110 anti roll bar

[reb78]

The rear ARB on my 110 is a bit worn with rust where it passes through the rubber bushes at the chassis attachments - this means the bar is quite loose in the bush.

My 110 is a 1989 CSW - and i think used NRC6221. Keith Gott have the later ANR4344 as new take offs at a decent price and I wondered if they are interchangeable?

[Snagger]

I'd be surprised if they weren't, but you may need new bushes as the bar diameter may differ. Can you not get them to measure the diameter and length on both axis to see if the match yours? I'm sure they'd do that for you.

[western]

My '89 110csw rear antiroll bar is 19mm diameter, think the later bar is the same

[bodumatau]

Yep only ever seen one size rear anti roll bar and I have 15 on my 150's and another 15 on my trailers..

[Orgasmic Farmer]

Yep, I used disco 1 ARBs on my 110 and they fits fine

[Chambo110]

Reviving an old one.. my 1987 110 csw doesn’t have one. Is it supposed to ??

did notice doing the nc500 that I’m rocking a bit 😱

[western]

Only if it has the mounts on the bottom face of chassis rails, Think rear antiroll bars were only fitted to County station wagons as factory fit, the rest were a option.

[miketomcat]

You don't need them, but some people like them some don't. We have one on the rear of 110 but not on the ibex. I off road the ibex but the 110 only goes off road from time to time.

Mike

[oneandtwo]

Massive improvement front and rear on a 90. I drove a non ARB equipped 90 the other day and it was like a jelly on wheels.

[Chambo110]

15 hours ago, oneandtwo said:

Massive improvement front and rear on a 90. I drove a non ARB equipped 90 the other day and it was like a jelly on wheels.

Appreciate the info fellas.. 

jelly on wheels sounds spot on.. I think I may invest. Pretty sure the chassis mounts are there.

cheers

[reb78]

I never completed this thread after starting it. The rear ARB that I got from Keith Gotts fitted up fine. I cant remember what bushes I used - I think I asked Gott to supply the right ones. They were very helpful as always.

On the ARBs - I run my 110 with a Brownchurch roof rack and often a roof tent mounted on bars on top of that. The roof tent sits fairly centrally over the rear wheels. This is the main reason I wouldn't consider not having a rear ARB (none at the front). My 110 behaves and handles really well - some would have you believe that with what I have on the roof it wouldn't make it round the first roundabout it encounters but it is absolutely fine. Any 'off roading' I do is very moderate so massive wheel droop is not a requirement for me (steep, muddy, grassy fields and tracks but no rock climbing/crawling type stuff that needs masses of articulation). 

[Chambo110]

Apologies for delay.. I been off grid.

cheers Reb.. sounds like I’m in similar situation as you were. Roof tent plus other bits on a rack. I deffo need to get the bar fitted I think.

 Thanks 

[Lightning]

l wouldn't fit an ARB on the rear and not on the front, as it would more than likely make the vehicle handling unpredictable.

My 110 CSW didn't have ARB's l fitted a pair and it transformed the on road driving, plus it still seems just as capable off road.

l fitted standard Land Rover parts.

[western]

Rear bar only is fine, my 89 110csw has a factory fitted rear bar only, I can hustle it along windy B roads without any problems

[uninformed]

3 hours ago, Lightning said:

l wouldn't fit an ARB on the rear and not on the front, as it would more than likely make the vehicle handling unpredictable.

My 110 CSW didn't have ARB's l fitted a pair and it transformed the on road driving, plus it still seems just as capable off road.

l fitted standard Land Rover parts.

The front radius arms have inherently more roll stiffness than the rear link set up. In essence the front is a big anti roll bar. Fitting one to the rear only can balance the front and rear roll stiffness. 

[miketomcat]

Our 110 has a rear ARB fitted from the factory in 83. No front ARB. 

Mike

[reb78]

2 hours ago, miketomcat said:

Our 110 has a rear ARB fitted from the factory in 83. No front ARB. 

Mike

Same and I cant fault the handling on mine. Any poor handling is due to me!

[Mo Murphy]

I just have one on the back of the 90 and it's fine.

Mo

[Troll Hunter]

Factory fitted only on the rear of my 1991 110.  It's the driver that needs one now!

Mike

[Snagger]

My RRC had ARBs from new and it handles really nicely, but I drove a friend’s without them and it wallowed like a fishing boat in a rough sea, which I found very unnerving.  I added one to the back of my 109 which has the same type of roof rack as you have, as it was quite unpleasant on side slopes and on fast road bends.  It has been fantastic since, and I have never had any kind of odd behaviour from it despite not finding a front bar.  I quite fancy an X-Deflex, even though I can’t really justify it.

[simonr]

On 9/6/2021 at 8:48 AM, Lightning said:

l wouldn't fit an ARB on the rear and not on the front, as it would more than likely make the vehicle handling unpredictable.

My 110 CSW didn't have ARB's l fitted a pair and it transformed the on road driving, plus it still seems just as capable off road.

l fitted standard Land Rover parts.

As someone else mentioned, the front radius arms have a lot of roll resistance as standard - and indeed, the front ARB is fairly weak compared to the back.

