MyRovers.com

For the rear you need to put the frame on jack-stands and pull the springs out. Then use a floor jack and cycle it, jack the axle up until the shocks bottom out, then lower it untill there’s 1/2″ of shaft showing, that’s where you need to bump it. Then droop it out untill the shocks are holding the axle up and then jack it back up so there’s 1/2″ of shaft still in the body, that’s where you needp to strap it. You’ll find you get a lot more than 10″ of trave out of a 10″ shock in the rear.

Straps do strech, so you gotta account for that, on a normal double wrapped strap you’ll get about 1″ of stratch per 12″ of strap.

2 more things to watch out for are coilbind, and where the bump-stops strike. Coilbind shouldn’t be an issue, but never the less, measure the width of the coils, then multiply by the number of coils, then measure the distance between spring perches at bump, mayke sure your perches are further away from eachother than the collapsed length of the spring. Then make sure your bumps are going to hit something flat, and that they’ll hit it pretty square, the RTE radius arms cock the axle for castor correction, and that cocks the bump-stop mounts and destroys bumps, other castor correcting radius arms will do the same, the RTE’s are also longer so only half the bump hits the strike-pad.

All Rovers

http://www.pirate4×4.com/forum/showthread.php?t=816718

http://www.pirate4×4.com/forum/showthread.php?t=822569

http://forums.lr4×4.com/index.php?showtopic=27817

All Rovers

http://www.pirate4×4.com/tech/billavista/PR-shaft/index2.html

All Rovers

http://www.expeditionportal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=22455

All Rovers

Drive Shaft Lengths:

25″ - Disco 1, D90, 110, 130, D2 (although it is a different shaft), RRC with an LT230 transfer case (up to 1988). These shafts have the u- joints clocked about 40 degrees out of phase so these shafts do not work well in units with a standard driveshaft geometry.
26.75 - RRC with BW t/case and also clocked 40 degrees out of phase.
28 - D90 rear
34.5 - RRC, D1, D2 rear
21.75 - Series SWB rear
23.75 - Series front with 4 cylinder engine

Thanks to Bill Davis for the driveshaft lenghts info.

All Rovers

Land Rover/Range Rover Service Bulletin 8/86

51/54 VIBRATION DIAGNOSIS
The following is intended as an aid for the diagnosis and solution of vibration problems on 1986 model year Range Rovers. When investigating complaints of vibration in the vehicle, it is important that the vehicle is assessed in a logical manner, so that, by a process of elimination, it is possible to determine the exact source of the problem. Therefore the first part of this bulletin gives a step by step sequence for the diagnosis of vibration sources and their elimination. Before initiating any investigation, however, check the vehicle to ensure that the cause is not due to an obviously simple fault. For example: check that all engine and gearbox mountings are of the correct specification and are correctly fitted; check that all exhaust mountings are correctly fitted, in particular check that there is no metal to metal contact between the mountings and the body; check the torque of the propshaft drive flange bolts, the universal joints for excessive play and transfer box and differential bearings for excessive wear.
If your initial investigations do not identify a problem it will be necessary to carry out the following procedure, which will involve some testing of the vehicle.

NOTE

Should it be found at the outset that several vibrations are evident at different road or engine speeds, each must be treated individually. It is highly unlikely that the vibrations will be due to the same problem and therefore each will require a separate cure.
Similarly, if a vehicle is found to be suffering from a particularly harsh vibration, it may not be possible to detect other, less noticeable vibrations which may exist. However, once the primary vibration has been eliminated, the secondary vibration, which again will only be evident at different road or engine speeds, will then become prominent. Again each vibration must be treated separately, allowing the causes to be isolated and the necessary remedial action taken.

RANGE ROVER VIBRATION DIAGNOSIS PROCEDURE
1. Road test the vehicle. Does the problem always occur at the same road speed irrespective of the gear selected? (SEE NOTE A).
YES: CHECK 2.
NO: Confirm that the problem occurs at the same engine RPM in all gears. CHECK 21.
2. Does the problem occur at 30-50 mph (48-80 km/hr) in all the available gears?
YES: Check that the front propshaft is correctly phased. The rear yoke must lead the front yoke by two splines. Fit correctly if necessary and re-test. If problem persists CHECK 3.
NO: CHECK 9.
3. Mark the drive flange and remove the front propshaft, engage the diff lock and re-test. Has the vibration been eliminated?
YES: CHECK 4.
NO: Check balance of front and rear wheel and tyre assemblies, using ON-CAR balancing equipment. Check that tyres have even wear characteristics with no evidence of flat spots. If wheels and tyres OK Check 19.
4. Check drive flanges (front output drive flange and front differential pinion flange) for eccentricity and run-out. (SEE NOTE B). Do the flanges conform to the tolerances?
YES: CHECK 7.
NO: CHECK 5.
5. Replace the flange(s). Recheck the eccentricity and run-out. Does the flange(s) conform to tolerances?
YES: CHECK 6.
NO: Fit 2nd replacement flange. Recheck eccentricity and run-out. If tolerances are still incorrect, the differential unit (or alternatively the transfer box) is suspect and should be checked separately. If tolerances correct CHECK 6.
6. Re-test the vehicle with the front propshaft fitted. Is problem still evident?
YES: CHECK 7.
NO: ——.
7. Substitute a replacement propshaft from a donor vehicle and Re-test. Is the problem still evident?
YES: CHECK 8.
NO: Replace propshaft with new unit (or leave on donor unit).
8. Fit the vibration damper assembly to the front axle, (see Attachment 1). (The attachment contains some figures. For further information, please contact Internet E-mail address: bjjen13b@telepost.no).Refit the front propshaft and road test. Is the problem still evident?
YES: Repeat diagnosis.
NO: ——.
9. Does the problem occur at 80-80 mph (112-129 kph) in ALL the available gears?
YES: Check that the rear propshaft is correctly fitted. The front and rear yokes must be IN LINE. There should be no phase difference. Realign if necessary and re-test. If problem persists, check ALL wheel and tyre assemblies for balance. If problem still evident CHECK 10.
NO: CHECK 19.
10. Mark the drive flanges and remove the rear propshaft. Secure the transmission brake drum with the propshaft flange nuts. With the differential lock engaged, re-test the vehicle. Is the problem still evident?
YES: CHECK 11.
NO: CHECK 15.
11. Remove the transmission brake drum and re-test. Is the problem still evident?
YES: Cause of problem is unknown. Re-check diagnostic procedure.
NO: CHECK 12.
12. Check the rear output flange on the transfer box, where the DRUM SITS, for eccentricity and run-out (See NOTE B). Does the flange conform to the tolerances?
YES: The handbrake drum is suspect and must be replaced with a known good component. Then CHECK 15.
NO: CHECK 13.
13. Replace the output flange and recheck the eccentricity and run-out. Does the flange conform to the tolerances?
YES: CHECK 14.
NO: Fit 2nd replacement output flange. Recheck eccentricity and run-out. If tolerances still incorrect, transfer box is suspect, and should be checked separately. If tolerances correct CHECK 14.
14. Refit the original handbrake drum and secure to flange with propshaft nuts. Re-test the vehicle without the propshaft fitted. Is problem still evident?
YES: The handbrake drum is suspect and must be replaced with a known good component. Then CHECK 15.
NO: CHECK 15.
15. Check the rear differential pinion flange for eccentricity and run-out. (See NOTE B). Does the flange conform to the tolerances?
YES: CHECK 17.
NO: CHECK 16.
16. Replace the flange. Recheck the eccentricity and run-out. Does the flange conform to the tolerances?
YES: CHECK 17.
NO: Fit 2nd replacement flange. Recheck eccentricity and run-out. If tolerances are still incorrect, the differential unit is suspect, and should be checked separately. If tolerances correct CHECK 17.
17. Re-test vehicle with rear propshaft fitted. Is problem still evident?
YES: CHECK 18.
NO: ——.
18. Substitute a replacement propshaft from donor vehicle and re-test. Is the problem still evident?
YES: CHECK 20.
NO: Cause of problem is unknown. Recheck fault diagnosis procedure.
19. If the vehicle has a manual gearbox, does the problem occur at 30-50 mph (48-80 kph) in all the available gears except 4th gear.
YES: CHECK 20.
NO: Cause of problem is unknown. Recheck fault diagnosis procedure.
20. Disconnect the front propshaft. Re-test with the differential lock engaged. Is the vibration still evident or is it worse?
YES: If this is confirmed, main gearbox is suspect, and should be investigated separately.
NO: RE-CHECK 2.
21. Are the correct engine mountings fitted? Current production usage:- Part no 566222 (colour coded yellow spot) for front engine mountings. Part No NRC 9154 (colour coded white spot) for rear engine mountings. (See also Service Bulletin 11A/85, Item 1).
YES: CHECK 22.
NO: Fit new engine mountings and re-test. If problem persists CHECK 22.
22. Remove the water pump drive belt. Test the vehicle statically by revving the engine in neutral. In order to avoid any overheating of the engine, DO NOT prolong the test. Does the problem remain?
YES: CHECK 24.
NO: CHECK 23.
23. Replace the fan and viscous drive unit, by substitution with known components from a donor vehicle. Refit the drive belt. Re-test the vehicle statically. Is the problem still evident?
YES: Replace water pump.
NO: ——.
24. Replace the electronic control unit by substitution with a known unit from a donor vehicle. Does the problem still exist?
YES: Cause of problem is unknown. Recheck fault diagnosis. If the vehicle is an automatic, check torque converter balance (see Attachment 2). (The attachment contains some figures.)
NO: ——.

All Rovers

Solid axle rovers are easy, get it to 0* toe in at the brake rotor, then just turn the tie-rod 1 turn to toe it in, tighten it all back up and you’re done.

All Rovers, D90 Misc, DII MISC, RRC

Clean out Your Cooling System

This is especially for older cars that have been sitting for an extended period of time. This Tip will explain an easy way to clean out the cooling system and it even cleans out radiator cores - it does NOT un block them - it cleans them and increases the efficiency of your cooling system.

1. Drain all fluid out of the cooling system
2. Refill with fresh water
3. Add two cups of “washing soda” - 20 mule team has it and Arm and Hammer has it. Get it at the grocery store in the laundry soap area.
4. Close the system up - drive for a week or two
5. Drain the crud and the filth
6. Refill and repeat until the system is clean
7. When the desired results have been achieved, refill with the recommended mix of antifreeze and water.

This actually works wonders….and is easy and painless!

Source: motorcarsLTD

All Rovers

http://www.scale4×4rc.org/forums/showthread.php?t=17883&highlight=defender

All Rovers

Here’s the way I was taught by and old LR friend of mine, it’s never failed me.

You’ve got the diff on the bench sitting “normal” Take the dial indicatoer with a magnetic base and set it up on one of the ring gear teeth. Put a little preload on the indicator and zero it. Then, holding the Pinion still, rock the pinion gear back and forth. You will here it, Click..click. Checl out the indicator, how far is the didtance between “clicks” that measument in the backlash measurement. Do it a few more times just to much sure you are getting a solid measurment.

Now mark the caps and the adjusters with a a couple of punch marks on the right side and a single on the left, make the same marks on the differential housing. This way everything goes back where it came from. Now tear the diff apart.

Remember that cleanliness is supreme, keep everything CLEAN. Now put your new carrier bearings on the locker, I use a hot plate to heat them to about 200 degrees then just drop them on the journals. The bearing cone is a LM102949, the cup is an LM102910 Get them at the bearing house for half of what you pay at the auto part. store and 1/4 of what you will pay a Rover parts/diff house.

Now the ring gear, Remember clean!!!! Bolt is on, you may need to get it warm to slip it over the diff. Bolt it down with red loctite and tourque to 60 ft lbs.

Now the fun begins.
Put you new locker with bearings back in the diff housing, put the caps and adjusters in place, got to be pretty snub but the adusters need to move. Adjust the ring gear side adjuster up so there is no backlash at the ring gear. line up the fixing member on the ring gear side adjuster. Now on the non ring gear side aduster start to tighten it, with you are creating the proper preload on the carrier bearings and setting the backlash on the gears, it’s going to be tight you may want to make a tool. Put the mag base with the indicatoer in place and check the backlash as you go once you get to the backlash measuerment you had before take it a couple thousands past and stop, back up and do it again only this time stop at the number you had before. Tighten the cap bolts and check the pattern, if you don’t have marking compound use creamy white toothpaste, works great and that 90 wt will be minty fresh!

Oh It doesn’t hurt to pattern the gears before you take the diff apart either.

Take your time and read up on what patterns should look like on a tech page from like ringpinion.com

ReWrite:

Put your new locker with bearings back in the diff housing, put the caps and adjusters in place, got to be pretty snug but the side adusters for the carrier bearings need to move.
Tighten the ring gear side side adjuster so there is no backlash between the ring gear and the pinion gear. You will need to make a judgment call here if the keeper or roll pin does not line up with the side adjuster. If you have to go a long way to fit the keeper back off the side adjuster, if you only have a little ways to go tighten it, kind of a 50%rule.
Now on the non ring gear side aduster start to tighten it, at this point you are creating the proper preload on the carrier bearings and setting the backlash on the gears.
It’s going to be tight you may want to make a tool to turn the side adjuster.

Put the mag base with the indicator in place on the diff and check the backlash as you go. Once you get to the backlash measurement you had before tighten the side adjuster a couple thousands of an inch further (on the indicator) and stop, back off the side adjuster and tighten it again only this time stop at the measurment you had before. The same 50% rule will apply to the keeper for this side adjuster.

Tighten the cap bolts and check the pattern, if you don’t have marking compound use creamy white toothpaste, works great and that 90 wt will be minty fresh!

All Rovers

I’m wondering why a 3 link is so much better than a radius arms set up.
I would think that the joints limit atrticulation , not the style of suspension.
or is this mostly a d44 thing..I pretty sure I havent seen one on a D30

just curious
BrettM
08-29-2005, 21:46
3 links (w/ panhard) give much more control over anti-dive characteristics and will bind less than radius arms. the advantage of radius arms is simplicity.
VegasAnthony
08-29-2005, 22:55
3 links (w/ panhard) give much more control over anti-dive characteristics and will bind less than radius arms. the advantage of radius arms is simplicity.

Ok but how does it bind less??

I would think that the binding would be dependent on what kind of links are used at the end of the lower arms
as in RE joints VS heims
like in this pic
sure the joint on top of the diff lets the axle articulate as much as the arms will allow at the “frame end”

but cant the same be said for radius arms?

http://www.xjdb.com/albums/xjs/xj0378.sized.jpg

oh and can ya define anti dive for me ?
Wil Badger
08-30-2005, 03:09
the binding comes in the axle tubes wanting to twist.in a radius arm set up the arms are fighting each other.in a 3 link the axle is allowed to rotate on onside so to speak.

there are ways of fighting this in using a raduis arm set up.if you were to sleeve the short drivers side tube with another tube and placed the arm on the sleeve it would allow the axle to do the same thing and rotate inside the tube on one side.
Roxtar
08-30-2005, 07:05
Radius arms have only the frame end spherical joint (heim, johnie, or RE) moving with the axle end fixed.
With a 3 link you can have sphericals on both ends of the control arms, essentially doubling the ability to twist.
XJ_ranger
08-30-2005, 08:13
the binding comes in the axle tubes wanting to twist.in a radius arm set up the arms are fighting each other.in a 3 link the axle is allowed to rotate on onside so to speak.

there are ways of fighting this in using a raduis arm set up.if you were to sleeve the short drivers side tube with another tube and placed the arm on the sleeve it would allow the axle to do the same thing and rotate inside the tube on one side.

http://bcbroncos.com/store/product_info.php?cPath=24_61&products_id=527

I thought about a 3 link, then decided to keep the 4 link, only i raised the axle mounts ~2.5″ in the process so i could keep my short arms ground clearance…
Dirk Pitt
08-30-2005, 08:27
http://bcbroncos.com/store/product_info.php?cPath=24_61&products_id=527

I thought about a 3 link, then decided to keep the 4 link, only i raised the axle mounts ~2.5″ in the process so i could keep my short arms ground clearance…

Did you raise the uppers too?

How’s it drive?
XJ_ranger
08-30-2005, 09:23
Did you raise the uppers too?

