Series 111 gearing ?

[Snagger]

It works out at about a 10% or so gearing increase to step from 6.00s up to 7.50s.

As for BSF's comments, I couldn't agree more. A "DI" retrofit is easier and cheaper than doingt he whole Tdi fit and will put less strain on the transmission (though I am one of the many who have had few problems caused by the increased engine torque, the one gearbox failure being more due to my use of OD and 3.54 gears together in third gear). But, for those who don't want the extra performance, why bother with all the hassle of bigger exhausts, intercooler plumbing and the rad change to include an oil cooler. Much simpler to fit a DI and keep the existing rad and plumbing... Horses for courses and all that!

[Landowner]

It works out at about a 10% or so gearing increase to step from 6.00s up to 7.50s.

As for BSF's comments, I couldn't agree more. A "DI" retrofit is easier and cheaper than doingt he whole Tdi fit and will put less strain on the transmission (though I am one of the many who have had few problems caused by the increased engine torque, the one gearbox failure being more due to my use of OD and 3.54 gears together in third gear). But, for those who don't want the extra performance, why bother with all the hassle of bigger exhausts, intercooler plumbing and the rad change to include an oil cooler. Much simpler to fit a DI and keep the existing rad and plumbing... Horses for courses and all that!

Diesel conversion was for economy and a bit more torque when off road.

Next question is, will defender rims fit because they have quite a large off set on the inside?

[Snagger]

They'll fit perfectly.

[Landowner]

They'll fit perfectly.

Thank you, excellent news,

Have a choice to go for.........., Range Rover Rostyles (maybe not) .... Wolfs off a 110 ( very tall tyres) ..... Standard Defender with wide ish tyres

[Snagger]

The Rostyles will foul the Series hubs, so go for whichever of the other two you prefer, including their tyres. Wolf rims take 7.50s and 235/85s, so would be good. Standard Defender rims should take very similar sizes, so be wary of very wide tyres (over 235) as they won't be suited to the wheel.

For a diesel powered Series vehicle, fat tyres will give a particularly noticeable drop in performance too, due to their increased mass and the amount of rubber deformed as they roll. Fat tyres are only useful in bog or on sand (with different tread patterns for each). For mud, grass, gravel, snowy or and wet roads and standing water, skinny tyres give much better grip - fat tyres aquaplane more easily and won't cut through mud or press down into grass; look at what the fat tyre shod vehicles do on trials compared to how ultra skinny tyre shod vehicles did on the WWI battlefields. Fat tyres will also make steering vague and heavy.

Also consider the pattern - the more aggressive it is, the worse it'll be on road, especially wet roads, and in sand. All Terrains are a good tyre for mixed use, way better than mud tyres. Only favour the mud tyres if you plan to do a lot of off road driving and little on road.

[Landowner]

The Rostyles will foul the Series hubs, so go for whichever of the other two you prefer, including their tyres. Wolf rims take 7.50s and 235/85s, so would be good. Standard Defender rims should take very similar sizes, so be wary of very wide tyres (over 235) as they won't be suited to the wheel.

For a diesel powered Series vehicle, fat tyres will give a particularly noticeable drop in performance too, due to their increased mass and the amount of rubber deformed as they roll. Fat tyres are only useful in bog or on sand (with different tread patterns for each). For mud, grass, gravel, snowy or and wet roads and standing water, skinny tyres give much better grip - fat tyres aquaplane more easily and won't cut through mud or press down into grass; look at what the fat tyre shod vehicles do on trials compared to how ultra skinny tyre shod vehicles did on the WWI battlefields. Fat tyres will also make steering vague and heavy.

Also consider the pattern - the more aggressive it is, the worse it'll be on road, especially wet roads, and in sand. All Terrains are a good tyre for mixed use, way better than mud tyres. Only favour the mud tyres if you plan to do a lot of off road driving and little on road.

We decided to put the old skinny 6.00 tyres back on when off roading, lower gearing and I think they will be better than a lot of these monster tyres that most people use.

[discomikey]

The Rostyles will foul the Series hubs, so go for whichever of the other two you prefer, including their tyres. Wolf rims take 7.50s and 235/85s, so would be good. Standard Defender rims should take very similar sizes, so be wary of very wide tyres (over 235) as they won't be suited to the wheel.