In terms of handling, increasing the front anti-roll leads to understeer.  Back leads to oversteer - so you can tune the vehicles cornering / drifting behaviour with the ARBs.

I found my 110 (doublecab with heavy rear springs) without a rear ARB had a tendancy to understeer in the wet - which personally, I don't like!  Adding a rear bar only, made a very positive difference - to what I consider almost perfect - where it will drift sideways and you can modulate the under / over steer with the throttle once the wheels are spinning.  That means you can still steer (with the throttle) if it drifts.  Other 110 models will behave differently, because of different loading characteristics / centre of mass.

I built an unlockable front bar for it (using a D3 ACE Bar) - but when it was locked, it induced way too much understeer.  I could still control it, but didn't like the handling as much as without.

Adapting a D3 ACE bar for the rear might be a good option, if you can't justify the X-Deflex.  The hydraulic actuator it uses is similar to a Helac

Actuator.  The swept volume on both sides is identical (unlike a cylinder).  It means that you can run it closed loop with just a ball valve to switch it on & off.  Purging all the air out of it is tricky but not rocket science.  I used a solenoid operated spool valve on mine.  I picked up the ACE bar itself at Newbury for aot £10.

[Chambo110]

3 hours ago, simonr said:

As someone else mentioned, the front radius arms have a lot of roll resistance as standard - and indeed, the front ARB is fairly weak compared to the back.

In terms of handling, increasing the front anti-roll leads to understeer.  Back leads to oversteer - so you can tune the vehicles cornering / drifting behaviour with the ARBs.

I found my 110 (doublecab with heavy rear springs) without a rear ARB had a tendancy to understeer in the wet - which personally, I don't like!  Adding a rear bar only, made a very positive difference - to what I consider almost perfect - where it will drift sideways and you can modulate the under / over steer with the throttle once the wheels are spinning.  That means you can still steer (with the throttle) if it drifts.  Other 110 models will behave differently, because of different loading characteristics / centre of mass.

I built an unlockable front bar for it (using a D3 ACE Bar) - but when it was locked, it induced way too much understeer.  I could still control it, but didn't like the handling as much as without.

Adapting a D3 ACE bar for the rear might be a good option, if you can't justify the X-Deflex.  The hydraulic actuator it uses is similar to a Helac

Actuator.  The swept volume on both sides is identical (unlike a cylinder).  It means that you can run it closed loop with just a ball valve to switch it on & off.  Purging all the air out of it is tricky but not rocket science.  I used a solenoid operated spool valve on mine.  I picked up the ACE bar itself at Newbury for aot £10.

I’ll be honest I couldn’t ever see me drifting in my 110. 
I would end up spending me money on new pants instead of parts 

Great info though 👍

 

[simonr]

13 hours ago, Chambo110 said:

I’ll be honest I couldn’t ever see me drifting in my 110. 
I would end up spending me money on new pants instead of parts 

Great info though 👍

 

You should try it, maybe in a wet car park.  I don't mean the kind of drifting you see in movies - just get a feel for how the vehicle behaves and how to control it.  Then, when it happens when you're not expecting it, you won't need new pants - you'll just recover it automatically. 

I had a day, driving around a roundabout.  I came across a patch of ice & my 110 started to slide - I just controlled the over/understeer with the throttle and managed to guide it out of the exit I intended, all be it at 45 degrees to the lanes.  I just did it automatically - though I had to stop for a minute just to let the adrenyline settle down.

Had I not practiced, it could have been quite serious. 

It has taught me a lot, from a technical point of view about how vehicles behave while drifting - such as, when you 'steer' you rotate around the vehicle centre of mass - and when you are drifting, it's the centre of mass which moves in a circle.  This came in useful working on Hobbs & Shaw in particularly when we were drifting (Off Road Armoury) buggies around Eggborough Power Station ruins. 

[Snagger]

I have lost the back end of the 109 on some wet A-road bends and on icy roads a couple of times.  Recovery was quite benign.  But that happened before fitting the Marshall Ambulance rear ARB - I haven’t come close since, even though the 12J was replaced with a Tdi.  It was probably mostly due to the tyres I had at the time (Pirelli Dakar).

Simon, do you know if the X-Deflex would fit in place of that Marshall ARB?  I can’t see why not, though I presume it needs special dimension D-bushes and maybe their clamps.  I’d imagine the arms would connect to the Marshall vertical links to the axle, which use standard Series/Defender steering rod ends.

[simonr]

6 hours ago, Snagger said:

I have lost the back end of the 109 on some wet A-road bends and on icy roads a couple of times.  Recovery was quite benign.  But that happened before fitting the Marshall Ambulance rear ARB - I haven’t come close since, even though the 12J was replaced with a Tdi.  It was probably mostly due to the tyres I had at the time (Pirelli Dakar).

Simon, do you know if the X-Deflex would fit in place of that Marshall ARB?  I can’t see why not, though I presume it needs special dimension D-bushes and maybe their clamps.  I’d imagine the arms would connect to the Marshall vertical links to the axle, which use standard Series/Defender steering rod ends.

Post a picture!