o_teunico Posted January 26, 2014 Share Posted January 26, 2014 Bye, bye Discovery, hello 109! Yep, thanks to wife´s Lancia, a disastrous clutch/flywheel failure and a BIG workshop bill, the savings I had for the Disco have been reduced to zero Fortunately, life gives us second oportunities. My bro has bought two 109"s, one from 1974, the other from 1975. Newer one has both a front and a rear halfshafts broken. The older one has a broken gearbox. At 300 eur each, with all the paperwork OK, are a bargain, and bro is happy selling one of them to me (he has not decided yet wich of them). Series vapour builds have started, and a SOA (Spring Over Axle) conversion is one of them. After searching the web for some info, I crawled undrer one of them and discoverded that the crossmember under the flywheel housing has very little clearance with the prop. Will this be a problem with a 10" suspension lift? (wider axles and torque bars are on the list). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o_teunico Posted January 26, 2014 Author Share Posted January 26, 2014 A very nice SIII Santana with SOA conversion that a friend spotted some months ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jai_landrover Posted January 26, 2014 Share Posted January 26, 2014 One Tonnes have the crossmember notched out and thats only a slight lift. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill van snorkle Posted January 26, 2014 Share Posted January 26, 2014 O'Teunico, how are you going to fit under that bridge with a 10" suspension lift ? Generally, to maintain stability, if you raise a vehicle say 2", you should widen the wheel track width by 4". So your 109 will need to have the same wheel track of a military Humvee, otherwise it will be an unwieldy tippy POS. The cost of suitable wider axles, plus fitting will well exceed what you planned for the Disco, to create a monster that would probably be next to useless in most off road situations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snagger Posted January 26, 2014 Share Posted January 26, 2014 Lifting the vehicle that much will certainly cause problems for both prop shafts. I had a problem with the rear prop fouling during the build of my 109 - with the body still off (so little load on the springs) and the slightly taller combination of MoD/1-Ton spring mounts and shackles and parabolic springs, the rear prop fouled the bottom of the hole through the cross member just behind the transmission. Fitting the cross member from an 88" would cure this problem. You'll still have issues with the bell housing cross member, though, and even notching it like the MoD/1-Ton chassis won't be enough. Steering is another problem with SOA conversions. That much of a lift is asking for all sorts of problems, not just with the steering and prop shaft clearances and UJ angles, but with vehicle handling and stability. The 40mm rise from the MoD hangers and shackles and the roughly 50mm rise from heavy duty parabolics is about as high as is sensible to go, being very similar in ride height to a 110 on HD springs. Even then, you would be wise to fit wider spread rims or spacers to widen the track. The engine and transmission sit considerably lower in a 109 than a Defender, so even though the track with spacers or after-market 8-spokes/modular wheels will be less than a Defender, stability should be similar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o_teunico Posted January 26, 2014 Author Share Posted January 26, 2014 This two 109s are quite special (sorry, but bro asked me not to publish any picture until he solves all the relative paperwork). Forget the brain looking for a family 4x4 that will fit inder the bridge. Heart loves this 109, wich is a two seater and, even in standard form, will not fit under the bridge. My idea about the axles was using some coiler axles + spacers + offset wheels = 300mm more track than a series axle. A new PAS box, sitting lower than standard, and a "z" bar will could do with steering. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o_teunico Posted January 26, 2014 Author Share Posted January 26, 2014 That bellhousing crossmemeber is absent in the coiler chassis. Can it be simply cutted and trown away? I think that Stage 1 V8 also lacks of this crossmember. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill van snorkle Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 That bellhousing crossmemeber is absent in the coiler chassis. Can it be simply cutted and trown away? I think that Stage 1 V8 also lacks of this crossmember. The Stage Ones don't have the old arched crossmember. but they had the old series 2/3 transfercase crossmember relocated further forward. Because of this I personally don't think the Stage One chassis is as rigid as earlier 109 chassis. My stage One doors jamb when suspension is articulating, and it is a low mileage unit with a very straight rust free chassis. i Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bowie69 Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 10"... are you flipping insane? I mean... come on man, have you not learnt anything from your other vapour builds! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill van snorkle Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 10"... are you flipping insane? I mean... come on man, have you not learnt anything from your other vapour builds! I don't know where the 10" figure actually comes from. Properly done the net gain in lift shouldn't exceed 6" at most, and then if settled springs are used that could be reduced to around 4" or less. That Z bar looks deadly, although Landrover 101's do have something similar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FridgeFreezer Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 I can sort of see the reasoning behind SOA as demonstrated by ToyRoverLander, but 10" lift just screams "dumb!