How’s it drive?

yup uppers are also 2.5″ higher

drives fine, need to work out a small steering bug, but other than that - all is well.

see you in Attica on the 10th?
Jes
08-30-2005, 09:31
http://www.xjdb.com/albums/xjs/xj0378.sized.jpg

Why are those lower links bent like that?
Dirk Pitt
08-30-2005, 10:03
see you in Attica on the 10th?

I’ll be there man.
Dirk Pitt
08-30-2005, 10:03
Why are those lower links bent like that?

Isn’t that Matt/WanderingWillys???
4ward
08-30-2005, 10:05
Isn’t that Matt/WanderingWillys???

Yup.
Lawn Cher’
08-30-2005, 10:14
Why are those lower links bent like that?

Just to be wacky.
hackedxj
08-30-2005, 11:01
I run a 3 link with a track bar on a D30 with longer dropped CAs for the reasons BrettM mentioned above, another plus is that it drives and feels more like stock on the road and trail but with a nice ride and excellent flex.
XJoachim
08-30-2005, 15:07
Try ti run a radius arm setup on a D60 and flex it up to the limits. One of your links will rip off the axle, been there, done that. :wave:
Ramsey
08-30-2005, 15:31
but that arm was designed with a dana 30 in mind
XJ_ranger
08-30-2005, 17:45
but that arm was designed with a dana 30 in mind

oh - this argument again…
BrettM
08-30-2005, 19:22
Why are those lower links bent like that?

if i remember correctly, he had a massive failure (I think the upper link broke) and it bent the lowers up. rather than re-making the links he added the plate to regain some strength
VegasAnthony
08-30-2005, 21:30
Why are those lower links bent like that?

I jsut posted that pic cause it really shows what a 3 link looks like

Yea I thought that was kinda funny but Im not one to flame anyone for design
flaws
BrettM
08-30-2005, 21:33
typically when you’re talking about an XJ with a 3-link front, that means 3 basically parallel links and a panhard bar, since there are very, very few people running full-hydro on XJs. That picture is a wishbone, triangulated 3 link. If you’re going to have a steering box and draglink, the best suspension you can run is a 3 link with panhard, the URF version is superb, search for that.
JeepFreak21
08-30-2005, 22:52
if i remember correctly, he had a massive failure (I think the upper link broke) and it bent the lowers up. rather than re-making the links he added the plate to regain some strength

Yup.
Billy
Jes
08-31-2005, 07:55
if i remember correctly, he had a massive failure (I think the upper link broke) and it bent the lowers up. rather than re-making the links he added the plate to regain some strength

That is totally retarded.
XJZ
08-31-2005, 10:32
That is totally retarded.

Hard braking + curved lower arms = SNAP!!

How could you not see that coming?

Gussets seem like such a Band-Aid. Wouldn’t it just be easier to cut the joints off and get some new tube?
Jeff 98XJ WI
08-31-2005, 11:06
In my opinion, Wandering Willys setup used bent arms to clear the “frame” and allow the arms to bolt to the crossmember closer to the frame as compared to the URF design which uses straight arms, but mounts them closer to the middle of the Jeep to clear the frame. Matt also is using the stock lca mounts for his upper wishbone, so the lower arms must clear the stock lca mounts. The arms were also bent for ground clearance. I’m not sure why he added the plate, but I imagine he ended up with some bending of the lower links, so he reinforced them with plate. Jeff
Jes
08-31-2005, 12:26
So, bend the arms to gain ground clearance then add the plate to lose ground clearance.
Dumb.
tealcherokee
08-31-2005, 15:36
typically when you’re talking about an XJ with a 3-link front, that means 3 basically parallel links and a panhard bar, since there are very, very few people running full-hydro on XJs. That picture is a wishbone, triangulated 3 link. If you’re going to have a steering box and draglink, the best suspension you can run is a 3 link with panhard, the URF version is superb, search for that.

thank you!!!! i hate when ppl confuse 3 links w/ other suspension links
cyrus
08-31-2005, 16:26
Please excuse my questions and statements here and correct or in form me otherwise if I am not relizing something. I do understand the concept of radially twisting the axle under extreme flex using a radius arm or “hard arm” style control arm. But if you were to remove, or at least remove one end of one of the two short “arms” on connecting the upper axle mount to the lower cotrol arm or radius arm. Would that not result in basiclly the same manerisms, as far as flex goes, as a true three link? Keepinf in mind this probably wouldnt be wise to run on the road, nut as a trail only rig, this should work, right?
hackedxj
08-31-2005, 16:37
Please excuse my questions and statements here and correct or in form me otherwise if I am not relizing something. I do understand the concept of radially twisting the axle under extreme flex using a radius arm or “hard arm” style control arm. But if you were to remove, or at least remove one end of one of the two short “arms” on connecting the upper axle mount to the lower cotrol arm or radius arm. Would that not result in basiclly the same manerisms, as far as flex goes, as a true three link? Keepinf in mind this probably wouldnt be wise to run on the road, nut as a trail only rig, this should work, right?
I’ve driven both and they definately don’t have the same manerisms. Someone here can probably explain why better than I can.
cyrus
08-31-2005, 16:46
I’ve driven both and they definately don’t have the same manerisms. Someone here can probably explain why better than I can.

What drove differnent about them?
I am in the middle of a long radius-arm build and can and will change my direction if I am convinced that the way I am going is wrong and/or not safe. I am looking for insite, and opinions on both the three link and radius arm. I have found plenty of opinions here, which is good, but not any real discriptive reasons. I can still switch to the three link if needed, but I want to know driving caracteristics.
zith
08-31-2005, 19:12
Figured I’d tack on a question of my own since I’m considering building a longarm setup and trying to decide which route to go.

A friend in my club swears by his 3-link, and I’ll admit it flexes like mad. What’s been confusing me is link separation at the frame side. He has all 3 arms pivot on the same line, making sure that the pinion angle is always pointing to the TC. Wouldn’t this behave almost exactly like a radius arm, except have not have that bind (more flex)?
BrettM
08-31-2005, 19:56
What drove differnent about them?
I am in the middle of a long radius-arm build and can and will change my direction if I am convinced that the way I am going is wrong and/or not safe. I am looking for insite, and opinions on both the three link and radius arm. I have found plenty of opinions here, which is good, but not any real discriptive reasons. I can still switch to the three link if needed, but I want to know driving caracteristics.
I would much rather have radius arms on both sides than on one side and the other with a single lower. The small loss in flex would be worth having even suspension characteristics. When you run only one upper (or wristed arms for Ford radius arms) all the anti-dive properties are transferred to only one side of the vehicle, meaning the suspension and traction will behave very differently with one side stuffed vs. the other side stuffed.

Better is a parallel 3 link (w/ panhard). Make the uppers roughly 75% of the lowers length, and the seperation at the frame roughly 75% of the seperation at the axle and it will function pretty well. If you want to get more complicated you can use the 4 link calculator (found on the Pirate board in Triaged’s sig) and figure out the exact anti-dive.
BrettM
08-31-2005, 19:57
Figured I’d tack on a question of my own since I’m considering building a longarm setup and trying to decide which route to go.

A friend in my club swears by his 3-link, and I’ll admit it flexes like mad. What’s been confusing me is link separation at the frame side. He has all 3 arms pivot on the same line, making sure that the pinion angle is always pointing to the TC. Wouldn’t this behave almost exactly like a radius arm, except have not have that bind (more flex)?
if the uppers and lowers are very parallel (same seperation at frame and axle) then it will be fairly neutral (100%) in anti-dive.

if the uppers and lowers have little to no seperation at the frame side they will have the same anti-dive characteristics of a radius arm.
cyrus
09-01-2005, 04:09
I would much rather have radius arms on both sides than on one side and the other with a single lower. The small loss in flex would be worth having even suspension characteristics. When you run only one upper (or wristed arms for Ford radius arms) all the anti-dive properties are transferred to only one side of the vehicle, meaning the suspension and traction will behave very differently with one side stuffed vs. the other side stuffed.

Better is a parallel 3 link (w/ panhard). Make the uppers roughly 75% of the lowers length, and the seperation at the frame roughly 75% of the seperation at the axle and it will function pretty well. If you want to get more complicated you can use the 4 link calculator (found on the Pirate board in Triaged’s sig) and figure out the exact anti-dive.

Thanks for the insite, that is the best explination I have gotten yet.
XJoachim
09-01-2005, 15:40
I would much rather have radius arms on both sides than on one side and the other with a single lower. The small loss in flex would be worth having even suspension characteristics. When you run only one upper (or wristed arms for Ford radius arms) all the anti-dive properties are transferred to only one side of the vehicle, meaning the suspension and traction will behave very differently with one side stuffed vs. the other side stuffed.

I run this setup and i’m really happy with it. The downside with 2 upper arms connected if you have a 60 in front with 1/2″ tubes is that you will have a big amount of bind in your suspension because this axle will not flex like a D30. One thing has to give and it will not be the axle. You will break control arms, rip off mounts or you limit flex with limiting straps.

It’s simply not possible to run a 4-link with panhard bar and a stout axle like a built 60 without breaking anything if you’re achieving full flex of your suspension. Had to learn it the hard way myself, broke 3 control arms and ripped off 2 mounts until i chose to ditch 1 upper arm. Since then no more problems. :wave:
bj-666
09-01-2005, 16:31
I run this setup and i’m really happy with it. The downside with 2 upper arms connected if you have a 60 in front with 1/2″ tubes is that you will have a big amount of bind in your suspension because this axle will not flex like a D30. One thing has to give and it will not be the axle. You will break control arms, rip off mounts or you limit flex with limiting straps.

It’s simply not possible to run a 4-link with panhard bar and a stout axle like a built 60 without breaking anything if you’re achieving full flex of your suspension. Had to learn it the hard way myself, broke 3 control arms and ripped off 2 mounts until i chose to ditch 1 upper arm. Since then no more problems. :wave:

i don’t agree there has to be something on every axle that limits the droop of the axle to say that with a 60 you will break more mounts is kinda a dumb truth if you have no bind and nothing to hold the axle up to the vehicle it will droop till it is back by the rear wheels. that is the reason for limiting straps to stop the axle from drooping so far that is hurts parts of the suspension in my mind everyone should be running straps because if it isn’t a strap limiting droop it is brakelines shocks etc. all are pieces of the suspension that should not have to handle that load. (this only applys to linked suspension):)
BrettM
09-01-2005, 17:26
I run this setup and i’m really happy with it. The downside with 2 upper arms connected if you have a 60 in front with 1/2″ tubes is that you will have a big amount of bind in your suspension because this axle will not flex like a D30. One thing has to give and it will not be the axle. You will break control arms, rip off mounts or you limit flex with limiting straps.

It’s simply not possible to run a 4-link with panhard bar and a stout axle like a built 60 without breaking anything if you’re achieving full flex of your suspension. Had to learn it the hard way myself, broke 3 control arms and ripped off 2 mounts until i chose to ditch 1 upper arm. Since then no more problems. :wave:
yes, with 2 radius arms, something has to give, that’s what bushings are for. if you’re going to the hassle of putting a 60 in the front of an XJ though, I can’t imagine why not spend the small amount of extra work to do a 3 link w/ panhard rather than running a single radius arm.
XJoachim
09-02-2005, 01:01
With the second upper arm connected and running rubber bushings on all control arms i had a slight wobble on the front. Since every thing else was new i started replacing the rubber bushings with RE joints on the frame side and since the axle side bushings were destroyed i replaced them too. The uppers remained unchanged and the wobble was still there.

The next time out i heard a big bang and the drivers side upper mount was ripped off the pumpkin so i simply removed it. On the way home i noticed that there was no wobble any more. Since i went to hydro assist i don’t even run a steering stabilizer any more.

I replaced the bushings of the remaining upper with polys to limit axle movement and i will in the future replace them with RE joints too.

BTW, i see no advantage to have a 3-link (1 upper arm connected to the frame) instead of running a radius style long arm on one side and a single lower long arm on the other side.
BrettM
09-02-2005, 01:17
BTW, i see no advantage to have a 3-link (1 upper arm connected to the frame) instead of running a radius style long arm on one side and a single lower long arm on the other side.

that’s because you know nothing about suspension geometry
XJoachim
09-02-2005, 01:33
Why don’t you teach me? :worship: I can not see any advantage, caster change doesn’t affect me off road but my pinion angle doesn’t change like in a 3-link configuration. I’m already at the limits of my driveshaft angles and any dive of the pinion would result in driveshaft breakage.
BrettM
09-02-2005, 01:47
so you would have to turn the knuckles if you wanted to run a superior suspension, not that big of a deal in the grand scheme of things.

radius arms have very little control of anti-dive (like anti-squat, but for the front) and generally have far too much. a 3 link w/ panhard allows a huge breadth of anti-dive possibilities.

of course the few pictures I remember seeing of your rig aren’t on steep rock climbs, which is where good anti-dive numbers are most beneficial.
XJoachim
09-02-2005, 02:08
Correct, we don’t have rocks but sometimes some climbs too

http://bilder.jeepcherokee.org/d/4745-2/IMG_4528.jpg

I control my front axle with my front winch cable hooked up at the center of the axle on those climbs so i can adjust anti-dive with my in-cab winch control.

The Cs were already turned during the pumpkin swap from passenger to driver side. On the street i have 6° caster and a perfect pinion angle.
BrettM
09-02-2005, 02:48
a winch cable does not adjust your anti-dive, but it does adjust the ramifications of poor anti-dive

a winch cable or limiting strap is a good idea for radius arms, but it is a bandaid and not as good as actual proper geometry. I can understand you wanting to keep your suspension in your circumstance, but there ARE benefits to running a 3link w/ panhard, they just don’t apply as strongly to your type of wheeling.
XJoachim
09-02-2005, 03:04
OK, besides the unloading of the front on steep climbs (that happens more or less on any suspension type) where are the downsides of the single radius arm style that i run in your opinion and why is a 3-link better than that?

I’m always interested to learn from different opinions but just telling me that something else is better doesn’t teach me anything. I want to know why and discuss it. :wave:

I’m far away from a so called “perfect suspension” and if i can make it work better i will get out the welder in no time. :wave:
cyrus
09-02-2005, 03:37
BrettM; Why would a 3 link unload less than radius arms? I don’t quite understand that theroy, or truth. But please explain. Like I stated yesterday, I could still change my direction, but I need to be convince myself of why I should do it, and an in depth explination would be very benificial.
hackedxj
09-02-2005, 06:28
OK, besides the unloading of the front on steep climbs (that happens more or less on any suspension type) where are the downsides of the single radius arm style that i run in your opinion and why is a 3-link better than that?

I’m always interested to learn from different opinions but just telling me that something else is better doesn’t teach me anything. I want to know why and discuss it. :wave:

I’m far away from a so called “perfect suspension” and if i can make it work better i will get out the welder in no time. :wave:

Since you seemed to have an open mind on this disscusion, I’ll give my opinion on the differences, and this is just an opinion. I wheel a 3 link with three seperate longer arms and panhard bar, my brother wheels with radius arms with one driver side upper, he removed the passengers side arm because it ate up the bushing on the d30 pumpkin to quickly from binding.For starters, I have less binding, great flex, better center vehicle clearence, mine front end stays lower on climbs, no noticable brake dive, caster works like stock, feels like stock suspension on the road with a good ride, The 3 link will work excellent even with a short lift height, long arm radius style won’t. His ride is slightly better and if we put them to a test I’ll would say he could drop a coil farther than I can due to his longer arms, which impresses me none.The best way I can put it, my Jeep just feels more “balanced” than his. We done his suspension first, then mine, after driving mine he wants to change his when we get the time. No doubt, both suspension are excellent upgrades but I think more people should take a longer look at the 3link.
cyrus
09-02-2005, 10:35
Hacked, Thanx for the opinion, and your discription. I will give that some thought and leave my options open to the three link.
XJoachim
09-02-2005, 11:33
OK, got your point, but what lift height do you have? I’m at about 14″ of lift with coilovers f/r and there is no way i can put shorter arms on that thing. And no, i will not remove a single inch of lift. :laugh3:

I still miss the “why” in your explanation, maybe it feels more comfortable for you but why is the 3 link better than a single radius arm?

If i would replace my long arms with shorter ones and go 3-link what would my front driveshaft do (at 14″ of lift and again, no i won’t loose a single inch of lift) at droop? If you drop your drivers side of the front axle, what does the differential output do? Does it dive? Sure, because you have a shorter upper arm than the lower.