For a diesel powered Series vehicle, fat tyres will give a particularly noticeable drop in performance too, due to their increased mass and the amount of rubber deformed as they roll. Fat tyres are only useful in bog or on sand (with different tread patterns for each). For mud, grass, gravel, snowy or and wet roads and standing water, skinny tyres give much better grip - fat tyres aquaplane more easily and won't cut through mud or press down into grass; look at what the fat tyre shod vehicles do on trials compared to how ultra skinny tyre shod vehicles did on the WWI battlefields. Fat tyres will also make steering vague and heavy.

Also consider the pattern - the more aggressive it is, the worse it'll be on road, especially wet roads, and in sand. All Terrains are a good tyre for mixed use, way better than mud tyres. Only favour the mud tyres if you plan to do a lot of off road driving and little on road.

i had a series on rostyle rims, they didnt foul?

i have 235/80R16 on modulars on my series, it sits nicely and with the offset of the modulars the tyres sit flush with the side of the truck which looks much better than a narrower track IMHO.

i would love to get hold of a set of 2B forward control rims, (of which i have a single one) as they are standard land rover steel style with a nice offset which will end up with the tyres flush with the side. they are like rocking horse poo though and they go for stupid money just for the single one.

[Snagger]

6.00s will have the benefits of lowering the gearing for steep hills (but, frankly, low range 1st and 2nd should cope fine with 7.50s), lowering the centre of gravity for steep slopes, especially side slopes, and are also narrower than 7.50s so would bite more in many muddy conditions, but they also reduce ground clearance considerably. For off roading, I'd plumb for 7.50s as they will give considerably better clearance with only marginal change of CoG.

I'd suggest 6.00s are only of much benefit for your vehicle if you're towing a lot, where the gearing reduction would be helpful but you don't need ground clearance.

[Landowner]

i had a series on rostyle rims, they didnt foul?

i have 235/80R16 on modulars on my series, it sits nicely and with the offset of the modulars the tyres sit flush with the side of the truck which looks much better than a narrower track IMHO.

i would love to get hold of a set of 2B forward control rims, (of which i have a single one) as they are standard land rover steel style with a nice offset which will end up with the tyres flush with the side. they are like rocking horse poo though and they go for stupid money just for the single one.

My Wolfs have a deeper dish than standard rims but I wont part with them to put on the series, Nearly bought a set of madulars for 100 quid with tyres but couldn't quite afford them

[Snagger]

i had a series on rostyle rims, they didnt foul?

i have 235/80R16 on modulars on my series, it sits nicely and with the offset of the modulars the tyres sit flush with the side of the truck which looks much better than a narrower track IMHO.

i would love to get hold of a set of 2B forward control rims, (of which i have a single one) as they are standard land rover steel style with a nice offset which will end up with the tyres flush with the side. they are like rocking horse poo though and they go for stupid money just for the single one.

There may have been different spec Rostyles out there, or maybe yours had been beaten out to clear the hubs, but certainly some people who tried them on SIIs and IIIs had that fouling problem. Beating the centres out though causes stresses in the wheel, which I have heard of leading to fractures. I don't know if spacers cure the problem - it seems likely they would - but then you end up with protruding wheels.

Modular and 8-spoke wheels are typically 7" wide, more than the 109 and Defender rims or the Wolf rims, which are 5.5" and 6", or 6" and 6.5" respectively, I can't remember which. But you have to be a bit careful when ordering those after-market wheels; they come in at least two offsets, perhaps more, with a 15mm difference between the two types I had. The more offset rim is the one you want (ie the mating face set further towards the outer rim of the wheel rather than close to the centre line), as this will keep the tyre wall just about flush with the wing and keep the steering reasonable. The less offset (further outset) rims make the steering very heavy and vague and are technically a C&U regs issue as well as likely to throw mud and stones up the sides of the vehicle.

Like you said, the IIB FC rims are the ideal, looking right and giving good dimensions. An alternative only slightly less wide is 1-Ton rims, which would take 235s perfectly well and retain the original look, unlike Wolf rims, and would also be lighter than the Wolf rims and not cause concern over wheel studs to over-zealous MoT testers.

