Austin ;-)

Resistance is futile!

250032884875



Lee D
--
www.lrproject.com

a.f.l. & 101ers Unofficial October 2006
<http://www.lrproject.com/afl__101_owners_unofficial.htm>

"Anti's - Give
them enough rope and they'll be stuck in a ditch with a lot of rope ;-) "

On or around Thu, 28 Sep 2006 23:30:46 +0100, "Lee_D"
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>250032884875

bugger that. that's one big project.

I've been wondering though whether I'll have to sell Edward to fund the
infamous minibus project. apart from owt else, if I have a 4x4 V8 minibus,
I hardly need another landy...

I've still not verified a few things about the project though, without which
it's not gonna happen.

The most obvious one is whether the insurers will run a mile. I expect to
have to get it examined by an engineer, but if their attitude is "no way,
josé", then it's not gonna happen.

The other minor detail is one I've yet to check...

One of you hombres with a 110, ideally on standard wheels - do us a favour,
next time it's not ****ing down, and measure the track *between* the front
wheels (and back wheels preferably) i.e. inner edge of tyre to inner edge of
other tyre. front wheels pointing straight ahead, natch.

If the axles are a lot too narrow, that'd be rather a problem too. I can
make 'em at least 4" wider by cunning choice of wheel rims, though, and
possibly wider than that by getting rims made for the job.
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
"There is plenty of time to win this game, and to thrash the Spaniards
too" Sir Francis Drake (1540? - 1596) Attr. saying when the Armarda was
sighted, 20th July 1588

On or around Thu, 28 Sep 2006 23:30:46 +0100, "Lee_D"
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>Resistance is futile!
>
>250032884875

'ere:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=320032938778
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
"There is plenty of time to win this game, and to thrash the Spaniards
too" Sir Francis Drake (1540? - 1596) Attr. saying when the Armarda was
sighted, 20th July 1588

"Austin Shackles" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On or around Thu, 28 Sep 2006 23:30:46 +0100, "Lee_D"
> <[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
>
>>250032884875
>
> bugger that. that's one big project.
>
> I've been wondering though whether I'll have to sell Edward to fund the
> infamous minibus project. apart from owt else, if I have a 4x4 V8
> minibus,
> I hardly need another landy...
>
> I've still not verified a few things about the project though, without
> which
> it's not gonna happen.
>
> The most obvious one is whether the insurers will run a mile. I expect to
> have to get it examined by an engineer, but if their attitude is "no way,
> josé", then it's not gonna happen.
>
> The other minor detail is one I've yet to check...
>
> One of you hombres with a 110, ideally on standard wheels - do us a
> favour,
> next time it's not ****ing down, and measure the track *between* the front
> wheels (and back wheels preferably) i.e. inner edge of tyre to inner edge
> of
> other tyre. front wheels pointing straight ahead, natch.
>
> If the axles are a lot too narrow, that'd be rather a problem too. I can
> make 'em at least 4" wider by cunning choice of wheel rims, though, and
> possibly wider than that by getting rims made for the job.
> --
> Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
> "There is plenty of time to win this game, and to thrash the Spaniards
> too" Sir Francis Drake (1540? - 1596) Attr. saying when the Armarda was
> sighted, 20th July 1588

I'll do it tonight, the wheels are standard, but the tyres are 235's trac
Edges to be precise

