes. There are easy and hard ways of doing this, some of which will lose your Series' identity (and tax-exempt status) to a Q-plate, not to mention the added pain of an SVA.

- Putting coils onto your chassis is a big job, no matter how you look at it. It requires lots of things being put in places that weren't designed to have them, and your welding-fu must be strong! Likely to incurr a Q-plate and be noticed by the MOT man. Years ago it was worth it, these days you don't see anyone bothering to add bits to a Series chassis when they can just use a RR one, or buy one new from a chassis co. Q-plate issues can be deflected slightly if the modifications were performed by someone before the laws changed however that's down to how persuasive you're feeling if anyone asks.

- Bill's bolt-on coil conversion is an interesting solution but looks as if it's more work than just welding the blasted things on, and I'm not sure what the MOT chap would say when he saw the setup (after all it's about as obviously non-factory as you can get)

- Use a 90 or custom chassis from Designa, far less farting about, you know it will work & be strong but you will again end up on a Q unless Designa issue a certificate that it's an original replacement (highly unlikely but you never know what the law allows) Q-plate issues can again be deflected if the modifications were performed by someone before the laws changed...

- Put parabolics and ES9000's on it and have a ride that is as near as damnit the same as a Defender. You then have the easier option of either welding leaf mounts onto a RR axle, or working out how to mate RR ends to a Series axle. Both of those give you a vehicle that is far more original in the eyes of the MOT/SVA man than the above options as the only obvious change (to them) is the appearance of disc brakes, which aren't really of any great concern to them.

You know what my vote is

[backball]

thanks for the advice

- Being new I struggle with some acronyms. I've read about Designa bue does RR refer to a range rover? Which model, if so? Up to this point I was actually looking at Disco 1 axles as suggested by some of my friends

- On coils vs. a good parabolics setup: Are you saying you get a similar riding comfort and axle articulation with parabolics?

- What about grip at the wheel (excluding the discussion whether you actually have drive on the wheel; e.g. x-axle syndrom, lockers etc.)? I thought that a leaf sprung chassis doesn't have the same level of grip as a coiler as for instance there are no stabilisers on a leaf sprung chassis

[FridgeFreezer]

thanks for the advice

- Being new I struggle with some acronyms. I've read about Designa bue does RR refer to a range rover? Which model, if so? Up to this point I was actually looking at Disco 1 axles as suggested by some of my friends

- On coils vs. a good parabolics setup: Are you saying you get a similar riding comfort and axle articulation with parabolics?

- What about grip at the wheel (excluding the discussion whether you actually have drive on the wheel; e.g. x-axle syndrom, lockers etc.)? I thought that a leaf sprung chassis doesn't have the same level of grip as a coiler as for instance there are no stabilisers on a leaf sprung chassis

Around here RR= Range Rover, usually "classic" (EG not P38 or "new" shape). Range Rover and Disco share the same chassis and axles so it wouldn't matter where you got the axles / chassis from. Old rusty Range Rovers are more plentiful at the moment.

Parabolics will give you similar (not quite 100% but close) comfort and articulation as a defender on coils. Jon White does well with his setup, and Tonk has won twist-offs with his here's my humble 109 on parabolics:

And from there you can fit revolver shackles or similar to up the articulation further. Within reason, anything coils can do leaves can do - have a look at some of the US sites and some of the stuff they get up to on leaves.

The reason there are no "stabilisers" on a leafer chassis is that the leaves do this already - they are very good at locating an axle as they only flex in one direction (up/down) but don't allow the axle to move side-to-side or backwards/forwards. Coil springs obviously are not very rigid in any direction so need links, arms, joints etc. to keep the axle where it should be and pointing in the right direction.

A leafer with similar articulation to a coiler will have similar traction to a coiler, the type of spring fitted is a bit academic.

[MECCANO]

i wouldnt recommend es9000's on a swb

[FridgeFreezer]

They have been recommended here for a reduction in axle tramp - Jon's SWB seems pretty well set up suspension wise so will be interesting to see how he finds the ES9's.

[MECCANO]

They have been recommended here for a reduction in axle tramp - Jon's SWB seems pretty well set up suspension wise so will be interesting to see how he finds the ES9's.

well i have them fitted and they are too stiff,if you dont mind skipping sideways around corners on slightly rough tarmac. then go for it

thats with 2 leafs front and rear, cp springs

[FridgeFreezer]

Interesting - wonder if that's 100% shocks or a combo of shocks/springs/tyres? What are you running, your photo shows a lightweight - is it stock or has it been tinkered with?

[MECCANO]

Interesting - wonder if that's 100% shocks or a combo of shocks/springs/tyres? What are you running, your photo shows a lightweight - is it stock or has it been tinkered with?

its a lwt, it does it both with standard and now with range rover axles (although dramatically reduced) running 265/75r15 All terrains- tube less

[Tonk]

CP springs (and stands to reason that others will do the same)seem to react in different ways depending on how heavy the lr is, a set of springs which i had on the back of my swb appeared saggy and spongy so i changed them for a different set, the CP springs were then put onto another swb which is much lighter and it became a real buckaroo ride so we've changed them again.

Meccano,

check your tracking?

got a steering damper fitted?

how heavy is your lr?

what tyre pressures are you running?

[MECCANO]

CP springs (and stands to reason that others will do the same)seem to react in different ways depending on how heavy the lr is, a set of springs which i had on the back of my swb appeared saggy and spongy so i changed them for a different set, the CP springs were then put onto another swb which is much lighter and it became a real buckaroo ride so we've changed them again.

Meccano,

check your tracking?

got a steering damper fitted?

how heavy is your lr?

what tyre pressures are you running?

tracking is set up to series spec.. dont ask me what it is i did it a year ago, as its rwd, obviosuly when it goes perminant 4wd i will have to set it back to 4wd stylee on the front end.

i have a standard rangie steering damper in the standard place.

it should roughly be standard issue weight + a tiny bit for the additional length in axles. but its standard box and engien at the moment.

i agree the CP are very spongy. the back end becomes a marsh mellow with over 1 person+ a spare wheel in the back. with my imense 13 stone i can jump up and down on the rear end, and almsot reach the bump stops

as the tyres are tubless, about 35 psi.. i think

you can feel that the wheels arent able to react quick enough to the changing surface

[Tonk]

i'd lower the tyre pressures a bit for starters, its a free mod.......

i normally run mine at about 25 on road, 17 ish offroad, and mine is way heavier than yours.