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pollywog Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 My idea about the axles was using some coiler axles + spacers + offset wheels = 300mm more track than a series axle. You'll be changing wheel bearings on a weekly basis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o_teunico Posted January 27, 2014 Author Share Posted January 27, 2014 10"=8" thick leaf pack + 2" 1 Ton shackle/hangers A friend has used offset wheels plus spacers in his thin hub 300 disco. Bearings have been changed once in four years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FridgeFreezer Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 Just because you can doesn't mean you should. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bowie69 Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 And since when was a leaf pack 8"? If you want to ruin a perfectly good truck, go ahead. I mean look at Fridge, his isn't lifted at all Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FridgeFreezer Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 I mean look at Fridge, his isn't lifted at all Damn right, it's running standard height, not even 1-ton shackles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bowie69 Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 Zactly Why muck about with it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon White Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 What do you hope to gain with a soa conversion? You will not gain articulation, nor will you gain ground clearance. However what you will gain is instability, poor handling, even worse spring wrap and an appetite for driveline components. Jon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill van snorkle Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 8" thick spring pack ? The front springs on my Stage One are 2" thick. the diameter of the axle housing , including upper and lower spring saddles would be 4", together = 6" total lift. decambered springs could be used to reduce that to about 3 or 4". Some of the leaves are there to provide some Wrap/tramp control, so if anti wrap bars are fitted a few leaves could be removed to lower it further. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o_teunico Posted January 27, 2014 Author Share Posted January 27, 2014 This special Santana has a thick leaf pack, rated both front and rear to nearly 1.7 Tonnes per axle. Leaf pack + axle tube = 200mm In those years, when the 88" was our off road machine, many times the sprigs, hanging from the axle, were the cause of the vehicle beeing stucked. SOA will solve that. The crossmember is also too low, about 325mm from ground. Lifting it with SOA will give excellent break over angle. The distance between front axle tube and bumpstop is just 40mm. That´s too low. SOA will give me about 4" more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bowie69 Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 I dread to think what your flex will be like with springs like that.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon White Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 A new PAS box, sitting lower than standard, and a "z" bar will could do with steering. Ought to upload that photo to the scary steering website! Drag link like that is flipping lethal! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FridgeFreezer Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 I want to know where ToyRoverLander got wheel arches you can jack the car up on! This special Santana has a thick leaf pack, rated both front and rear to nearly 1.7 Tonnes per axle. OK, are you carrying 1.7 tonnes per axle? Unless you have lot of weight in the car it won't flex at all, and when it's empty you'll hit the ceiling on every bump. Just adding more height solves one problem but can bring others instead, what are you trying to achieve? Series spring hangers can be improved upon - many moons ago Tonk made spring plate sliders (Jon White might also have some?), or you can go a stage further and turn the U-bolts upside down so they don't stick down - this happens to be how Volvo do it, so I kept it (it could be made lower profile but it's not been an issue): Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snagger Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 Ought to upload that photo to the scary steering website! Drag link like that is flipping lethal! It looks pretty thick, so shouldn't be a problem other than the bump steer it'll have - the link needs to be as close to horizontal as possible, and kinking it like that doesn't cut it; the ends are still at different levels, so it'll behave like a diagonal link. Kinking it like that just makes sure it clears suspension and chassis parts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snagger Posted January 28, 2014 Share Posted January 28, 2014 How about keeping things simple and using decent quality parabolics, which will give a much better ride and handling whilst also being much thinner. Then use slipper plates to make the clamping plate under the springs more streamlined and less likely to hook any obstacles, with the U'bolts cut flush with the ends of their nuts, level with the bottom of the slipper? It'll give a small lift to the chassis, too, so that cross member won't hang up, but all without any adverse effects or major effort. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.