[Snagger]

My Wolfs have a deeper dish than standard rims but I wont part with them to put on the series, Nearly bought a set of madulars for 100 quid with tyres but couldn't quite afford them

Have a word with Vass as Ampthill - they have huge stocks of cast-off MoD wheels and tyres at good prices, many of them unused. Most will be Michelin XCLs, though, which are fine off road but less than ideal for wet tarmac.

[Landowner]

There may have been different spec Rostyles out there, or maybe yours had been beaten out to clear the hubs, but certainly some people who tried them on SIIs and IIIs had that fouling problem. Beating the centres out though causes stresses in the wheel, which I have heard of leading to fractures. I don't know if spacers cure the problem - it seems likely they would - but then you end up with protruding wheels.

Modular and 8-spoke wheels are typically 7" wide, more than the 109 and Defender rims or the Wolf rims, which are 5.5" and 6", or 6" and 6.5" respectively, I can't remember which. But you have to be a bit careful when ordering those after-market wheels; they come in at least two offsets, perhaps more, with a 15mm difference between the two types I had. The more offset rim is the one you want (ie the mating face set further towards the outer rim of the wheel rather than close to the centre line), as this will keep the tyre wall just about flush with the wing and keep the steering reasonable. The less offset (further outset) rims make the steering very heavy and vague and are technically a C&U regs issue as well as likely to throw mud and stones up the sides of the vehicle.

Like you said, the IIB FC rims are the ideal, looking right and giving good dimensions. An alternative only slightly less wide is 1-Ton rims, which would take 235s perfectly well and retain the original look, unlike Wolf rims, and would also be lighter than the Wolf rims and not cause concern over wheel studs to over-zealous MoT testers.

I have some discovery plastic caps for the wheelnuts at mot time, works a treat

[seriebil.dk]

Hi

I have this setup in my 88", 2,5 n/a, standard gearbox, standard diffs, tires 235/85-16 on oneton rims,

Runs sweet, pulls great from start with and without trailer.

My first shot would be bigger tires, 600 are thinny.

I'm doing 90 km/h flatout. But going to fit a ashcroft High ratio transfer, to gain higher top speed, White keeping the low range.

Fittings RR of Defender diff. will make low range useless in my opinion.

[discomikey]

I would argue that is not necessarily the case, where i know its mainly down to opinion and driving style, i run a 200tdi with standard gearbox fairey overdrive cooler diffs and 235/85 tyres. I do a lot of off roading from greenlaning to pay and play sites, I'm not afraid yo take my truck into the deepest darkest parts of the site like the woods at bala etc. I don't feel like i need a lower low first.

like i said its a matter of opinion though.

[Snagger]

I run a very similar set to Mikey on my 109 - Tdi, standard SIII gear box and hight range SIII transfer box with overdrive and 3.54 diffs and 235/85s. Personally, I find the 3.54s a bit too tall, but my vehicle is much heavier and has considerably more drag, but the original diffs are too low for my commuting. I did slightly modify the transfer box by fitting the lower low range gears from the SII Suffix B gears after learning about them from Phil (without doubt the forum's foremost Series transmission expert) - 2.8:1 rather than 2.35:1 of the later SII and the SIII gears. They have offset the effect of the diffs by half. In the future, I'd like to either fit a Defender transmission or 4.1 diffs with this transmission - either would provide an ideal gear ratio for my vehicle's characteristics. It's just a shame that the 4.1 diff gears are so costly, but it'll cost a little less than sourcing second hand LT77/stubby R380, LT230 and all the other bits to make the conversion (prop shafts, hand brake, transmission tunnel, seat base and so on), and will be a hell of a lot less work. I still can't make up my mind which way to go...

I would never have considered the 3.54 diffs behind the 12J I had before I installed the Tdi - they would have made 4th gear nearly redundant, costing much more in fuel consumption by being held down in 3rd and also increasing gear box wear. DO NOT fit 3.54s or High Ratio Transfer Case behind a 2.25 petrol or diesel or a 2.5 NAD, only behind a 2.6, V8 or Tdi; you just won't have the torque to pull that gearing unless you have a very light vehicle with no external accessories and keep the small diameter tyres. With the 12J engine, overdrive is what you need - you can select it when the vehicle has finished accelerating, or even use it as a gear splitter in the lower gears, but it allows standard gearing for accelerating and hills and can be selected for cruising on the level. 3.54s and HRTC are non-selectable and will ruin your drive - even Ashcrofts themselves advise against their HRTC being used in the non-charged 4-pot vehicles.