What will your ride feel if you put it to that lift height since your brothers feels better on road now?

Transfer your suspension to a 14″ lift height and then tell me again that shorter arms and a single upper long link works better for m and please explain why, i still miss that explanation.
BrettM
09-02-2005, 13:48
anti-dive is the main thing.

if you ran the numbers on a radius arm with more than a few degrees of angle on it you will see that the anti-dive numbers get real high real quick.

anti-dive is massively influential in affecting how effectively your vehicle puts power to the ground (traction)
XJoachim
09-02-2005, 15:12
Do you think you get better numbers on a 3-link with 14″ of lift?
BrettM
09-02-2005, 21:36
Do you think you get better numbers on a 3-link with 14″ of lift?
absolutely!!

radius arms that are pretty flat (like a stock Ford) aren’t too bad, but with the 15+% angle you probably have on your arms the anti-dive numbers will be HIGH. As I mentioned earlier, upper(s) 75% the length of the lowers and 75% as much verticle seperation at the frame as at the axle is a good place to start. If you want to get more detailed (not too hard) get the free 4-link calculator. The version I have (there might be an update) does not have it set up for a front suspension, but you can plug it in the same as the rear and just read “anti-dive” wherever it says “anti-squat”. I would shoot for numbers between 80% and 120% and build some adjustability in so you can find what you like best for your terrain.
tealcherokee
09-02-2005, 22:16
Brett, im really just looking for your help on that, seeing that your the only one that seems to know what hes talking about here

i currently have 28.5″ lowers, and stock uppers

im swapping in a full width 44 tmrw, and i want to run a 3 link set up

you say make the upper 75% of the lower, thats like 21″, now thats not going to even reach the lower part of the frame, let alone my skid, where id like to mount it to, can u give me some insite?
BrettM
09-02-2005, 22:32
search for pictures of Goatman’s “midarm” 3 link or the URF 3 link on Jes or CRASH’s rigs

get creative, make it fit
MaXJohnson
09-02-2005, 23:03
so you would have to turn the knuckles if you wanted to run a superior suspension, not that big of a deal in the grand scheme of things.

radius arms have very little control of anti-dive (like anti-squat, but for the front) and generally have far too much. a 3 link w/ panhard allows a huge breadth of anti-dive possibilities.

of course the few pictures I remember seeing of your rig aren’t on steep rock climbs, which is where good anti-dive numbers are most beneficial.

Radius arms (long arms) generally have a lower anti-dive percentage than typical 3-link and 4-link designs seen on this forum. This is why radius arms usually have better(softer) ride characteristics. Anti-dive, however, is based on deceleration(braking) forces and consequently has no affect on putting power to the ground.

For climbing, discussions regarding the front axle should be concerned with anti-lift, which applies to acceleration. Variations in anti-lift probably have more effect on the dirvers pucker factor (when the nose points skyward) than on actual climbing ability. There is a difference though. The tendancy towards a light front end will result in moving the CG slightly upward and to the rear. This results in increased weight transfer to the rear axle, and therefore, less overall traction. For this reason, a limiting strap can be an effective method of controlling anti-lift forces.
MaXJohnson
09-02-2005, 23:22
I still miss the “why” in your explanation, maybe it feels more comfortable for you but why is the 3 link better than a single radius arm?
3-link (and 4-link) suspensions allow more design flexibility. With radius arms, the instance-center is fixed(not really an instance-center) at the chassis attachment point. This will generally be somewhere along the lower edge of the frame rail and ahead of the vehicle centerline. With a 3-link or 4-link, you can design the instance-center to be just about anywhere; on the roof, at the rear bumper, what ever you want. This allows you more freedom in determining the amount of anti-pitch (lift & dive). The downside is that the instance-center constantly moves as the suspension cycles. That’s why it’s called an instance-center. With the IC always moving, the amount of anti-pitch is always changing.
XJoachim
09-03-2005, 00:42
I was at the drawing board and did some calcs. I see the advantage of the 3-link but the pinion angle change at 3″ of suspension droop will be too much for my driveshaft and i already run a high angle driveshaft in front. The control arm angles of a midarm would be not too bad but that’s only for the street.

You may have better numbers at anti-dive (or anti-lift) but you would have to limit the suspension to avoid driveshaft breakage and to minimize axle steer during flex (droop).

At a certain amount of lift, i’m actually at about 14″ or so, it’s simply not possible to run midarm lengths or allow for pinion angle changes to keep the driveshaft alive. I see more downsides in my application than advantages, the anti-lift is controlled by center straps front and rear, my anti-squat is at 105% and i have lots of (usable) flex in my suspension.

The 3-link may have some advantages but i don’t think you can use it on a 14″+ lift.
BrettM
09-03-2005, 01:10
I was at the drawing board and did some calcs. I see the advantage of the 3-link but the pinion angle change at 3″ of suspension droop will be too much for my driveshaft and i already run a high angle driveshaft in front.

is your pinion pointing right at the t-case output at ride-height? sounds like either your pinion angle is screwed up or your drawing board version of a 3 link is screwed up. there are plenty of guys running 3 links and getting full travel out of 14 and 16″ travel coilovers.

You may have better numbers at anti-dive (or anti-lift) but you would have to limit the suspension to avoid driveshaft breakage and to minimize axle steer during flex (droop).

axle steer isn’t much of an issue since it’s a steering axle anyways, but regardless, there is no reason a 3 link would have any more axle steer than radius arms.

The 3-link may have some advantages but i don’t think you can use it on a 14″+ lift.

I can see why you want to keep the radius arms, and I probably would in your situation. HOWEVER, there are only more advantages to a 3 link when you get into higher lift heights because that’s where radius arm geometry goes to crap with no chance of improving it (without dropping the frame mounts) but a 3 link can be very well tuned.

MaXJohnson, thanks, I’ve gotten into the habit of always referring to it as anti-dive when dealing with a front axle. It’s odd terminology anyways, why do people even talk about 80% anti-squat rather than an amount (120%?) of squat… or why not call it lift rather than anti-squat… why not dive rather than anti-lift… why not lift rather than anti-dive… etc, etc
XJoachim
09-03-2005, 01:43
Brett, at droop the pinion angle will change, the shorter the upper arm the more the angle will change. I call it “pinion dive” because the pinion is rotated down. My pinion is pointed directly towards the t-case output and a pinion that is rotating down would make my driveshaft angles worse.

People using 14″ or 16″ travel coilovers do not have the same amount of lift, don’t interchange the amount of travel and the amount of lift. I can build a rig with 16″ coilovers and only 4″ lift. I’m at approx. 14″ of lift.

The shorter the arms are the steeper are the angles and the more axle steering is there during droop. Since your 3-link arms will be shorter than my long arms there will be more axle steer.
BrettM
09-03-2005, 02:10
Since your 3-link arms will be shorter than my long arms there will be more axle steer.
where did I say that? there’s no reason 3 link arms need to be shorter than radius arms. For 14″ of lift I would do a 3 link with arms around 40 inches. A properly designed 3-link will not have issues with pinion dive.

my whole point is that a 3-link w/ panhard (designed right) is basically the ideal suspension for a vehicle using a steering box and panhard (or very low, tight clearance buggys with full-hydro). Radius arms are great for simplicity, but nothing really matches the balance in geometry, adjustability, clearance, (lack of) bind, and flex as a 3 link w/ panhard.
David Taylor
09-03-2005, 12:12
Three links can run into drive shaft issues. Goatmans DS starts to bind at the CV
at full drop. That’s why he unlocks the hubs for fast stuff when he might be air born. That’s with a HP axle. The angle’s with an LP axle would make getting any travel very difficult with a three link. XJoachim said he had his 60
pumpkin moved to the drivers side. So I’m assuming it must be LP.
If he were to go to really long three link arms that would start to make more issue’s.

I run radius arms and like them. I tried removing one upper and didn’t like they way it felt. Sloppy is the only way I could describe it. But, that was
with rubber bushings on the axle end.

That being said, if I were to build new I would go with the three link. But we only run aprrox 7″ lift around here.
XJoachim
09-03-2005, 14:19
You got exactly my point, i have a LP Chevy D60 front and my driveshaft is at its limits.
MaXJohnson
09-04-2005, 22:44
MaXJohnson, thanks, I’ve gotten into the habit of always referring to it as anti-dive when dealing with a front axle. It’s odd terminology anyways, why do people even talk about 80% anti-squat rather than an amount (120%?) of squat… or why not call it lift rather than anti-squat… why not dive rather than anti-lift… why not lift rather than anti-dive… etc, etc
the pitching moment that results in squat, dive & lift is always there(100%), based on the location of the sprung mass CG. Your suspension links counter-act (”anti”)the pitching moment to a varying degree(% “anti”) based on the side-view design of the links. 100% of the pitching moment is transmitted to the springs unless your suspension links are designed such that a percentage of the pitching moment is carried through the suspension links. At 100% anti-pitch(squat/dive/lift), the links are reacting to all of the available pitching moment, resulting in no change in compression or extension of the spring. Anti-squat/dive/lift does not change the amount of weight transfer at the axle, just the way it is applied. Too much anti-pitch increases the effective spring rate which is counter productive in maintaining tire contact with the ground.
Goatman
09-05-2005, 08:21
I would much rather have radius arms on both sides than on one side and the other with a single lower. The small loss in flex would be worth having even suspension characteristics. When you run only one upper (or wristed arms for Ford radius arms) all the anti-dive properties are transferred to only one side of the vehicle, meaning the suspension and traction will behave very differently with one side stuffed vs. the other side stuffed.

Better is a parallel 3 link (w/ panhard). Make the uppers roughly 75% of the lowers length, and the seperation at the frame roughly 75% of the seperation at the axle and it will function pretty well. If you want to get more complicated you can use the 4 link calculator (found on the Pirate board in Triaged’s sig) and figure out the exact anti-dive.

This advice is based on……….?

I love it when a front leaf spring guy gives advice about link suspesnsions. I think he should have to post on link threads with a disclaimer “take this advice with a grain of salt, I run leaves all around”.

Yeah, Brett, I’ve been gone for awhile…….but I’m baaaack. :wave:

I do have to say, though, in Brett’s defense, that he has studied link suspensions and has most of the concepts down…….though no direct experince. I get a kick out of him posting on both the link and leaf spring threads.
Goatman
09-05-2005, 09:44
anti-dive is the main thing.

anti-dive is massively influential in affecting how effectively your vehicle puts power to the ground (traction)

This sounds really good, but it’s not true. Anti-dive will effect how a lifted rig with big tires handles on the road, and can (should to a degree) be a concern, but has little to do with trail performance. The forces are minimal at slow trail speeds, and traction, rather than braking behavior, is the real issue.

Few of us have problems with traction in the front on boulder fields or ledges, it’s the steep climbs that make a difference.* Here weight transfer has a large effect, as well as how well the rear axle stays planted. Anti-squat in the rear will have a MUCH bigger effect on climbing performance than how much anti-dive is in the front. Since weight transfer is the big issue, a limiting strap helps out, and will mask any small effect of too much anti-dive/lift/pitch in the front. Basically, running an adjustable limiting strap on the front negates the point of most of these arguments that have to do with traction. Street/road handling is still an issue, though, especially on rigs with tall lifts.

Unloading also has a big effect on traction on steep climbs, and there are many factors that contribute to unloading. Too much anti-dive/pitch can have an effect, but there isn’t always enough traction in the front to get those forces involved. Spring height and spring force at full droop will effect unloading, where the spring can push up too much at close to full suspension extension in the front. In my opinion, too long of an arm can contribute to unloading. The weight of the front axle will pull down on the chassis to some degree, especially when the suspension is at or close to full extension, and the longer the arms are the further back on the chassis this weight is applied, further effecting weight transfer on steep climbs. Of course, again, a limiting strap will change the point at which this weight is applied, moving it much further forward, and virtually negating the argument.

* Front link suspensions inherently climb (in the front) better than leaf springs because the links tend to push the tire into the obstacle, creating more traction.
Beej
09-05-2005, 14:40
More please, I need more…
This is much better than sitting through class…
BrettM
09-05-2005, 18:59
This advice is based on……….?

I love it when a front leaf spring guy gives advice about link suspesnsions. I think he should have to post on link threads with a disclaimer “take this advice with a grain of salt, I run leaves all around”.

Yeah, Brett, I’ve been gone for awhile…….but I’m baaaack. :wave:

I do have to say, though, in Brett’s defense, that he has studied link suspensions and has most of the concepts down…….though no direct experince. I get a kick out of him posting on both the link and leaf spring threads.
1 Point for the Goatman

however, in my defense… I’ve done a lot of study and research (though mostly for rear link-suspensions, since I’m happy with my leafs up front and will very soon be linking the rear).

I’ve seen, ridden in, and drove a good handful of 4×4s with radius arm fronts, single radius arm fronts (one upper), and 3 links. I would personally rate the 3 links a 9 (nothing’s perfect), the dual-radius arms a 6 or 7, and the single radius arm a 3. (if you’re curious, I would rank front leafs a 5) I can’t stand the uneven characteristics of a single radius arm.
BrettM
09-05-2005, 19:09
More please, I need more…
This is much better than sitting through class…
more what? if you have any specific questions someone might be able to answer them.
cyrus
09-06-2005, 02:59
Thanks guys, this has been a very educational thread, even if most disussion was based off personal preference, with some very in depth explinations. I believe I will stay with the radius arms. Simplicity in this case wins. my rig will most likly not see more than a few miles of road time, from trail to trail. Goatman, thanks for the input.

Have a good one guys,
Thanks again for the help.
Beej
09-06-2005, 11:11
more what? if you have any specific questions someone might be able to answer them.Could you elaborate on your rating system above, and explain a bit more detail about how you came up with those comparisons and why? I just want to learn more…
XJoachim
09-06-2005, 12:48
This sounds really good, but it’s not true. Anti-dive will effect how a lifted rig with big tires handles on the road, and can (should to a degree) be a concern, but has little to do with trail performance. The forces are minimal at slow trail speeds, and traction, rather than braking behavior, is the real issue.

Few of us have problems with traction in the front on boulder fields or ledges, it’s the steep climbs that make a difference.* Here weight transfer has a large effect, as well as how well the rear axle stays planted. Anti-squat in the rear will have a MUCH bigger effect on climbing performance than how much anti-dive is in the front. Since weight transfer is the big issue, a limiting strap helps out, and will mask any small effect of too much anti-dive/lift/pitch in the front. Basically, running an adjustable limiting strap on the front negates the point of most of these arguments that have to do with traction. Street/road handling is still an issue, though, especially on rigs with tall lifts.

Unloading also has a big effect on traction on steep climbs, and there are many factors that contribute to unloading. Too much anti-dive/pitch can have an effect, but there isn’t always enough traction in the front to get those forces involved. Spring height and spring force at full droop will effect unloading, where the spring can push up too much at close to full suspension extension in the front. In my opinion, too long of an arm can contribute to unloading. The weight of the front axle will pull down on the chassis to some degree, especially when the suspension is at or close to full extension, and the longer the arms are the further back on the chassis this weight is applied, further effecting weight transfer on steep climbs. Of course, again, a limiting strap will change the point at which this weight is applied, moving it much further forward, and virtually negating the argument.

* Front link suspensions inherently climb (in the front) better than leaf springs because the links tend to push the tire into the obstacle, creating more traction.
Thanks, you second my findings. :wave:
BrettM
09-06-2005, 14:29
Could you elaborate on your rating system above, and explain a bit more detail about how you came up with those comparisons and why? I just want to learn more…
well obviously those are not scientific results, but just the way I feel about those systems. There are obvious simplicity (and cost) factors where leafs or radius arms beat out a 3 link.

3 links are great (when built right, any good idea can be screwed up), they flex great, they follow the travel of the steering, they can be built to counteract engine torque on the body, they don’t unload on climbs, etc.

Radius arms are also pretty good, they flex good enough, follow the travel of the steering, control axle wrap fairly well, are pretty easy to build, BUT they need a limit strap(s) to control unloading, and they need bushings in all then ends so there is a little more play than ideal.

Leafs are cheap and very simple to build, flex good enough, are very stable due to roll-center and interleaf friction, don’t unload on climbs, BUT do not follow the arc of the steering, and can experience axle wrap.