On or around Fri, 29 Sep 2006 13:49:53 +0100, "Nige"
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>
>"Austin Shackles" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On or around Thu, 28 Sep 2006 23:30:46 +0100, "Lee_D"
>> <[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
>>
>>>250032884875
>>
>> bugger that. that's one big project.
>>
>> I've been wondering though whether I'll have to sell Edward to fund the
>> infamous minibus project. apart from owt else, if I have a 4x4 V8
>> minibus,
>> I hardly need another landy...
>>
>> I've still not verified a few things about the project though, without
>> which
>> it's not gonna happen.
>>
>> The most obvious one is whether the insurers will run a mile. I expect to
>> have to get it examined by an engineer, but if their attitude is "no way,
>> josé", then it's not gonna happen.
>>
>> The other minor detail is one I've yet to check...
>>
>> One of you hombres with a 110, ideally on standard wheels - do us a
>> favour,
>> next time it's not ****ing down, and measure the track *between* the front
>> wheels (and back wheels preferably) i.e. inner edge of tyre to inner edge
>> of
>> other tyre. front wheels pointing straight ahead, natch.
>>
>> If the axles are a lot too narrow, that'd be rather a problem too. I can
>> make 'em at least 4" wider by cunning choice of wheel rims, though, and
>> possibly wider than that by getting rims made for the job.
>> --
>> Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
>> "There is plenty of time to win this game, and to thrash the Spaniards
>> too" Sir Francis Drake (1540? - 1596) Attr. saying when the Armarda was
>> sighted, 20th July 1588
>
>I'll do it tonight, the wheels are standard, but the tyres are 235's trac
>Edges to be precise
>

that's OK - it'll probably end up on 235s anyway.
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
Appearances: You don't really need make-up. Celebrate your authentic
face by frightening people in the street.
from the Little Book of Complete B***ocks by Alistair Beaton.

On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 12:56:52 +0100, Austin Shackles
<[email protected]> wrote:

>One of you hombres with a 110, ideally on standard wheels - do us a favour,
>next time it's not ****ing down, and measure the track *between* the front
>wheels (and back wheels preferably) i.e. inner edge of tyre to inner edge of
>other tyre.

Oddly mine gives 126cms at the back and 127cms at the front, tyre
bulge to tyre bulge. Either the pressures and loadings are different,
the wheels have different offsets or something's bent!

AJH

On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 12:56:52 +0100, Austin Shackles
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On or around Thu, 28 Sep 2006 23:30:46 +0100, "Lee_D"
><[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
>
>>250032884875
>
>bugger that. that's one big project.

Its going for sensible money though!

Austin Shackles wrote:

> If the axles are a lot too narrow, that'd be rather a problem too. I can
> make 'em at least 4" wider by cunning choice of wheel rims, though, and
> possibly wider than that by getting rims made for the job.

Not a good idea - it changes the scrub radius and will cause unevern
tyre wear, interesting steering characteristics and instability under
heavy braking.


--
EMB

Austin Shackles wrote:
> On or around Thu, 28 Sep 2006 23:30:46 +0100, "Lee_D"
> <[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
>
>> 250032884875
>
> bugger that. that's one big project.
>
> I've been wondering though whether I'll have to sell Edward to fund
> the infamous minibus project. apart from owt else, if I have a 4x4
> V8 minibus, I hardly need another landy...
>
> I've still not verified a few things about the project though,
> without which it's not gonna happen.
>
> The most obvious one is whether the insurers will run a mile. I
> expect to have to get it examined by an engineer, but if their
> attitude is "no way, josé", then it's not gonna happen.
>
> The other minor detail is one I've yet to check...
>
> One of you hombres with a 110, ideally on standard wheels - do us a
> favour, next time it's not ****ing down, and measure the track
> *between* the front wheels (and back wheels preferably) i.e. inner
> edge of tyre to inner edge of other tyre. front wheels pointing
> straight ahead, natch.
>
> If the axles are a lot too narrow, that'd be rather a problem too.
> I can make 'em at least 4" wider by cunning choice of wheel rims,
> though, and possibly wider than that by getting rims made for the
> job.

126cm matey, sorry about the delay!!

--
Ta!

Nige

Subaru WRX (54)
Land Rover Turbo Diesel 110 (G)
KTM 520 SX (2001)
Kawasaki ZZR 1100 (1995)

On or around Sat, 30 Sep 2006 13:24:44 +0100, "Nige"
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:


>126cm matey, sorry about the delay!!

excellent, and no problem - the project ain't off the ground yet.

seems there's a consensus so far on 126cm or so.
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
0123456789112345678921234567893123456789412345678951234567896123456789712345
1 weebl: What's this? | in recognition of the fun that is weebl and bob
2 bob: it a SigRuler! | check out the weebl and bob archive:
3 weebl: How Handy! | http://www.weebl.jolt.co.uk/archives.php

On or around Sat, 30 Sep 2006 20:29:44 +1200, EMB <[email protected]>
enlightened us thusly:

>Austin Shackles wrote:
>
>> If the axles are a lot too narrow, that'd be rather a problem too. I can
>> make 'em at least 4" wider by cunning choice of wheel rims, though, and
>> possibly wider than that by getting rims made for the job.
>
>Not a good idea - it changes the scrub radius and will cause unevern
>tyre wear, interesting steering characteristics and instability under
>heavy braking.