[Daan]

For wheels, if you like the series look, banding is the way to go. I did it with a set of td5 wheels, with a bead welded onto it, to make it a tubeless wheel. I since then found out that TDCI rims do actually have a hump. So if you band a set of them, you have a tubeless landrover wheel of the width you require.

[Snagger]

How much did that cost, Daan? It's a very simple solution if affordable, and probably cheaper than genuine IIB wheels anyway!

[Daan]

I paid 50 euros per wheel, plus 70 euros per wheel for blasting and powder coating at www.velgenverbreden.nl.

There are uk options though.

See the link in my signature for pics.

Daan

[Snagger]

That's not bad. I paid £60 per wheel to have the CSK/90SV alloys to be fully refurbished, so £70 for blasting, cleaning up the wled lines and coating is pretty comparable. Eu50 or £40 per wheel for banding is pretty reasonable. I'd be concerned about an insurer's reaction to them, but realisically, as long as the welding is properly done and checked, I can't see any strength or safety issue.

[Daan]

Edwin's work is top notch, I would happily recomend him. The legal side is well documented. It is not illegal, and you are ok, unless the banded wheels are the cause of a problem. It is not a cause for concern to me, having seen the quality of his work.

Daan

[Snagger]

Sorry, I was unclear - there would be no legal issues because the wheels would be using steel bands of the same thickness and fall well within the C&U regs on the wheel dimensions. I just wonder about insurers getting funny about modified rather than after-market manufactured wheels. They can be very illogical about any changes, like owner installation of what were factory options, so this would be bound to make some of them nervous.

[Landowner]

I run a very similar set to Mikey on my 109 - Tdi, standard SIII gear box and hight range SIII transfer box with overdrive and 3.54 diffs and 235/85s. Personally, I find the 3.54s a bit too tall, but my vehicle is much heavier and has considerably more drag, but the original diffs are too low for my commuting. I did slightly modify the transfer box by fitting the lower low range gears from the SII Suffix B gears after learning about them from Phil (without doubt the forum's foremost Series transmission expert) - 2.8:1 rather than 2.35:1 of the later SII and the SIII gears. They have offset the effect of the diffs by half. In the future, I'd like to either fit a Defender transmission or 4.1 diffs with this transmission - either would provide an ideal gear ratio for my vehicle's characteristics. It's just a shame that the 4.1 diff gears are so costly, but it'll cost a little less than sourcing second hand LT77/stubby R380, LT230 and all the other bits to make the conversion (prop shafts, hand brake, transmission tunnel, seat base and so on), and will be a hell of a lot less work. I still can't make up my mind which way to go...

I would never have considered the 3.54 diffs behind the 12J I had before I installed the Tdi - they would have made 4th gear nearly redundant, costing much more in fuel consumption by being held down in 3rd and also increasing gear box wear. DO NOT fit 3.54s or High Ratio Transfer Case behind a 2.25 petrol or diesel or a 2.5 NAD, only behind a 2.6, V8 or Tdi; you just won't have the torque to pull that gearing unless you have a very light vehicle with no external accessories and keep the small diameter tyres. With the 12J engine, overdrive is what you need - you can select it when the vehicle has finished accelerating, or even use it as a gear splitter in the lower gears, but it allows standard gearing for accelerating and hills and can be selected for cruising on the level. 3.54s and HRTC are non-selectable and will ruin your drive - even Ashcrofts themselves advise against their HRTC being used in the non-charged 4-pot vehicles.

I think something is wrong here, getting crossed wires regarding what the gearing is and what it should be.

The series 3 had a 2.25 petrol engine fitted.

I was told that both petrol and diesel models used a similar gearbox.

With petrol engine fitted the landy was good for probably 70 mph, she would cruise easily 50mph

When the diesel was fitted she would just about crack 50 but that was flat out, nothing wrong with the engine because it would cruise at 55/60 and over 70 downhill in my Defender before it was taken out.