A single radius arm is simple to build, flexes great, follows the travel of the steering, BUT they need a limit strap to control unloading, and the big thing is they make for some scary situations off-camber and otherwise when the single radius arm is trying to flip the rig over to one side. I don’t at all think the small gain in flex between one radius arm and two is at all worth the often scary handling of all the axle’s rotational forces being sent to one side of the Jeep.
XJoachim
09-06-2005, 15:41
First, we did never talk about cost or simplicity, sure nothing beats a leaf setup in those categories, but that’s it.

Second, you may have been sitting in a similar rig but i doubt the suspension was something near than well engineered.

Third, leafs DO unload on climbs but since they do not flex much they don’t unload as much as any other working suspension.

Fourth, a bushing does not provide play, if it does it is defective.

I’m working on my suspension for about 18 months now and i still see some negatives to work out. But nothing extreme, that’s just fine tuning. I want to stretch the wheelbase another 5″ and redesign the rear crossmember but that’s all i plan to do. So bad i’m not able to show you what i’ve done and how it works, maybe i could be able to change your mind.

I don’t know why you’re saying that the single radius arm is “trying to flip the rig over to one side”. What side should that be relative to the radius arm, the same or the opposite? I’m running this setup for more than a year now and i never realized or recognized that.
bj-666
09-06-2005, 20:13
when you apply rotational forces to the tires (throtle/brake) it trys to twist the axle with a single radius arm that force is trancfered to only one side. but on the other hand i see the same thing happening in a 3 link (i’m no expert)
BrettM
09-06-2005, 21:04
this is true, but with a single radius arm you are applying a ton of anti-squat to one side, but with a well designed 3 link you are sending a fairly neutral anti-squat to the one side. You can even engineer it (there’s a specific equation for distance from center of the upper depending on gear ratio and link angles) so that it counteracts engine torque which pulls the vehicle to the passenger side.
XJ_ranger
09-08-2005, 23:33
More please, I need more…
This is much better than sitting through class…

dont you teach the class?

Beej
09-09-2005, 08:09
dont you teach the class?

:DTrue, but good lord, am I boring!
Dirk Pitt
09-09-2005, 09:01
True, but good lord, am I boring!

:speepin:

:laugh3:
jeep_87_cherokee
09-09-2005, 15:00
in the front with a dana 30. is a 3 link with panhard bar able to be used with the lower control arms trianglulated , and does it help for the to be that way or is it just better to keep them parrallel , and would there be a benefit of trianglulateing the lower control arms

All Rovers

http://www.jegs.com/i/Prothane/311/19-919-BL/10002/-1

those fit 7100s

use 19-919 with 1/2″/13mm hardware; 19-920 with stock 12mm bolts

use a ball joint press or other press to get heims out, you need tools to pick out the circlips; you can have most speed shops do this

i’m running rte front lower mts on my 04d2; polys everywhere except front in the shock towers; heims give the best movement there(also per rte)

All Rovers

shocks
pinion angles
drive shafts
radius arms
rear control arms
rear A frame
caster corrected swivel balls.
raised panhard bar
extended brake lines
spring retainers
spring perches
wheel spacers or off set rims

All Rovers

http://emsoffroad.com/shop/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=212

All Rovers

MOAB Individual Trail Descriptions

Pritchett Canyon - Rating 8
Description of Trail and Obstacles

This is the hardest trail outside of BFE. It has grown much harder recently due to weather erosion and use. The major obstacles are Rocker Knocker and The Rock Pile. You should have a rock buggy or extremely well built truck for this trail with large tires. Expect to break parts and possibly roll on this trail. Most of the obstacles have no bypasses. The trail is about 4 ½ miles down Kane Creek Road on the left, and is about 4 1/5 miles long. You will need front and rear lockers, a winch, roll cage, rock protection and at least 35” tires to do this trail as well as LOTS of off-roading experience! Vehicle damage is likely.

BFE – Rating 9
Description of Trail and Obstacles

Area BFE is private land that was purchased to help keep trails open for off-road use. The trails are extreme rock crawling trails and should only be run with buggies or very well built trucks. You should have front and rear lockers, a winch and at least 35” tires. They also have their own restrictions on some trails, like a minimum number of vehicles in a group. While the park is free, please consider donating to the landowners for their kindness in spending their money to give you a place to wheel. Vehicle damage is likely. Area BFE is south of Moab to the east off of Hwy 191.

Behind the Rocks - Rating 7
Description of Trail and Obstacles

Behind the Rocks is one of the harder trails in Moab. It has quite a few difficult obstacles including White Knuckle Hill, High Dive and Upchuck Hill to name a few. This is not a trail for inexperienced drivers as it is easy to roll and breakages are common. Vehicles should have both front and rear lockers, a roll cage and a winch. 35”+ tires are recommended. Vehicle damage is very possible. The trail is south of Moab to the west off of Hwy 191.

Cliff Hanger / Amasa Back – Rating 6
Description of Trail and Obstacles

Cliffhanger, as it is more often called, is an apt description of this trail. It starts on the right, about 6 miles down Kane Creek Road and climbs onto a high isolated plateau. Part of the trail, and one obstacle are along a shelf road on a high cliff face. There are several difficult obstacles along the trail. Vehicles need at least a rear locker, front is recommended, 32” minimum tires, good ground clearance and rock protection. There are great views from the end of the trail, looking down on the Colorado River and the potash plant in Jackson Hole and up towards Dead Horse Point.

Flat Iron Mesa - Rating 5
Description of Trail and Obstacles

Flat Iron Mesa is about 17 ½ miles south of Moab on Hwy 191, with an entrance on the right that is easy to miss. It starts out a little slow with mellow dirt trail, then later on gets into more interesting slickrock obstacles. The main ones are Tilt-A Whirl, which is a steep and tippy slickrock descent, and Easter Egg Hill, which is another tippy descent which is complicated by having to drive between a gap between rocks. Body damage is possible on this one without very careful driving. Both these obstacles have bypasses, though the Easter Egg bypass is relatively long. The trail can be driven without lockers, though at least a rear locker is highly recommended. You also need good articulation, rock protection and at least 32” tires. There are several cliff overlooks off short spurs off the main trail. If you find a wedding ring, contact Jim.

Golden Spike – Rating 7
Description of Trail and Obstacles

This is probably one of the longest trails time wise in Moab, and the longest one at the rally. It actually consists of 3 trails, most of Poison Spider which must be driven to get to Golden Spike, Golden Spike and Gold Bar Rim which must be driven to get back to the highway.
The trail is rather difficult, with many obstacles along it’s high slickrock route. Route finding can be difficult at times and most of the obstacles have no bypasses. There are also some side trails off of it, like Rusty Nail and Where Eagles Dare, although you have to know where they are to find them. Total length is close to 35 miles and 10 hours on the trail if not more is not uncommon, especially with breakages. Vehicles need at least a rear locker, rock protection, good ground clearance, 32” minimum tires although larger is highly recommended. Bring lots of food and water as this is a very isolated trail and breakages are common. Sections of the trail have supposedly gotten harder, so YMMV.

Moab Rim – Rating 7
Description of Trail and Obstacles

Moab Rim is a difficult trail that climbs up a rim on the south side of the Colorado River just west of Moab. It is fairly steep for most of it’s length, with big ledges and sharp turns, occasionally at the same time, which must be negotiated. In fact, most of the first mile of trail is one steep obstacle after another. Most of the trail is on slickrock until you reach the top, where some dirt and sand are encountered. This is an up and back trail, so what you go up, you must drive back down. Body damage is possible on this trail as is rolling if you become careless, and if you roll, it’s a long way down! Vehicles should have at least a rear locker and 32” tires and rock protection. There are some great views overlooking Moab from the top. The trail starts just a few miles down Kane Creek Road on the left hand side.

Hells Revenge - Rating 4
Description of Trail and Obstacles

Hells Revenge is one of 3 trails off of the road to Sand Flats Rec area. It starts on the left, just past the fee booth, and is mostly slickrock. The trail follows slickrock fins up and down, some of them being rather steep. The steep ascents and descents will test your nerves, as there are no bypasses except on some of the hardest obstacles. This is a trail that stock standard vehicles can attempt as their “hard” trail however you have to be prepared to pay out lots of $$ in repairs if your driving skills are poor or you make mistakes. Please note however that Range Rovers and Discoveries with front air dams [i.e. the plastic skirt below the front bumper] may find these dams will scrape and may get damaged, therefore it is recommended that such be removed. In addition to the slick rock there are rock ledges, broken rock, sandy dirt and some blow sand. The views are of the La Sal Mountains, the Arches National Park and the Colorado River Canyon. Vehicles should have at least 30 “ tires, and traction aides are helpful .Climbs are too steep and long for Freelanders.

Poison Spider - Rating 5
Description of Trail and Obstacles

This is one of Moab’s most popular trails which offers a wide variety of obstacles with bypasses for some of the tougher challenges. It is popular because the driving is challenging while still being drivable by a fairly stock vehicle. Much of the trail is on Navajo sandstone slickrock with one small stretch of bare rock. There are also some rock ledges sandy wash bottoms and two sand hills. The initial climb and switchbacks are rough but easy to drive. There are some rock ledges that make the trail difficult combined with some steep slick rock climbs. There is a potential for damage or rolling if you choose a bad line, though most vehicles make it through unscathed. You should have rock sliders as sill/door dents are a real possibility and at least 30” tires, though larger is better. Not a good trail for Freelanders.

Metal Masher - Rating 6
Description of Trail and Obstacles

This trail offers a 1300-foot high view from Arth’s Rim, which overlooks Highway 191 between Gold Bar Rim and the highway. The trail varies from easy dirt to high sandstone ledges with some relatively level slick rock. The trail passes Rock Chucker Hill, a playground for those mad of spirit and deep of pocket. The bypass is itself a difficult option including rocky steps and the infamous “widow maker Hill”. The route first angles up the sloping part of the cliff to a gap in the rim rock. It follows Little Canyon partway into the mesa to resume the climb along the gentler slope of the tilted rock strata. Much of the trail is routine four-wheeling, but there are a few spots, notably Mirror Gulch and Widowmaker Hill, where many will not make it on the first try. The narrow Mirror Gulch often damages full-width vehicles, and it is especially difficult for those with long front or rear overhangs. Widowmaker Hill is extremely challenging for any vehicle because it has become dug up at the bottom. A winch is almost mandatory to make it up. Fortunately it is an optional part of the trail. The road portion on the slope beneath Arth’s Rim climbs to increasingly fine views of Arches National Park, Moab Valley, and the La Sal Mountains. That is just a warm-up for the later perch on the cliff top. Little Canyon has beautiful vertical walls. This trail varies from easy dirt to some tall sandstone ledges, with some relatively level slick rock and sand mixed in. Vehicles should have rock sliders and 31” or taller tires. Traction devices are helpful.

Strike Ravine - Rating 5
Description of Trail and Obstacles

In addition to the views inside the rugged canyons, there are beautiful vistas of colorful rocks, forested slopes, and the snow-covered La Sal Mountains. The easy parts of the trail are sandy dirt with enough bedrock poking through to keep the speed down. The difficult creek-bottom parts have rocks, boulders, and ledges, and the most difficult hills have large, loose rocks. Two hills have loose dirt and rocks that cause poor traction. The canyon bottoms have large rocks and rock ledges that can change with every flood. Strike Ravine is ledgy and rough, with a combination of rock steps and loose dirt. Tall tires, short wheelbase, and short overhangs are the order of the day. A minimum of 31” tires and rock sliders are recommended. The trail is located approximately 12 miles south of Moab along Highway 191.

Kane Creek Canyon – Rating 6
Description of Trail and Obstacles

Kane Creek Canyon trail is southwest, just out of Moab, at the end of Kane Creek Road. Most of the trail isn’t too hard, meandering in and out of Kane Creek many times before climbing up the canyon wall near the end. The creek can be non-existent to very deep, and deep water can hide rocks and tree roots beneath it’s surface. Also some of the easier beginning sections can get washed out, greatly increasing their difficulty. However by far the hardest section is the climb up the canyon wall. This section has been washed out to where a winch is now often needed to get up, even with lockers, and it is along a far drop to boot. Pin striping from the Tamarisk trees is unavoidable. Vehicles should have at least 32” tires and a rear locker, rock protection, with a front locker and winch highly recommended. Sometimes deep mud and quicksand may be present.

Fin’s N’ Things – Rating 4
Description of Trail and Obstacles

While Fins ‘N Things isn’t a difficult trail at all, it is a very fun trail for almost any vehicle. It is in the Sand Flats Rec area, and as it’s name suggests, it follows up, down and all over the slickrock fins. There are also some dirt and sand sections, as well as Sand Flats Road sections between parts of the trail. It starts on the south side of the road and ends up on the north side of the road. While many of the fins are rather steep, they are easily doable by stock vehicles. However those which still have the front air dams may scrape them in places, as well as trailer hitches scraping on the LWB vehicles that don’t have a lift. The trail also travels along a part of Negro Bill Canyon, and the beautiful La Sal Mountains can be seen in the distance. Most any vehicle can drive this trail, just keep in mind the above mentioned caution about scraping air dams and hitches for lower vehicles. Air dams should be removed if you don’t want to damage them. Some climbs might be a challenge for Freelanders as there are some short but steep ones.

Steel Bender - Rating 6
Description of Trail and Obstacles

Steel Bender follows an historic Wagon trail that works its way up form a beautiful canyon to elevations above 6000 feet. It features 2 creek crossings, numerous steep ledges and 2 rocky ascents that have bypasses. This trail will test those in stock vehicles as you attempt a procession of rock ledges. It is located close to town starting immediately northeast of the Moab Golf Course on private land. The trail lies between Moab and the La Sal Mountains in the vicinity of Mill Creek, a major drainage from the mountains. The trail crosses the creek a few times and travels a lovely part of its canyon. It overlooks the North Fork of Mill Creek as it climbs to the base of South Mesa on the skirts of the La Sal Mountains. It is another variation on the Canyonlands landscape, and it offers further variety to the scenery and the four-wheeling opportunities of the Moab area. The trip can be done in stock 4×4s that have excellent clearance, but only because there are bypasses around some of the challenging spots. Portions of the trail are in two beautiful parts of Mill Creek Canyon. Other portions ride the higher country toward the mountains and overlook Canyonlands vistas toward the west from a 6,000-foot elevation. The canyon-bottom trail crosses stream-washed rocks and the stream itself in a few places. The higher country has dirt and a little sand - all generously mixed with rocks and rock ledges. There is a little slick rock near the upper creek ford. Mill Creek has a strong perennial flow that is highest in springtime, but the fords usually do no more than dampen your hubs. Not far above the creek is a steep, ledgy chunk of rock that may push some to the easy bypass. As the trail climbs, a succession of rock steps can be difficult for stock equipment, but each ledge area has a bypass. A couple of minor tributary canyons provide steep, rocky descents and testy climbs. The final creek ford is followed by a short, steep climb that can get muddy and slippery
A rear traction aid, rock protection and 32 inch tires would be preferred on this trail. This trail is harder if run from south to north as a winch will probably be required to ascend The Wizard’s Chest.

Seven Mile Rim – Rating 4
Description of Trail and Obstacles

Seven Mile Rim trail winds it’s way up to where it follows the canyon rim for a while. There are a lot of old mining roads in the area, and the trail also passes the old Cotter Uranium mine along the way. Route finding can be difficult for those that don’t know their way. Most of the trail is fairly easy driving on sandstone, with small ledges here and there, and mild climbs. Part way through the trail, it passes close to Uranium arch, which can be walked across if you don’t have a fear of heights. It joins other trails in the area of Merrimac and Monitor Buttes. There is a harder section if trail on the south side of Merrimac Butte which includes a squeeze, and a sandy hill near the end of the trail. Both can be bypassed due to the maze of roads. Also by Merrimac Butte, the trail has a slickrock sidehill section just above Wipeout Hill if that section is run. Depending on how it is run, it is suitable for most stock vehicles, please note however that Range Rovers and Discoveries with front air dams [i.e. the plastic skirt below the front bumper] may find these dams will scrape and may get damaged, therefore it is recommended that such be removed. Freelanders may scrape on some rocks and ledges.

