V8david Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Hi all This I assume has been done to death but anyway... I am carrying out the old chestnut of replacing the front OS inner wing on my 1989 RRC. It's off and everything's cleaned up ready to put the new one on. Does it have to be welded or can I bolt the new one on (at the bulkhead end particularly)? Just thinking that if it was bolted on instead of welded everything could be fully painted and undersealed and rustproofed all over before putting it together. Were the original classics front inner wings bolted on? It would also be much easier to re-do again in another 25 years ( ). Cheers Dave p.s. What do you recommend painting it with once it's in? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrRob Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Probably needs welding as per original. Ask your MOT man I would. I used chassis paint then lots of black waxoyl. Early ones were bolted on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bowie69 Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Welded, it is a structural member incorporating the body mounts Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V8david Posted February 20, 2014 Author Share Posted February 20, 2014 Thanks for the super fast replies. Bugger... I thought that'd be the case. I didn't know just how bad the body mounts are for cultivating rot until I took the front two off! The NS one is thankfully salvagable (just), rest of that wing is also fine. I think I might just visit the rest of the body mounts now even though they look ok, save them from themselves! Thanks again. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrRob Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 My front mounts under the light boxes were made of dust. YRM or Easy on Panels are our saviours! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V8david Posted February 21, 2014 Author Share Posted February 21, 2014 My front mounts under the light boxes were made of dust. YRM or Easy on Panels are our saviours! I know! Those are the two particularly bad ones on mine (so far ). Amazingly the two at the back of the engine bay are fine. Thank god given their position... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrRob Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 I've smothered those in waxoyl too! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highway_Star Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 It's an interesting one, and a grey area really. In MOT terms the RaRo inner wings are not a 'prescribed area', because it has a separate chassis. BUT there is that catch all about 12" from a body mount etc. Also the inner wing might be supporting items like the ABS pump and accumulator, as well as the brake pipes flexi mounts. The early (I think it was pre '86) cars were bolted.The switch to welding was not for structural reasons, purely cheaper and quicker to weld. It's one of those discussions that can go round and round. My own RaRo has one side that's welded at the bulkhead end, bolted at the radiator end. The other side is fully welded. None of the various MOT testers have ever mentioned it. Personally I'm not really fussed it it's bolted or welded. The body mounts on the inner wings don't carry the real bulk of the body, they only really carry the radiator, wings, bonnet etc. The body shell's real mass is supported by the bulkhead body mounts, rear body cross member mounts and the ones on the inner sills. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snagger Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 I was contemplating a decent PU adhesive for this on my RRC - it's used for glueing combat aircraft and airliners together, and held the tub rear cross member in extremely well on my 109, causing a lot of trouble when it had to be replaced after an accident. It's incredibly strong, possibly stronger than spot welding because of its continuous nature, and will prevent any possibility of moisture ingress between the spot/rose/stitch welds, which will cause weakness as the flanges rust in the future. The front wings are not structural items. Replacing the sills on the other hand, and repairing the door pillar, are definitely welding jobs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highway_Star Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 It's a real can of worms Snagger. Thankfully the diagram in the MOT manual clearly shows they aren't prescribed areas. BUT.... a really picky tester could use the ABS pump and reservoir or the brake flexi mountings as a failure point if corroded to excess. PU adhesive has a lot of merit, after all modern cars are often glued together! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrRob Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Bolt them in. If it fails then run the MIG along the join. Job done ;-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V8david Posted February 27, 2014 Author Share Posted February 27, 2014 Thanks for all the replies, very interesting. I'm lining it all up at the moment, currently held in with a few self tappers and the body mount. Feels bloody sturdy already! I will weld it up then weld it in once it's in one piece. Has anyone used the poly body mount rubbers? Never seen them before and just come across them: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Rangerover-P38-Body-to-Chassis-Mounting-Bushes-in-Polyurethane-ANR1504-/280977010655 Less likely to split than the rubber? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
disco_al Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Plenty of red oxide after it's on, then a good coat of chassis black all over, followed by underseal wherever there is likely to be stone/mud/water impacting at high speed would be my preferred solution. Cavity wax into the body mounts where the bolts fit, before the bolts are inserted, followed by a quick spray once in and the a top up/over once in and done up - stop any water ingress between the rubber mounts, the bolt and the steel panel. Seam sealer along all joins/seams after painting, you could run black tiger seal (other super sticky stuff is available) in a nice neat bead to keep it tidy, and smooth into corners as you go (same idea as silicone round the bath) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highway_Star Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 I've done that before V8David, a few TEC screws and the body mount, with some judicious persuasion from clamps to get it into alignment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bowie69 Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 "In MOT terms the RaRo inner wings are not a 'prescribed area', because it has a separate chassis." Erm... a prescribed area does not denote just the chassis! Anything structural/load bearing major components etc. Body mounts are obviously a prescribed area. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
task Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 I would weld them back on, that's how they were fixed on from the factory Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bishbosh Posted March 1, 2014 Share Posted March 1, 2014 Welded, it is a structural member incorporating the body mounts I understand your sentiment Pete, but the anal engineer in me just couldn't let this slide... A structural member can equally well be bolted in, at least I hope so or else there are quit a few non structural bridges out there that you lot have driven over and under.... As stated above, the likey reason for the change to welded would have been on cost grounds, nothing more. It will also be an easier connection to protect from corrosion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bowie69 Posted March 1, 2014 Share Posted March 1, 2014 ooooh, OK, it is a structural member that was originally welded, therefore should be if you are replacing Pftt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highway_Star Posted March 1, 2014 Share Posted March 1, 2014 Bowie69, correct. But go and look at the diagram in the MOT testers manual for vehicles with separate chassis, the front inner wings aren't marked as prescribed! As I said, there's the catch of all of being within 12" of a body mount etc. As predicted this is going round and round, it has done for as long as I've owned a Range Rover.. Knocking 20 years! There's something in the MOT wording, can't recall it exactly, but it basically equates to not needing ALL the body mounts secure and strong. The ones on the front inner wings aren't carrying anything like the load of the rest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bowie69 Posted March 1, 2014 Share Posted March 1, 2014 My understanding is that the areas around a mounting point as we are describing are also a prescribed area. In other words, all areas where excessive corrosion can cause a fail is a prescribed area. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highway_Star Posted March 2, 2014 Share Posted March 2, 2014 That's kind of my take on it too. But the manual doesn't illustrate them as prescribed areas. Hence I don't describe or think of them as such in the strictest manner. As we've discussed above, technically they should still fail if corroded to excess or badly repaired due to the body mounts and the brake components. But then again, there's that point about not actually requiring all body mounts intact! I guess this is why this discussion has been going round and round and round for years. Until VOSA issues a firm bulletin on the inner wings of the RRC, it will continue to go round and round and round. Are we bored yet? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snagger Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 Also consider that the brake parts mounted on the wings consist just of the pump and accumulator, which have no external forces acting on them and so don't need heavy mountings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highway_Star Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 Doesn't the wording say something along the lines of 'likely to cause loss of control'? I dunno about you, but I'd call losing the brake assistance a pretty dramatic loss of control! If you've ever driven a Wabco ABS equipped RRC without the pump working I'd wager you'd feel the same Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bowie69 Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 Erm, yes, non-existent really doesn't describe it does it! Might as well be pressing the bulkhead directly for all the good it does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V8david Posted March 3, 2014 Author Share Posted March 3, 2014 Sorry for starting this! Interesting though... 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.