So I'm thinking that the petrol engine Series 3 had lower gearing than the diesel version, either via transfer box or diffs this would allow for the difference in max engine revs between the two.

So we have had to gear it up by fitting 3.54 diffs and now she will cruise at 45/50 and crack over 60 flat out, acceleration is very good as well.

Therefore the advice that it would be overgeared and not pull etc with 3.45 diffs is rubbish

[Snagger]

All Series LRs had the same gearing except for the 1-Ton and V8 109s. The top end RPM of the 2.25petrol and 12J is close, the 12J being limited to 4250rpm if I remember correctly.

If your 12J is so rough at 2500rpm+ that speeds over 40-50 were unbearable, then there is something wrong with the engine or mountings - they're not as smooth as the petrol engines, but the indirect-injection diesels weren't particularly prone to vibration or harshness. It should certainly have pulled the car to a higher comfort speed and maximum speed with standard gearing. I'd look first at the timing, as even slight maladjustment of that causes harshness and rapid performance drop off.

Having run a 109 for twelve years with a mint 12J, I can assure you that 3.54s will be over-geared in anything other than a basic spec 88. It's not a matter of opinion but a simple fact. That is why LR used a 1.6: ratio transfer box with the 3.54 diffs. 1.15 transfer gears and 4.71 works out roughly comparable, but mixing the taller late diffs with the taller early transfer box would be awful for the vast majority of Series drivers.

[Landowner]

All Series LRs had the same gearing except for the 1-Ton and V8 109s. The top end RPM of the 2.25petrol and 12J is close, the 12J being limited to 4250rpm if I remember correctly.

If your 12J is so rough at 2500rpm+ that speeds over 40-50 were unbearable, then there is something wrong with the engine or mountings - they're not as smooth as the petrol engines, but the indirect-injection diesels weren't particularly prone to vibration or harshness. It should certainly have pulled the car to a higher comfort speed and maximum speed with standard gearing. I'd look first at the timing, as even slight maladjustment of that causes harshness and rapid performance drop off.

Having run a 109 for twelve years with a mint 12J, I can assure you that 3.54s will be over-geared in anything other than a basic spec 88. It's not a matter of opinion but a simple fact. That is why LR used a 1.6: ratio transfer box with the 3.54 diffs. 1.15 transfer gears and 4.71 works out roughly comparable, but mixing the taller late diffs with the taller early transfer box would be awful for the vast majority of Series drivers.

The 11J 2.5 n/a diesel which came out of my defender 90 is in excellent condition and will rev its nuts off, it would pull 55mph in 4th if you really wanted to and go again in 5th, I could overtake trucks on the motorway on the flat and leave them for dead downhill.

That engine transplanted into the series 3 would still rev its nuts off but the series top speed was not even 50. In fact when my mate tried to get 50 and 50 plus, the oil filler cap blew off it was revving that hard.

This suggests to me that the series is too low geared, it would start off in second and then straight into fourth at about 20 mph, surely the diesel series three was not that low geared, I had a 1966 diesel 88 in the late sixties and it would fly along at 60 plus if given the boot.

Now that we have put the defender diffs in it goes a lot better, it's quick off the mark and will cruise at 50 on a light throttle without revving the rockers off it, in fact it is just a little lower geared now than it was in the defender so our little series must have lower gearing than normal. It will pull very well in top from 30mph so cant be too high geared. I would imagine the top speed to be about 65 flat out now so not overgeared in my opinion.

That same engine in my defender with 110 wolf wheels and 235/80 profile tyres was too high geared above 30 mph and I had to swap back to smaller standard wheels and tyres for a more relaxed drive so I am aware of diesels and gearing, I have driven diesels for over 50 years in cars vans and hgvs so am familiar with speed/power/gearing and its affects.

It does have small wheels from a 1960 series but not that small to make it too low geared, it wasn't to low with the petrol engine in it but that would have revved higher.

[snailracer]

Was there any difference with military land rover? I'm sure I remember someone telling me some were lower geared than standard.

I'm running a 200tdi in my 109 with an overdrive on 235/85's and its quite happy. I even pushed it to near 80 on the motorway but it's quite happy at 60-65