Rose Garden Hill - Rating 5
Description of Trail and Obstacles

Rose Garden Hill is actually part of th Kokopelli bike trail system. It can be run several ways, with various difficulty depending on the route taken. If run as an out and back trail starting at Onion Creek, You must go both up and down Rose Garden Hill. At least a rear locker is needed to run it like this, as traction is hard to come by when going up the hill. It can also be run from the road by Dewey Bridge(or what’s left of it). Going this route also has several options, either following Entrada Bluffs Road to Cottonwood Canyon trail and down Rose Garden, or following it down and crossing the Dolores River a couple times, water level permitting, and then taking the Dolores Canyon Overlook trail up to the Cottonwood Canyon trail and down Rose Garden Trail. It is easier in this north to south direction, and lockers aren’t needed. Rock protection and at least 32” tires are recommended either way due to the big ledges on Rose Garden Hill. Expect to scrape something wether going up or coming down. There are some great views from the top of the mesa as this is the same mesa the Top of the World trail traverses. There are also some smaller ledges and a cliff section of trail. The trail starts between 20-30 miles north of Moab off of Hwy 128 depending on which route is taken. The drive up 128 is scenic as well as you follow the Colorado River up the deep and wide canyon.

Top of the World – Rating 4
Description of Trail and Obstacles

Awe inspiring views. Nothing more really needs to be said other than bring lots of film.
This trail is ideal for stock standard vehicles. Owners of such are encouraged to sign up. Please note however that Range Rovers and Discoveries with front air dams [i.e. the plastic skirt below the front bumper] may find these dams will scrape and may get damaged, therefore it is recommended that such be removed. Freelanders may scrape as well.

Hell Roaring Rim – Rating 3
Description of Trail and Obstacles

Hellroaring Rim trail follows the mesa between the deep Hellroaring and Mineral Canyons, and follows Mineral Point out to the west. The trail is fairly easy, and is suitable for all stock vehicles. The trail consists of rocky ledges, broken rock and sandy dirt. Depending on vehicle height, it is possible to scrape low parts on some rocks/ledges for low vehicles. The trail culminates in a spectacular view overlooking the Green River.

Dome Plateau – Rating 3
Description of Trail and Obstacles

This trail explores the highland area east of Arches National Park and north of the Colorado River. It is a little more than 30 miles north of Moab, off of Hwy 128, and starts on the north side of the highway just past Dewey Bridge. The trail has several arches and also some shelter caves that were used to protect livestock The plateau slopes towards the south but crosses two canyons on the way to a spectacular view overlooking the Professor Valley and the Fischer Towers along the Colorado River. The trail consists of sand, rock and dirt. With the exception of one hill near the overlook, the trail is fairly easy. On the northern section of the trail, arches in Arches National park can be seen off in the distance. Freelanders may have problems on the hill by the overlook, but the rest should be ok

Secret Spire – Rating 2
Description of Trail

Secret Spire trail follows the mesa top between Spring and Hellroaring Canyons. It crosses the upper portion of Spring Canyon to visit a tower that the trail was named for, the Secret Spire. The trail consists of sand, dirt and a little rock. There are great views into the canyons as well as being able to see the San Rafael Reef and Book Cliffs in the distance. There is a spur road that goes to the Dellenbaugh tunnel, which is a watercourse which is usually dry that goes through the sandstone and limestone and ends up at the brink of Spring Canyon. It is around 100 feet long and tall enough to walk through. The trail is suitable for all stock vehicles, although sometimes there can be washouts which could cause problems for vehicles with low ground clearance.

Chicken Corners – Rating 2
Description of Trail

Chicken Corners trail is actually a combination of two trails, Hurrah Pass and Chicken Corners. Both trails are relatively mild and are passable by all stock vehicles. Like most of Moab, there are some fantastic views from both Hurrah Pass and Chicken Corners, with the Colorado River far below, and Dead Horse Point across the way. There are also many interesting rock formations along the way. Chicken Corners is reached by Kane Creek road, southwest of town, and is west of Kane Creek Trail. The surface is dirt, some slickrock, sand and some smaller rocks. While you do drive close to the cliff in spots, it isn’t that close, and the trail is more than wide enough.

Wipe-Out Hill – Rating 5
Description of Trail

Wipe-Out Hill trail was named after it’s main obstacle, Wipe-Out Hill. This is a steep rock section with two routes, both of which have ledges as well. While it is possible to make it up without lockers, the chances of doing it, and doing it without breaking something are low. Good ground clearance and breakover angle are needed. There is also a sandy wash which must be driven, some more mellow slickrock and some dirt or sand hills. This trail is northwest of Moab, where it also passes by both Monitor and Merrimac Buttes and Determination Towers. Vehicles should have at least 31” tires as well.

Porcupine Rim – Rating 5
Description of Trail

Porcupine Rim is an out and back trail which starts at the end of Sand Flats Road, east of Moab. It consists mostly of dirt and rock, having some ledges, slickrock and sand as well. It is a somewhat bumpy trail compared to others. The trail winds it’s way along the mesa top, and has some great views overlooking Castle Valley. Vehicles should have 31” tires, decent ground clearance, and a limited slip/traction control or lockers are helpful though probably not needed with good driving skills. Air dams should be removed for this trail, and there is a potential for scraping underneath and possibly hitting door sills.

Gold Bar Rim – Rating 5
Description of Trail

This trail is northwest of Moab and shares a road with Gemini Bridges and Bull Canyon trails, basically the southern most section of Gemini Bridges trail. The first part of the trail isn’t too difficult, but the first difficult obstacle has gotten much harder recently. It is a rocky incline that terminates with a steep rock section, which has been washed and probably dug out much more than it was in past years. The trail also has a large crack that must be crossed as well as numerous smaller ledges. Vehicles should have limited slip/traction control or lockers and at the very least 31” tires if not larger. Since you come back the same way unless you end up running Golden Spike backwards, some vehicles may need to winch or be pulled back up the first/last obstacle. The trail in general has a lot of slickrock, some dirt and loose rock and some sand. There are good views overlooking both Gold Bar Canyon and the Moab Rim, with Arches National Park across the valley.

Copper Ridge – Rating 3
Description of Trail

Copper Ridge Trail consists of a combination of several trails including a part of Klondike Bluffs Trail. The trail runs somewhat parallel to the southwest boundary of Arches National Park. The trail has some slickrock sections, but is mostly dirt interspersed with rocks here and there. There are also some sandy wash sections. Most of the trail is fairly easy, but there may be eroded sections, and there are two somewhat steep climbs. When wet, the trail can become impassible, so caution should be taken if it looks like it may rain. The trail is scenic, especially in the Klondike Bluffs area where the rock is eroded into interesting formations. There are also several arches that can be seen in the distance in the park. Vehicles should probably have 30” tires. May be too steep for Freelanders.

3D – Rating 3
Description of Trail

3D trail is northwest of Moab. The trail runs by some deep canyons, and also travels to a high overlook, which is where it’s name is supposed to come from. There is a variety of terrain, from slickrock to dirt, sand, and some ledges. Some of the hills can be challenging for stock vehicles, and look intimidating either because of their steepness, or how the ground drops off on either side (Mean Hill), but they are doable. Vehicles should probably have 30” tires. May be too steep for Freelanders.

Hey Joe Canyon– Rating 3
Description of Trail

Hey Joe Canyon is another trail northwest of Moab in the vicinity of 3D, Secret Spire and several others. It is accessed via Spring Canyon Bottom Road, which is a ledge road that descends the 600 foot deep canyon. This road should be in fairly good shape as it is county maintained. At the bottom, the road follows along side the Green River for quite a few miles. This section has varying difficulty as there can be erosion and rockfalls. The trail is mostly dirt, but there are rocks and there can be a mud hole. There are a lot of tamarisk on this trail, so paint will likely get scratches. The trail should not be run when wet or if rain threatens due to the rock fall danger and mud factor. This trail also has some narrow sections. It ends at an abandoned uranium mine which should be stayed out of. Barring any bad washouts or rock falls, this trail is suitable for all vehicles.

Tiptoe Behind The Rocks – Rating 3
Description of Trail

Tiptoe Behind the Rocks is a more tame version of some of the trails in the Behind The Rocks area. It also bypasses some of the longer stretches of easy road. The trail is dirt and sand with sandstone sections and some ledges. It has gotten slightly harder due to erosion recently. The trail runs by some of the harder obstacles in the area as it shares some of the regular Behind The Rocks trail sections. There are great views from this trail, especially of the interesting Behind The Rocks Wilderness area. The trail is southwest of Moab. Vehicles should have at least 31” tires, good ground clearance and rock protection.

All Rovers

RRC Install of Lincon MIII here
—-

More info here and here.

—-

The Taurus fan works well, but the Mustang folks have been using the Mark VIII for quite some time: http://www.geocities.com/smithmonte/…rkVIII_Fan.htm
…they claim it has the best airflow.

For severe cooling needs, the electric fan from the Lincoln Mark VIII provides the greatest airflow. The part number is F8LH 8C607 AA — I got mine from the junkyard for $15, but they are available new for just over a grand. Fan diameter is 18″ and the fan blades are optimized for low noise but high flow. Outer dimensions of this fan are 22″W x 18.5″H x 6.25″D.

94 and 95 Taurus fans work, as do the SN95 Mustang fans and late-model low-hood T-birds. Pontiac Fieros have pretty good 2 speed electric fans, as well.

——–

mark VIII and 3.8 taurus are the same part #, same fan

———

Mark VII is a puller, 5.5-6″ deep.

———–

this is for the mark fan..

This info was give to me by Matt W.
part # is F3LY8C607A
93-96 use p/n F3LY 8C607 A @ 245.80
The 93-96 spin 1100 rpmson low and 1850 on highspeed.
97’s use p/n F7LZ 8C607 AB @ 196.23
98’s use p/n F8LZ 8C607 AA @ 140.11
The 97-98 spin 1800 on low and 2225 on high.
They all look the same, all come with a shroud. The 93-96 spin slower according to Ford Motorsport Tech line.

———
haven’t read this all but the MKVIII pulls a lot more, not that you need it. I wired mine with a bosch 75 amp relay and an 18ga fusible link similiar to the factory setup with these. Kicks ass..

——–

88-91+?? Taurus elec. fan (Local junk yard $10-25)
FWIW, fan part numbers are F2DE-8C607-AB and F4DH-8C607-CB for my two fans.

————

I’ve used them both. Generally the 2 speeds came out of 3.8l cars, and the 1 speed came out of 3.0l cars. The single speed fan is a smaller fan, and doesent pull as much air as the 2 speed at the low setting (but still pulls a bunch of air… I wouldnt think twice about running one on my 4 runner).
I think what your noticing is that there are ALOT more 1 speed fans at the wreckers than 2 speeds.

If you want to try it, go ahead, just watch the temp gague. From trying all kinds of electric fans (vw rabbit, plymouth FWD, and also seeing a mr gasket fan in action), I would say that the 1 speed taurus fan pulls stronger than them, just not by alot, and a good amount less than a 2 speed.

—-

All Rovers, D90 Electrical

Basically the ECU gets a signal and then once it adjusts the engine it offer a ground to run the relay or compressor clutch. Comes in on pin #27 to the ECU (power) then comes out as a ground on pin #33.
Same when you shut off the device, it makes sure the stepper doesn’t go bat-shit trying to compensate and keeps the idle smooth and steady.
In a 95 D90 this is wired into your AC at the multi connector near the evap. On 94s it is in the engine bay near the heater (same place on 110s). So you can wire a relay to run the compressor clutch or if you have a 2 wire clutch just use the output for the ground on the clutch.
There are inputs in the 14CUX for the automatic gearbox and the heated windscreen, basically anything that requires the engine to adjust to a load is just putting in the right wires to the 14CUX. It can be done in a GEMS as well but its a little more work.

All Rovers, D90 Electrical, D90 Misc

Luxury Liner Pro

http://www.secondskinaudio.com/noise-barrier/Luxury-Liner-Pro.php

All Rovers

Shocks

Front:
N115 21.8″/12.75″ - 9″ Heavy Loads
N73 24.17″/13.93″ - 10″ ??
N45F 21.8″/12.75″ - 9″ Medium Loads

Rear:
N25 25.3″/14.8″ - 10.5″ ?? (Smaller M10 x 1.25 stud)
N27 22.0″/13.4″ - 8.6″ ??
N44 22.0″/13.4″ - 8.6″ Heavy Loads
N46 22.0″/13/4″ - 8.6″ Medium Loads

OME Shocks Catalog Pages (PDF)

Springs

Front:
761 16mm - 15.7″/15.3″ - 200 lbf/in - 9.1T - 1.25″ lift
764 17mm - 16.9″/16.5″ - 220 lbf/in - 9.75T - ?? lift
751 16mm - 15.3″/15.0″ - 230 lbf/in - 8T - 1.25″ lift
766 17mm - 16.5″/16.5″ - 250 lbf/in - 9T - 1.25″ lift

Rear:
764 17mm - 16.9″/16.5″ - 220 lbf/in - 9.75T - 1.25″ lift
781 18mm - 16.7″/16.3″ - 290 lbf/in - 9.2T - 1.25″ lift
762 18mm - 16.5″/16.1″ - 300-340 lbf/in - 9.5T - 1.25″ lift
763 19mm - 16.5″/16.1″ - 360 lbf/in - 9.2T - 1.25″ lift

OME Springs Catalog Page (PDF)

All Rovers

http://www.lrrforums.com/showthread.php?p=84212#post84212

http://www.discoweb.org/forums/showthread.php?t=20395

All Rovers

Pic 1, M10 x 180mm bolts, heads cut off and slot cut for screwdriver to aid screwing in and out

Pic 2, 4 bolts inserted inplace of the 4 bolts which hold the transfer box on from the rear

Pic 3, box being slid out along the bolts with the weight on a big trolley jack. Slide the box all the way to the end of the bolts, at which time the gear and seal are clear of the end of the output shaft

All Rovers, D90 Drivetrain

There is a rebuild site, Ericson, not sure of the spelling, but they have exploded view diagrams on their site and sell rebuild kits. Biggest thing is to have the proper tools to do the rebuild. there is a heavy duty rebuild kit availale for towing and higher power engines.

All Rovers

As far as the t-case rebuild goes, do the input and output seals, also do the pto shaft o-rings. you can reseal the case itself with right stuff if you open it. If it is a CDL t-case you will need to get a new crush sleeve also. it goes inside the t-case on the shaft. only tighten it until the gear won’t wiggle back and forth. Tighten it too little and it will clunk, tighten too much it will whine.

All Rovers

Replacement Poly Bushing for the heim joints ends.

eShocks: (800) 303-6211
Talk to: Paul - Bilstein rep
Ask for Prothane 19-920 (12mm bolt) or (19-919 1/2″ bolt) - Bilstein 7100 heim joint replacement bushings

You need 4 packages as each package comes with 2 bushings (top and bottom).
Total will be around $45

I bought 19-919 because I bought my 7100s before RTE started selling the step down spacers to use with the factory Land Rover bolt size. If you drilled/tapped your shock mounts for 1/2″ bolts you want the 19-919. If you are running the genuine bolts with the RTE step-down spacers you want 19-920. I believe both part numbers have an extension that describes the color (e.g. 19-919-BL for black).

All Rovers, D90 Suspension

The seams on the inner tents should not have leaked. I would have your brother either rub them with a Bee’s Wax Bar http://www.beeyondthehive.com/ or use a seam seal.

With all tents it’s best to be pro active in the area of water resistance and seam leakage. The alternative isn’t so pleasant. To test the tent deploy it, remove the mattress, and use a garden hose to simulate rain. Having someone inside checking for leaks is always a plus. If you find leakage along the seams use the wax or seam sealer. If the fabric is seeping try one of the waterproofing products such as 3M.

—————–

The material itself normally is not a problem. The stitching can allow water through as the hole the needle punches in the material and the thread are different sizes. With canvas tents you were always told to soak down the tent so the stitching would swell up and plug the hole made by the needle. With synthetic or blended materials or thread there is little or no water absorption so the swelling does not take place.

You don’t see that many problems with leaking seams, but if they do occur seam seal or wax takes care of it. The nice thing about wax is it works when the fabric is wet.

—————–

The real deal is 303 Products High Tech Fabric Guard. It is avalable in marine shops and direct from 303 Products –

303 Products website

—————–

Never had to re waterproof an Eezi Awn. If I had to I probably look into the Niki Wax products or the 303 Products High Tech Fabric Guard MikeS was referring to. Something specific to breathable materials.

—————–

It is difficult to make a single wall tent keep the rain water out but still breathe. I’ve done a lot of work with the Maggiolina’s fabric through the years, it has a DWR finish (durable water repellant) but even it’s finish does wear out with time.

Here are some thoughts, they are highly subjective and always subject to change.

I’m not a fan of seam sealant, it too wears, best to design a tent so the seams aren’t in critical places. You will sometimes find seams on the folding rooftents. The good fabrics for this type of tent have a cotton content, which is good because the water causes the fabric to swell and close up to be water repellant. The problem is it stretches the seams, allowing water to come in there. We redesigned AutoHome’s OverCamp tent many years ago because the fabric was reinforced at the peak, for wear. If it rained over 4 inches an hour, the tent would develop drips at the threads, even though this wasn’t a seam. None of the OverCamp or OverLand tents have seams in the roof for this reason. We also use a “winter hood” that turns the tent into a double walled, four season tent, for these conditions.

Here is what I recommend for the Maggiolina which uses a special Drylon fabric. Drylon is a synthetic polyester, so it doesn’t absorb water and swell. With time, the DWR finish (durable water repellant) will wear and water will not bead up and the fabric will get wet. The Drylon needs the DWR renewed. There are several products that can do this. Scotch Guard by 3M tends to attract dirt and dirt hampers the DWR finish. I recommend the 303 finishes over Scotch Guard or NikWax for this reason. Clean the fabric really well, 303 has a special cleaner for this. Apply the 303 finish, and leave the tent out in the sun on a hot day. This is critical, the heat will let the 303 finish bond to the fabric. I will use a hair dryer in the winter, but it doesn’t work as well. The Maggiolina’s design is excellent for continuous wet weather, but you can also get a winter hood to make it a double walled tent.

The Columbus is something of a hybrid tent. Drylon isn’t as good because the sloping walls need more water repellence. This tent uses Airtex fabric, which has a special PTFE finish, similar to what GoreTex now uses. Pasquale is right, it doesn’t breathe as well, but you never have to worry about water coming in. I have noticed some condensation in very wet cold conditions. If this is a concern, again, use a winter hood and turn it into a four season tent.

Martyn brought up condensation. This will occur anytime there is a cold surface that warm moist air can condense on. Solutions are breathable fabrics, and insulation. I’ve seen rooftents that are “waterproof” that will turn into little rain forests once the water condenses on the fabric, not pleasant. Any surface that gets cold needs to be insulated. Many rooftents have plywood bases, sounds bad but actually insulates quite well. Look under your mattress, if it is wet, you tent probably didn’t leak, that’s condensation. A good rooftent will have an insulated base. Another of my pet peaves is ridgepoles that aren’t sheathed and insulated. Fine if you camp in the desert, but water will condense all night and drip on you, even if it isn’t raining.

Oh, Pasquale, you mentioned an awning for a Columbus, yes we have them, we use a parawing design that goes over the whole tent, lots of protection, you just attach to the top and it deploys when you open the Columbus, Mike can set you up.

Almost forgot, we have a new experimental mesh that goes under your mattress. It is about a half inch thick and acts like a box spring, has a little cush, very little weight, but allows air to pass under your mattress. Our guy in Germany developed it and I’ve been testing in in marine conditions, it works. Stock is really limited but we do have some. Should work on any brand of rooftent no just AutoHome.

Hope this helps explain some of the science and design issues. Rooftents are a challenge they are very different from ground tents.

————————–

The 3M Scotch Guard will not hurt the fabric, think of the fabric like a mesh or lattice, something to support the DWR. I talked at length with the chemist at 303 products and it is perfect for Dralon. As long as you don’t have any big holes, should work as new. I tested 303 against salt water and have been very impressed so far.

All Rovers, Camping Trailer, Misc Info

We’ve been using Ford 5.0 FI for several years with great success. Works great for standard tuning and for modified. Use the same injector for both and allow the engine management to lengthen the injector pulse rather than using a larger injector.

http://www.fiveomotorsport.com/Injector_SetsENGLAND.asp

SET 8 - Brand New
1989-1998
Range Rover
Discovery, Defender
3.9, 4.0, 4.2, 4.6 V-8
Ford Motorsport C302
Set 8/$329.50

All Rovers, D90 Electrical

Here is the low down on the connections to a Gentex mirror (with comp and temp) cut from a late model GM product. The connector pin numbers are found on the wire incursion side of the mating connector.

GM wire harness color function

PIN 1 PINK POWER +12 volts

PIN 2 BK CHASSIS, GND

PIN 3 LT GRN BACKUP LIGHTS

PIN 4 GY TO AUTO DIM OUTSIDE MIRROR

PIN 5 PINK TO AUTO DIM OUTSIDE MIRROR

PIN 6 DR GRN/WT TEMP PROBE

PIN 7 BK/WT TEMP PROBE

Note: Pin 3 is to be connected to the backup lights to turn off the auto dim feature in reverse. If you intend not to use this feature connect the LT GRN wire to chassis ground. If this pin is floating the auto dim will not work properly. Hope this helps.

All Rovers, D90 Electrical

Pond liner is sold by the foot, but its like 8 feet wide. No matter, 2-3 feet still costs less than 10 bucks and you’ll start using it for all sorts of little anti-vibration/anti-scuff projects.

All Rovers

LED Strip Light Link

All Rovers

UpDate!

Get a Mocal SP1 oil filter adapt and some 8AN fittings, it works better and cleans up the routing of the lines as well. ECR.

——–

I don’t know why I haven’t heard of these guys til now:

http://www.britishfasteners.com/mm5/merchant.mvc?

Also found a source of obscure fittings and adapters: http://www.discounthydraulichose.com/category_s/207.htm

And that 3/8bspt male - 3/8npt female: http://www.discounthydraulichose.com…042-parent.htm

For future reference for the D90 folks Part # 7005-08-20 is 20mm to 8AN: http://brennaninc.com/series.asp?item=7005

All Rovers, D90 Drivetrain, D90 Misc

http://landroverclassaction.com/

All Rovers

Link

Note: SVO = Special Vehicle Operations.
lrr = Long Range Radar.
Special thanks to PPG for providing paint code information allowing me to update the colour lists.
The year column is a guide to when colours were available.

Example:
95-95 available only in 1995.
98- available from 1998 to present day.
84-99 available from 1984 to 1999.
COLOUR BLACK YEAR CODE
399 Black 40% Gloss 69-99 LRC.399
775 Java Black (Engine Bay) 04 LRC.775
PVM Narvik Black 06 LRC.921
PUE Beluga, Caracal, County, Manhatton Black 2ct 89-97 LRC.416
PUE Beluga, Caracal, County, Manhatton Black 2ct 89-97 LRC.416(D)
COLOUR WHITE YEAR CODE
755 BT Ford Diamond White (Ral-9001) 01- LRC.755
603 German Border Police White 99-99 LRC.60
NCA Arctic White 75-85 LRC.273
273 Arctic White 75-85 LRC.273
354 Ivory White, Chamonix White, Davos White 94-90 LRC.354
NCM Ivory White, Chamonix White, Davos White 84-90 LRC.354
456 Alpine White, Savarin White 90-97 LRC.456
456 Alpine White, Savarin White 90-97 LRC.456(L)
456 Alpine White, Savarin White 90-97 LRC.456(Y)
NUC Alpine White, Savarin White 90-97 LRC.456
NUC Alpine White, Savarin White 90-97 LRC.456(L)
NUC Alpine White, Savarin White 90-97 LRC.456(Y)
NAL Chawton White 2ct 98- LRC.NAL
603 Chawton White 2ct 98- LRC.603
714 White GS (Engine Bay) 98 LRC.714
TS714 White GS (Tinted Surfacer) 99 LRC.TS714
NNZ Old English White 00-02 LRC.753
NCL Alaska (Porcelain) White 06 LRC.909
NUQ Whistler White 06 LRC.922
PA3 Denham White 04 LRC.PA3
COLOUR BEIGE YEAR CODE
ACD Sahara Dust 70-85 LRC.239
ACF Sand 59-84 LRC.004
356 Kuwait Matt Sand 99-01 LRC.356
566 Saudi Desert Pink Matt (svo) 00 LRC.566
NCJ Limestone 59-84 LRC.007
NCN Cornish Cream Svo 91-95 LRC.374
SCA Shetland Beige 80-84 LRC.324
433 Arran Beige Pebblestone 89-92 LRC.433
SUB Arran Beige Pebblestone 89-92 LRC.433
133 Libyan Matt Sand (svo) 94-95 LRC.133
239 Sahara Dust 70-85 LRC.239
501 Qatar Sand (svo Matt) 94-94 LRC.501
571 Corporate Cream 92-92 LRC.571
630 Beige 96-96 LRC.TS630
SUL Pioneer Sand (svo) Matt 99- LRC.699
725 Sand (svo) 2ct 99- LRC.725
0020 Mayagold (Engine Bay) 05 LRC.0020
NAU Atacama Sand 06 LRC.916
GAF Nazca Sand 06 LRC.919
GCN Kennicott Gold 07 LRC.931
COLOUR GREY YEAR CODE
0001 Dark Grey 59-68 LRC.0001
0017 Door Hinge Silver 00-00 LRC.0017
LCB Mid Grey, Welsh Grey 59-84 LRC.008
333 Matt Ssf Grey (Svo) 94-95 LRC.333
LCN Cambrian Grey, Slate Grey 84-88 LRC.348
471 Merlin Grey Svo 92- LRC.471
LUS Pennine Grey, Pembroke Grey 91-94 LRC.476
LUS Pennine Grey, Pembroke Grey 91-94 LRC.476(D)
527 Telecom Grey 91-91 LRC.527
687 BT Grey (svo) 2ct 98- LRC.687
728 Spanish Matt Navy Grey (svo) 99- LRC.728
581 Charcoal Stayfast Gloss 60% (Upper) 93-93 LRC.581
613 Charcoal (Tinted surfacer) 96-96 LRC.TS613
LDA Hatton Grey (Bumper) 98-99 LRC.LDA
481 Lizard Grey 89-00 LRC.481
768 Giverny (Engine Bay) 05 LRC.768
PD7 Morgan Grey 04 LRC.PD7
COLOUR BLUE YEAR CODE
JCC Marine Blue 59-87 LRC.006
JCB Tuscan Blue 72-81 LRC.236
26 Royal Blue (svo) 94-94 LRC.26
JCP Stratos Blue, Tasmin Blue 82-87 LRC.327
JUG Shire Blue 88-89 LRC.392
JUG Shire Blue 88-89 LRC.392(G)
JUH Arles, Windjammer, Pacific Blue 90-97 LRC.424
JUH Arles, Windjammer, Pacific Blue 90-97 LRC.424(VI)
JUT Caledonian Blue 2ct 98- LRC.507
JUT Caledonian Blue 2ct 98- LRC.507(DR)
595 Blue Lord (svo) 94-94 LRC.595
614 Ghana Police Gloss Blue 1427 (svo) 95-95 LRC.614
616 Portugese Blue (svo) 95- LRC.616
JDU British Gas Light Blue (svo) 95- LRC.633
JBE Caribineri Blue (svo) 98- LRC.658
692 Italian Police Blue (Ral-5023) 98- LRC.692
JBQ Gendamerie Blue Cob (svo) 98- LRC.681
694 Gendamerie Blue Cob (svo) 98- LRC.694
899 Midnight Blue 2ct 91-91 LRC.899
COLOUR GREEN YEAR CODE
715 Green GS (Engine Bay) 98 LRC.715
295 Java Green 74-78 LRC.295
693 Java Green (svo) 98 LRC.693
0013 Black & Decker Green (svo) 97- LRC.0013
619 Deep Bronze Green 99-00 LRC.619
HUY Deep Bronze Green (svo) 93-94 LRC.540
506 Mid Bronze Green 51% Gloss (svo) 94-95 LRC.506
HCC Bronze Green, Ascot Green 59-88 LRC.001
HDV Bronze Green 2ct 99-99 LRC.619
268 Olive Green (svo) 94-94 LRC.268
002 Deep Olive Green 70-71 LRC.002
213 Olive Drab Matt (svo), also British Standard 381C (298) 89- LRC.213
HYA Non lrr Nato Green, also British Standard 381C (285) 94-95 LRC.553
242 USAF Matt Green (svo) 94-95 LRC.242
HCD Light Green, Pastel Green 59-84 LRC.005
0007 British Racing Green 93-93 LRC.0007
HCS Balmoral Green 84-86 LRC.340
519 Balmoral Green 84-86 LRC.340
HUJ Eastnor Green Eskdale Green 89-92 LRC.419
HUJ Eastnor Green, Eskdale Green 89-92 LRC.419(R)
HCJ Warwick Green 86-86 LRC.232
HCB Lincoln Green 70-84 LRC.233
295 Java Green 74-78 LRC.295
693 Java Green (svo) 98 LRC.693
HFK Seguarro Green (svo) 99-99 LRC.703
HCN Trident Green 82-86 LRC.325
505 Trident Green 82-86 LRC.325
355 Matt Leo Green 93-93 LRC.355
504 National Grid green (svo) 95-95 LRC.504
563 Malaysian Green Matt 92-92 LRC.563
334 Bottle Green, Brooklands Green 83-92 LRC.334
HYF Brooklands Green 93-95 LRC.569
HYE Coniston Green, Olive Green 93-97 LRC.570
HYE Coniston Green, Olive Green 93-97 LRC.570(B)
HYJ Coniston Green 2ct 98-01 LRC.637
HYJ Coniston Green 2ct 98-01 LRC.637(L)
572 Corporate Green 92-92 LRC.572
576 Matt Khaki (Lead Free) 93-93 LRC.576
615 Matt Ghana Police Green 95-96 LRC.615
577 Matt Oman Khaki (svo) 93-95 LRC.577
594 Salvia Green (svo) 94-94 LRC.594
596 Portugese Nat Guard Green (svo) 94-94 LRC.596
680 Portugese Nat Guard Green Cob 98 LRC.680
599 Indonesian Army Matt Green (svo) 94-94 LRC.599
727 German Police Green (svo) 2ct 99 LRC.727
759 Asian Green Matt (Svo) 00 LRC.759
HZA Atlantic Green (svo) 2ct 99- LRC.726
11852 Wildlife Green (Australia) 72-72 LRC.11852
HZL Belize Green 2ct 03- LRC.756
JUC91 Tonga Green 06-08 LRC.JUC91
HZL Belize Green 03-06 LRC.HZL(D/L)
COLOUR YELLOW - ORANGE YEAR CODE
FUQ Borrego Yellow 02-02 LRC.757
578 Orange (Ral-2010 Signal Orange) 93- LRC.578
EUE Orange (Ral-2011 Deep Orange) 93- LRC.578
FMB A.A Yellow 93-94 LRC.559
FUN A.A Yellow 2ct 94-00 LRC.FUN
GCA Bahama Gold 71-79 LRC.235
GCA Bahama Gold 71-79 LRC.235(D)
235 Bahama Gold 71-79 LRC.235
235 Bahama Gold 71-79 LRC.235(D)
361 Camel Trophy Yellow, Sandglow 93-97 LRC.361
561 Telecom Yellow, Highway Yellow 85-85 LRC.561
FAP Daytona Yellow (svo) 2ct 99-99 LRC.702
0008 Yellow 93-93 LRC.0008
611 Yellow (Tinted Surfacer) 96-96 LRC.TS611
600 Yellow (svo) (Ral-1023 Traffic Yellow) 95-95 LRC.600
582 Yellow (Ral-1016 Sulphur Yellow) 95-95 LRC.582
584 Nas AA Yellow 94-99 LRC.584
593 B.A.A Yellow (svo) 94-94 LRC.593
0014 Molten Orange 99-99 LRC.0014
EMC Tangiers Orange 2ct (G4 challenge colour) 02- LRC.761
FAH Sumatra Yellow 01-01 LRC.749
COLOUR RED YEAR CODE
0012 Farrari Red 95-95 LRC.0012
0009 Royal Claret 93-93 LRC.0009
CMK Poppy Red 59-68 LRC.CMK
CUF Arrow Red, Portofino Red Corallin Red 88-97 LRC.390
CUF Arrow Red, Portofino Red, Corallin Red 88-97 LRC.390(D)
CUF Arrow Red, Portofino Red, Corallin Red 88-97 LRC.390(DI)
CCC Masai Red 70-85 LRC.378
CCL Venetian Red 81-87 LRC.440
542 Red svo (Ral-3000 Flame Red) 94-94 LRC.542
560 Post Office Red (svo) 94-94 LRC.560
562 S.W.E.B Red (svo) 94-94 LRC.562
590 Lazer Red 94-94 LRC.590
CCZ Monza Red 2ct 95-99 LRC.590
CPQ Rutland Red 2ct 95-99 LRC.607
CPQ Rutland Red 2ct 95-99 LRC.607(LQ)
612 Red (Tinted Surfacer 96-96 LRC.TS612
ZZZ Damson Red 97-98 LRC.ZZZ
723 Scarlet Red 2ct 00-00 LRC.723
JUC90 Rimini Red 06-08 LRC.JUC90
CBK Rimini Red 04 LRC.889
CVA Blaze Red 97-03 LRC.701
CVA Blaze Red (svo) 2ct 99-99 LRC.CVA
COLOUR BROWN YEAR CODE
293 Oman Sand Matt (svo) 94-95 LRC.293
CCH Russet Brown 76-85 LRC.318
ACV Rowan Brown 82-85 LRC.324:82
341 Arizona Tan 84-87 LRC.341
520 Arizona Tan 84-87 LRC.341
ABA Arizona Tan 84-87 LRC.341

All Rovers

Odd pipe and hose fittings:

http://www.discounthydraulichose.com/category_s/207.htm

http://www.britishfasteners.com/mm5/merchant.mvc?

All Rovers, D90 Chassis, D90 Drivetrain

The 1.6:1 boxes were used predominantly in military vehicles with NA diesels and some oddball 2 Liter ish MPI 4cyl Discoveries that were sold in certain markets (Italy?). They are not very common…I’ve only had a couple of them come through for rebuild. The last one went into a Discovery with 35″ tires that the owner wanted to maintain the 3.54 R&P gears. RDS has new 1.6 boxes for sale.
The 1.4:1 boxes were used in the NAS D110’s and a lot of other LR products behind TDIs. They are not really common in the US, but can be found. I swapped one into my NAS D90 with a set of GBR 4:1 low range gears. It has a slightly lower theoretical top speed but much improved power for trailer towing and maintaining highway speed at altitude. I love it…it was one of the best mods I’ve done. This was done before 4.10s were reliably available. 1.4:1 t-box gears give approximately the same overall gearing in high range as changing to 4.10 R&P gears. The advantage of regearing the t-box is that the inexpensive 3.54 R&P gears are retained and speedometer accuracy is not changed. The disadvantage of the 1.4 t-box gears is that it only changes high range…to get lower gearing in low range you need to fit the crawler low range gears or an underdrive. It really depends on your budget and your use of the vehicle. I have a 1.4 box that I will be rebuilding for stock as soon as I finish moving into my new shop.
The 1.2 boxes are the most common in the US and came in just about everything that Land Rover sold here with an LT230 transfer case. There are several versions of the 1.2 box depending on the year and application. The earliest sold in the US came in 1987 & 1988 RRC. They can be visually distinguished by the steel PTO cover and 4 pin switch on the hi/low shift housing. They used an early gearset with a 26 tooth input gear. The 1994-1995 D90s came with a 1.2 LT230T that was set up for a manual transmission as it had no interlock solenoid fitted. These used a newer gearset with a 28 tooth input gear. The early gears were not crossdrilled resulting in the spline wear issues that these trucks are known for. As a service fix LR introduced the oiling plate to direct oil to the splines and fixed the problem permanently with the introduction of the cross drilled input gears in late 1995/early 1996. The Discovery 1s with manual transmission used the same 1.2 t-box as the Defender. The automatic equipped Defenders (1997) and Discovery 1s (all years) used a 1.2 LT230 that had an interlock solenoid mounted on the box to lock the hi/low linkage in place to prevent the t-box being shifted unless the transmission was in neutral. This solenoid can be eliminated and the hole blanked off to allow this style of box to be used in a manual transmission application. In about 1997 the gears were changed again and the coarse gears of the LT230T were redesigned with the finer gears and the designation changed to the LT230Q. The basic 1.2 high range ratio was retained but the new input gears now sported 38 teeth instead of the previous 28 tooth configuration. These boxes were used until the introduction of the Discovery 2. The LT230 for the D2 changed a bit with some additional switches, no speedo drive, a larger front flange, solid spacer replaced the crush spacer on the intermediate shaft. Early D2s had no CDL but the t-boxes still had the parts installed but no linkage to actuate it. In about 2002 the CDL parts were removed and the front output casting was not machined for it. In 2003 the CDL function was introduced on some D2 models. Around this time the t-boxes became LT230SEs and appear to have a finer finish on the gears (almost polished).

All Rovers

Cool pre-labeled 4×4 switches here.

All Rovers

For future reference to anyone needing to know how to remove the (automatic trans) shifter handle on a 97 D-90.

1- The top plate which is textured can be popped out using a tiny screwdriver (note: once you clean the area arround same one side will have a bit more of a gap than the others)

2- Inside there is a retaining clip. Lift the clip/bushing up with needlenose pliers and rotate 1/2 turn. This will allow you to remove the clip (slide over). Remove clip and then lift the bushing out (under the clip) which holds the button. You can now slide the button out (may as well clean it)

3- Note there is a small spring on the inside right (just FYI to avoid loss) .

Then there is a 19mm nut (will require deepwell)

Of course then she pulls right up.

All Rovers, D90 Drivetrain, D90 Interior, D90 Misc

I used black plastic enamel by Valspar. Primed the plastic first with a plastic primer. Make sure to use rubbing alcohol and clean the surface thoroughly first. 3 light coats 15 minutes apart, the first coat is almost a dusting. I’ve used this before on cars and it lasts for at least 5 years. Any tips for getting the interior door panels off? Cost was $7.00 for primer and paint.

All Rovers, D90 Interior

I found these OBDII code for Disco I’s (up to 1998’s) on another forum, posted by a factory technican. Repost here for future reference.
___________________________________________________________

Trouble Code Chart
DTC
Fault Description
P0101
Mass Air Flow Sensor Signal Error Fault
P0102
Mass Air Flow Sensor Low out of Range Fault
P0103
Mass Air Flow Sensor High out of Range Fault
P0111
Air Temperature Signal Error Fault
P0112
Air Temperature Low out of Range Fault
P0113
Air Temperature High out of Range Fault
P0116
Engine Coolant Temperature Sensor Falling Temp Fault
P0117
Engine Coolant Temperature Sensor Low out of Range Fault
P0118
Engine Coolant Temperature Sensor High out of Range Fault
P0121
Throttle Position Sensor Output Signal Error Fault
P0122
Throttle Position Sensor Low out of Range Fault
P0123
Throttle Position Sensor High out of Range Fault
P0125
Engine Coolant Temp Sensor Warm Up Fault
P0130
Oxygen Sensor Cycle Fault *codes* A U
P0131
Oxygen Sensor Low Voltage *codes* A U
P0132
Oxygen Sensor High Voltage *codes* A U
P0133
Oxygen Sensor Slow response *codes* A U
P0136
Oxygen Sensor Cycle Fault *codes* A D
P0137
Oxygen Sensor Low Voltage *codes* A D
P0138
Oxygen Sensor High Voltage *codes* A D
P0139
Oxygen Sensor Slow response *codes* A D
P0150
Oxygen Sensor Cycle Fault *codes* B U
P0151
Oxygen Sensor Low Voltage *codes* BU
P0152
Oxygen Sensor High Voltage *codes* BU
P0153
Oxygen Sensor Slow response *codes* B U
P0156
Oxygen Sensor Cycle Fault *codes* B D
P0157
Oxygen Sensor Low Voltage *codes* BD
P0158
Oxygen Sensor High Voltage *codes* BD
P0159
Oxygen Sensor Slow response *codes* B D
P0171
Oxygen Sensor System Too Lean Fault Bank A
P0172
Oxygen Sensor System Too Rich Fault Bank A
P0174
Oxygen Sensor System Too Lean Fault Bank B
P0175
Oxygen Sensor System Too Rich Fault Bank B
P0181
Fuel Temperature Sensor Signal Error Fault
P0182
Fuel Temperature Sensor Low out of Range Fault
P0183
Fuel Temperature Sensor High out of Range Fault
P0201
Injector 1 Circuit Fault
P0202
Injector 2 Circuit Fault
P0203
Injector 3 Circuit Fault
P0204
Injector 4 Circuit Fault
P0205
Injector 5 Circuit Fault
P0206
Injector 6 Circuit Fault
P0207
Injector 7 Circuit Fault
P0208
Injector 8 Circuit Fault
P0300
Misfire on Multiple Cylinder
P0301
Misfire on Cylinder 1
P0302
Misfire on Cylinder 2
P0303
Misfire on Cylinder 3
P0304
Misfire on Cylinder 4
P0305
Misfire on Cylinder 5
P0306
Misfire on Cylinder 6
P0307
Misfire on Cylinder 7
P0308
Misfire on Cylinder 8
P0326
Continuous Knock Fault Bank A
P0327
Background Noise Low Fault Bank A
P0328
Background Noise High Fault Bank A
P0331
Continuous Knock Fault Bank B
P0332
Background Noise Low Fault Bank B
P0333
Background Noise High Fault Bank B
P0335
Crankshaft Position Sensor Signal Error Fault
P0336
Crankshaft Position Sensor Out of Range Fault
P0340
Camshaft Position Sensor Signal Error Fault
P0420
Catalyst Efficiency Low Fault Bank A
P0430
Catalyst Efficiency Low Fault Bank B
P0441
Evap. Purge Valve Incorrect Flow Fault
P0442
Evap System Small Leak Detected Fault
P0443
Evap. Purge Valve Open or Short Circuit Fault
P0451
Fuel Tank Pressure Sensor Signal Error Fault
P0452
Fuel Tank Pressure Sensor Low Out of Range Fault
P0453
Fuel Tank Pressure Sensor High Out of Range Fault
P0461
Fuel Tank Level Measurement Not Valid Fault
P0500
Vehicle Speed Sensor Signal Error Fault
P0506
Idle Speed Control Engine Speed Low Fault
P0507
Idle Speed Control Engine Speed High Fault
P0560
Battery Voltage Below minimum Fault
P0562
Measurement Circuit OK Battery Voltage Low Fault
P0563
Battery Voltage Above Maximum Fault
P0605
ECM Self Test Fault
P1130
Oxygen Sensor Fuel Trim at Limit *codes* A U
P1131
Oxygen Sensor Lean *codes* A U
P1132
Oxygen Sensor Rich *codes* A U
P1137
Oxygen Sensor Lean *codes* A D
P1138
Oxygen Sensor Rich *codes* A D
P1150
Oxygen Sensor Fuel Trim at Limit *codes* B U
P1151
Oxygen Sensor Lean *codes* B U
P1152
Oxygen Sensor Rich *codes* B U
P1157
Oxygen Sensor Lean *codes* B D
P1158
Oxygen Sensor Rich *codes* B D
P1171
Oxygen Sensor System too Lean Fault Banks A & B
P1172
Oxygen Sensor System too Rich Fault Banks A & B
P1176
Maximum Positive FMFR Correction Fault
P1177
Maximum Negative FMFR Correction Fault
P1178
Maximum Positive AMFR Correction Fault
P1179
Maximum Negative AMFR Correction Fault
P1185
Oxygen Sensor Heater Circuit Open Upstream
P1186
Oxygen Sensor Heater Circuit Short Upstream
P1187
Oxygen Sensor Heater Circuit Short Upstream
P1188
Oxygen Sensor Heater High Resistance Upstream
P1189
Oxygen Sensor Heater Type 1 Low Resistance Upstream
P1190
Oxygen Sensor Heater Type 2 Low Resistance Upstream
P1191
Oxygen Sensor Heater Circuit Open Downstream
P1192
Oxygen Sensor Heater Circuit Short Downstream
P1193
Oxygen Sensor Heater Circuit Open Downstream
P1194
Oxygen Sensor Heater High Resistance Downstream
P1195
Oxygen Sensor Heater Type 1 Low Resistance Downstream
P1196
Oxygen Sensor Heater Type 2 Low Resistance Downstream
P1199
Fuel Level Sensor Circuit Fault
P1201
Injector 1 Open Circuit or Ground Short Fault
P1202
Injector 2 Open Circuit or Ground Short Fault
P1203
Injector 3 Open Circuit or Ground Short Fault
P1204
Injector 4 Open Circuit or Ground Short Fault
P1205
Injector 5 Open Circuit or Ground Short Fault
P1206
Injector 6 Open Circuit or Ground Short Fault
P1207
Injector 7 Open Circuit or Ground Short Fault
P1208
Injector 8 Open Circuit or Ground Short Fault
P1313
Misfire Catalyst Damage Fault Bank A
P1314
Misfire Catalyst Damage Fault Bank B
P1315
Misfire Persistent Fault
P1316
Misfire Excessive Emissions Fault
P1317
ABS Rough Road Line Low Fault
P1318
ABS Rough Road Line High Fault
P1361
No Ignition Coil Activation Fault Coil 1
P1362
No Ignition Coil Activation Fault Coil 2
P1363
No Ignition Coil Activation Fault Coil 3
P1364
No Ignition Coil Activation Fault Coil 4
P1371
Early Ignition Coil Activation Fault Coil 1
P1372
Early Ignition Coil Activation Fault Coil 2
P1373
Early Ignition Coil Activation Fault Coil 3
P1374
Early Ignition Coil Activation Fault Coil 4
P1440
Evap System Purge Valve Stuck Open Fault
P1441
Evap System Purge Valve Flow 1 Fault
P1442
Evap System Purge Valve Blocked Fault
P1447
Evap System Purge Valve Open or Short Circuit Fault
P1448
Evap System Purge Valve Flow 2 Fault
P1508
Idle Speed Control Open Circuit Fault
P1509
Idle Speed Control Short Circuit Fault
P1514
Neutral Drive Load Fault
P1516
Neutral Drive Gear Change Fault
P1517
Neutral Drive Cranking Fault
P1607
Malfunction Indicator Lamp Short Circuit Fault
P1608
Malfunction Indicator Lamp Open Circuit Fault
P1620
Reprogramming Code Learn Fault
P1621
Serial Data Link Dead Fault
P1622
Repeated Wrong ECM Security Code Fault
P1623
ECM Security Code Fault
P1621
Serial Data Link Dead Fault
P1622
Repeated Wrong ECM Security Code Fault
P1623
ECM Security Code Fault
P1701
Transfer Box Line Fault
P1703
Transfer Box Line Open Circuit Fault
P1708
Transfer Box Line Short Circuit Fault
P1775
Gearbox Fault
P1776
Gearbox Ignition Retard Request Timeout Fault
P1777
Gearbox Ignition Retard Request Line Fault

All Rovers, LR3 Electrical

V8 Petrol – Carburetor and EFI (Land Rover 90 & 110, Discovery, Range Rover)

Lastly we come to the venerable but cherished V8 petrol power plant. As many of you will know, this engine has been around in various guises since the sixties and consequently it’s not too demanding of its engine oil (in terms of thermal and mechanical stress) despite its reputation for longevity.

However, because it is based on a very old design it likes a relatively viscous oil to give a good amount of oil pressure, especially in the upper engine and hydraulic tappets. Equally, the running tolerances and temperatures on older engines (eg carburetor variants) do not favour highly additive treated lubricants which can give rise to bore glazing.

Hence for older Land Rover V8’s (all carburetor versions) a good quality 15W50 viscosity grade mineral oil is perfectly suited. By adopting a viscosity span of SAE 15W/50, slightly improved fuel economy and cold starting is achieved as a result of lower frictional losses compared with using conventional SAE 20W/50 grades grades but SAE20W50 can be used too of course.

With Land Rover’s V8 engines, what really matters is the cleanliness of the oil since V8’s have a tendency to pollute it with combustion by-products (via leaking head gaskets) and this leads to heavy, constricting deposits and tar like gums within the engine.

Therefore for best results you should opt for an oil with good detergency. A diesel compatible oil is ideal for these very reasons. Therefore you should look for an oil that meets quality grades API SG/CE or ACEA A2, B2.

Note though that if the engine has been neglected or is tired and already has heavy deposits of sludge, then a very highly detergent oil may dislodge deposits that subsequently block oil ways, increase leakage or increase running tolerances so don’t use a very highly specified, so-called ‘diesel specific’ oil.

Candidly, if the engine is anything darker than honey brown under the rocker covers then it may need some TLC in the workshop if you want best results from it. Conversely, it will probably soldier on for a very long time in a worn state but with lower performance and economy.

You should, however, change the engine oil regularly at no more than 6,000 mile intervals WITHOUT FAIL and many enthusiasts change the oil at 3,000 miles.

If you have a later EFI V8 (Fuel injected), then these engines (in good condition) are capable of running on a lower 10W40 viscosity grade. This gives better economy, especially for EFI engines that are soaking up higher mileages on fast roads such as motorways. You can opt for high or fully synthetic oils of this viscosity range but do bear in mind the aforementioned effects of a highly additive treated oil (say ACEA grade A3/B3) on an engine that has significant tar like deposits within, or that is not running at those higher temperatures borne of sustained high speeds. Only opt for 10W40 grade if your EFI engine is in good condition and is being worked hard at higher road speeds.

If you are racing your V8, then you have quite a few choices to make since you may wish to sacrifice the ultimate longevity of the engine in return for greater power output. If you want the lowest viscosity, then you might opt for a 10W30 grade but this is on the very limit of the viscosity that the V8 will accept even in race tuned condition. For racing engines, we recommend nothing thinner than a 10W40 viscosity span which should be fully synthetic.

If you are really, really squeezing the power out of the engine (perhaps with NOS), then we recommend you look for a specialist 20W50 fully synthetic racing oil (popular in the US amongst V8 racers) since this will have the film strength to cope with the extremes of stress and temperature imposed at the very highest limits of the V8’s power capability.

Gearboxes

Having covered engines, we can now consider transmissions.

5-speed LT77 and R380 main gearbox (Land Rover 90 & 110, Discovery, Range Rover)

Firstly, let’s deal with the somewhat notorious LT77 and R380 5-speed main gearbox. These are famed for a poor, notchy gear change, especially from 1st to 2nd gear.

The notchy gear change is due to a combination of a weak synchromesh and the use of a plain mineral ATF fluid.

ATF was originally specified for the LT77 5-speed gearbox and, theoretically, could be used in the later R380 box. Type DIII is the best grade currently available. ATF was originally specified because of the weak synchromesh in the LT77 and R380 boxes (especially second gear).

ATF has a very low viscosity (rated as 5W20 since it falls below normal gear oil viscosity grades) and so it has minimal drag on the gears, enabling the weak synchromesh to do the best of a bad job.

BUT ATF has several drawbacks which is why it is NO LONGER recommended for use in such boxes. These are:

It is generally a plain mineral base stock formulation (even DIII) and this, coupled to its very low viscosity, means that it is poor at preventing metal to metal wear in manual transmissions.

This is compounded by the fact that the viscosity improvers within (thickeners) are more rapidly sheared down in manual transmissions. Again, this reduces the protective film strength of the ATF in those areas of high pressure contact and also increases transmission noise.

ATF thickens as temperatures drop (increasing that drag on the gears) which is why folks notice that gear changes are worst on cold mornings and improve after a few miles motoring when the ATF has warmed up a little.

So, what are the alternatives?

Land Rover currently has commercial arrangement with Texaco/Chevron that leads it to recommend a Texaco/Chevron MTF94 fluid. From the freeback we have received and read on this Forum and elsewhere, we feel it’s a little too viscous (5W30 or 70W80) to give the best results. Nonetheless you should use it in preference to ATF if your choice is limited to the two.

However, there are better alternatives such as the fully synthetic MT75D gear oil we have developed. Rather than simply plug our MT75D I’ll give pointers to what you should look for when seeking alternatives to ATF or MTF94.

Firstly, the lubricant must have the original 5W20 low viscosity of ATF fluids to give minimum gear drag. However, it MUST also be formulated only from fully synthetic base stocks since these will have a much higher lubricant film strength so as not to be squeezed out of those all important high pressure contact areas where wear might occur. This, and the low viscosity, has the added benefit of reducing friction which lowers transmission noise and improves economy.

It must also be highly shear stable and able to maintain its optimum working viscosity over a very wide temperature range. This and a very, very carefully matched coefficient of friction (probably the most critical parameter) will ensure that it dramatically improves gear shifting in LT77 and R380 boxes (especially from cold).

It is the improved shear stability and higher film strength that enables synthetic gear lubricants to outlast their plain mineral counterparts by up to 5 times. However, we err very much on the cautious side and recommend only a doubling of drain intervals.

Note that unlike engine oils, gear oils do not have combustion by-products building up in them, nor do they suffer the higher temperatures of engines, so extending drain intervals is entirely acceptable if the lubricant is of the highest performance and the increase is modest. The exception to this would be if the gear oil were contaminated, perhaps by water or mud during deep wading, though this is unlikely. If the oil is contaminated in this way it MUST be changed immediately, regardless of its formulation.

LT230 Transfer Box (Land Rover 90 & 110, Discovery, Range Rover)

That’s the problems of the LT77 and R380 boxes solved, but what about the LT230 transfer box to which these are commonly mated?

You should NOT use ATF, MTF94 or MT75D in an LT230 TRANSFER box. It must use a thicker gear oil such as EP90 (monograde), EP80W90 (multigrade which is better for cold starting lubrication on winter mornings) or EP75W90 (typically fully synthetic giving the best lubrication of all). This is the same lubricant that you should use in your axles and you should look for an API GL5 specification for best protection.

Borg Warner Chain Drive Transfer Box (Range Rover)

The only transfer box from Land Rover where ATF was originally recommended is the BORG WARNER chain drive box as fitted to Range Rover vehicles from around 1989 onwards. Again, type DIII is the best grade currently available but guess what, these Borg Warner boxes suffer from wear around the chain and sprockets!! Another application for a fully synthetic MT75D type solution, we feel.

LT95 & LT85 (Land Rover 90 & 110, Range Rover)

Very early 90 and 110’s were fitted with either LT95 4-speed (also fitted to early Classic Range Rovers) or LT85 5-speed gearboxes.

These boxes are very robust and when mated to engines in standard tune are relatively unstressed. Consequently, both boxes can be filled with a 15W50 or 20W50 engine oil (API SG/CE or ACEA A2-96/B2-96).

If you choose to use engine oil in your LT95 or LT85 gearbox, we very strongly recommend that you change the oil in the box at the SAME time as you change your engine oil (i.e. no more than 6,000 miles). This is because in manual gearboxes, engine oil provides limited extreme pressure protection and the viscosity improvers within it tend to shear down faster, again reducing protection since the lubricating film thins out.

If you want better protection for these boxes you should opt for 75W90 Fully Synthetic Gear Oil to API GL5 specification.

Be careful though since, generally speaking, GL5 oils are incompatible with the copper alloys found in older generation gearboxes. Certain additives within can cause leaching of the copper and this weakens the component, especially the synchro rings. You should check with your supplier that any GL5 Fully Synthetic Oil you use is FULLY compatible with copper and its alloys and suitable for use in older transmissions.

ZF HP22 4-speed Automatic Gearbox (Land Rover 90 & 110, Discovery, Range Rover)

That’s manual gearboxes covered, but many late vehicles are fitted with the ZF HP22 4-speed automatic box.

In reality, the ZF 4-speed auto box fitted to these vehicles is more than happy with Non Synthetic ATF fluids, and the latest ATF DIII grade is the one to use since it is better suited to the small orifices and electronic control systems in the latest generation of auto boxes. Regular fluid and filter changes will see the box give a very, very long life without the need for Synthetics.

However, if you live in hotter climes, or if the box is being worked extremely hard (say touring the Alps in Summer!), then a Synthetic fluid will significantly reduce the transmission temperature and this is worth the expense alone to avoid an overheated transmission.

So, if you want the best fluid for your ZF auto box then synthetic is the way to go for maximum box life, best economy (such as it is with an auto box!) and lowest transmission temperature. If you want the VERY best fluid then you won’t do better than an MT75D type fluid since it is perfect for ZF 4-speed auto boxes.

Chrysler Torqueflite 3-speed Automatic Gearbox (Range Rover)

Reputedly, this 3-speed auto box offered prior to the ZF 4-speed was about as ‘bullet proof’ as auto boxes could get. It’s a very tough, very simple, long lived unit and runs happily on ATF Type DII or as mentioned earlier, the latest ATF Type DIII type fluid.

Note that not all older generation auto boxes can run on ATF DII or DIII, but the Torqueflite unit factory fitted to Classic Range Rovers is fine with either.

Further Info

I hope you find the information above useful.

Don’t forget too that you can find some FREE and detailed features on renewing gearbox oils and servicing your favourite 4×4 in our online technical library:

Difflock Servicing Guides

You can also find some free and detailed guides to selecting engine oils on our website here:

Difflock Guide to Oils & Lubricants – Background Info

Difflock Guide to Oils & Lubricants – Selecting the best oil for your engine

Feel free to email me at: info@difflock.com if you have any specific lubricant queries you would like me to answer.

All Rovers, D90 Drivetrain

Optimas in particular HATE being charged from zero with anything lower then 10.5 amps. What the engineer told me was that crystals form in the cells when charged for too long at 2.5 amps. He said that battery is designed to discharge and be recharged by a standard automatic charger set to begin its charge at 10.5 amps and work its way down to 2.5 amps until its full, and finally will shut off or float the battery until you unplug it.

All Rovers, D90 Electrical, LR3 Electrical

Ten Commandments of Land Rover Ownership

1) Thou shalt not Bling Bling thy Rover.

2) Thou shalt never leave thy fellow Rover stranded.

3) Thou shalt not drink and drive. Drive first then drink.

4) Thou shalt not operate thy Land Rover solely for “Mall” use.

5) Thou shall honour thy parts Rover by toasting with a venerable single-malt or shot of Tequila.

6) Thou shall offer a friendly wave at thy passing Rover.

7) Thou shalt never use petrol with octane rating less than 91.
Thou shall drink beer from a pint glass poured from a keg and not from a plastic glass poured from a plastic bottle for heaven’s sake.

9) Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s Rover as it is thy duty to build a stronger more capable Rover.

10) Thou shalt not own more than 4 Land Rovers at any one time for fear of bankruptcy or divorce.
__________________

source:LRRepair.com

All Rovers

Recovery gear List.

Winch:
In-cab or wireless remote control
greasable pulley block that can be disassembled for cleaning. Large diameter pulley to reduce friction
9′+ Tree Protector
Line dampener
Wired Remote
Winch Extension (50′+)
Hand Winch
ANSI rated goggles or glasses

Recovery:
30′ snatch strap
HD Leather Gloves
15′ of chain (CAD/Zinc Plated)
(2-3) 3/4″ Bow Shackles with pin and cotter
HD Ratchet Strap
Constrictor Strap
Rubber wear pad (for wrapping around the frame, etc. to prevent rope damage)
Shovel (spade) with long and short handle
Pick
Exhaust jack
Pull Pal
Hi-lift w/base
Axe
traction mat or board

source:expeditionportal

All Rovers

Winch:

1. In-cab or wireless remote control
2. greasable pulley block that can be disassembled for cleaning. Large diameter pulley to reduce friction
3. 9′+ Tree Protector
4. Line dampener
5. Wired Remote
6. Winch Extension (50′+)
7. Hand Winch
8. ANSI rated goggles or glasses

Recovery:

1. 30′ snatch strap
2. HD Leather Gloves
3. 15′ of chain (CAD/Zinc Plated)
4. (2-3) 3/4″ Bow Shackles with pin and cotter
5. HD Ratchet Strap
6. Constrictor Strap
7. Rubber wear pad (for wrapping around the frame, etc. to prevent rope damage)
8. Shovel (spade) with long and short handle
9. Pick
10. Exhaust jack
11. Pull Pal
12. Hi-lift w/base
13. Axe
14. traction mat or board

All Rovers

BG44K is by far the best cleaner on the market, I use
it once a year for decarboning the engine. As for the booster, I use
Lucas Octane booster and it really does work. I find I have alot more
throttle response when off the road, you can even hear the engine
bellow deeper under full throttle.

All Rovers

Spend 30 minutes and $65 at your local Les Schwab Tire center. They’ll even throw in a cup of bad coffee and a bag of stale popcorn for free.

If you don’t have Les Schwab back east, call around until you find a tire shop that will do it. Just do the center two sets of lugs. Leave the outer ones solid.

All Rovers

Source for Roof Rack Cussion Clamps.

CushAClamp

All Rovers

This post is to keep track of maintenance done on my 2001 DII.

All Rovers

If you want the regular Ex military metal cans you can get them at www.sportsmansguide.com or www.cheaperthandirt.com They go for about $17 to $19 bucks They WILL ship to CA cause they don’t care.. fits standard Nato nozzles, you can get extra rubber seals at British Pacific if the seals are old ( there are date codes on these cans.. I have one from 1953 so find out before you buy) the 80’s issued ones will cost a little more.

source:NCRC maillist

All Rovers, Camping Trailer

45,000 MILE SERVICE
Exterior Add 16 oz Land Rover Fuel Conditioner (LRN5010)
Inspect wiper blades
Lubricate door locks, check straps
Lubricate hood latch and safety catch, fuel door hinges
Interior Check parking brake (Adjust if necessary)
Check seat belts
Under Hood Inspect coolant hoses
Inspect radiator and AC condenser
Check power steering fluid level/ACE fluid level
Clean battery and terminals
Replace serpentine drive belt
Check brake fluid level
Under Vehicle *Change engine oil and replace filter
Perform body corrosion warranty inspection
Inspect tire pressures, condition and tread depth
Inspect brake pads, calipers and discs
Inspect exhaust system and heat shields
Inspect brake lines
Lubricate drive shafts and U-joints
Inspect steering rods, joints and dust covers
Inspect shock absorbers
Inspect suspension links and mountings
Inspect wheel speed sensor and height sensor wiring
Inspect fuel and hydraulic lines
Inspect engine and transmission mounts
Record performance of Service in Passport to Service
back to top
52,500 MILE SERVICE
Exterior Add 16 oz Land Rover Fuel Conditioner (LRN5010)
Inspect wiper blades
Under Vehicle *Change engine oil and replace filter
Inspect tire pressures, condition and tread depth
Inspect brake pads, calipers and discs
Record performance of Service in Passport to Service
back to top
60,000 MILE SERVICE
Exterior Add 16 oz Land Rover Fuel Conditioner (LRN5010)
Inspect wiper blades
Lubricate door locks, check straps
Lubricate hood latch and safety catch, fuel door hinges
Replace Alarm handset batteries
Interior Check parking brake (Adjust if necessary)
Check seat belts
Under Hood Inspect coolant hoses
Inspect radiator and AC condenser
Check power steering fluid level/ACE fluid level
Clean battery and terminals
Inspect serpentine drive belt
Change brake fluid
*Replace air-cleaner element
Change engine coolant
*Replace spark plugs
Under Vehicle *Change engine oil and replace filter
Perform body corrosion warranty inspection
Inspect tire pressures, condition and tread depth
Inspect brake pads, calipers and discs
Inspect exhaust system and heat shields
Inspect brake lines
Lubricate drive shafts and U-joints
Inspect steering rods, joints and dust covers
Inspect shock absorbers
Inspect suspension links and mountings
Inspect trailer hitch attachment bolts for tightness
Inspect wheel speed sensor and height sensor wiring
Inspect fuel and hydraulic lines
Change transfer gearbox oil
Change transmission fluid
Check front and rear axle oil level
Service SLS filter (if equipped)
Record performance of Service in Passport to Service

All Rovers

Northern Tools Pump

————–

I use $10 tank sprayers from Home Depot. I have them for ATF, 90 wt. Car washing soap, Super clean, etc. The same sprayers you use for weed killer, etc.

The 90 wt. doesn’t flow very fast, but the conveninece value is so great, I don’t mind.

Get the ones you can see through so you can keep an eye on how much has flowed.

source:discoweb

All Rovers