I had a set of 8-spokes on the 110 before - more offset and no discernible
problems. Granted, only an inch or so more offset, but the effect was
enough that the mud flaps had to be moved out to match - with wider wheels
as well (7x16) the tyres came out nearly level with the wheelarch eyebrows.

Never noticed any problems with the handling though, and it meant that I
could work on the lock stops and get a better turning circle.



--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
0123456789112345678921234567893123456789412345678951234567896123456789712345
1 weebl: What's this? | in recognition of the fun that is weebl and bob
2 bob: it a SigRuler! | check out the weebl and bob archive:
3 weebl: How Handy! | http://www.weebl.jolt.co.uk/archives.php

On or around Sun, 01 Oct 2006 08:36:33 +0100, Austin Shackles
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>On or around Sat, 30 Sep 2006 13:24:44 +0100, "Nige"
><[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
>
>
>>126cm matey, sorry about the delay!!
>
>excellent, and no problem - the project ain't off the ground yet.
>
>seems there's a consensus so far on 126cm or so.

hmmm.

Disco seems to measure about 130cm.

Tranny measures about 150. On the front of the tranny there's a fair amount
of clearance inboard of the wheel, cos it has a fat damper in there. not so
good at the back, although there *is* a gap inboard of the wheel - enough to
take up the difference between a 195 section tyre and a 235 section one,
certainly.

However, about 4" sounds quite a lot of spacing on the wheel. Mind, the
axles seem to cope OK with quite a bit more overhang than "standard" - and
the disco rims are offset quite a long way "inwards", if you look at a steel
set. Fitting them "backwards" (apart from the obvious thing about the
chamfers on the holes would be wrong) would get you almost 4", I reckon.

This is an interesting point. are the disco/raro axles longer (between
wheel mounting flanges) than the 90/110 ones? The wheels seem to have more
offset inwards, yet the measurement between tyres appears to be greater...


I wonder how much more complicated the process becomes (legalistically) if I
start with a rangie chassis and lengthen it? lengthening the chassis looks
easy: I can get bits of channel folded up in the local blacksmiths, and 2
bits of channel, sized to fit accurately over the existing channels, with a
suitable overlap, could make a tidy job of extending the chassis.

--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
"There are three sorts of people in the world - those who can count,
and those who can't" (Anon)

Austin Shackles <[email protected]> uttered summat worrerz
funny about:
> hmmm.
>
> Disco seems to measure about 130cm.
>
> Tranny measures about 150. On the front of the tranny there's a fair
> amount of clearance inboard of the wheel, cos it has a fat damper in
> there. not so good at the back, although there *is* a gap inboard of
> the wheel - enough to take up the difference between a 195 section
> tyre and a 235 section one, certainly.
>
> However, about 4" sounds quite a lot of spacing on the wheel. Mind,
> the axles seem to cope OK with quite a bit more overhang than
> "standard" - and the disco rims are offset quite a long way
> "inwards", if you look at a steel set. Fitting them "backwards"
> (apart from the obvious thing about the chamfers on the holes would
> be wrong) would get you almost 4", I reckon.
>
> This is an interesting point. are the disco/raro axles longer
> (between wheel mounting flanges) than the 90/110 ones? The wheels
> seem to have more offset inwards, yet the measurement between tyres
> appears to be greater...
>
>
> I wonder how much more complicated the process becomes
> (legalistically) if I start with a rangie chassis and lengthen it?
> lengthening the chassis looks easy: I can get bits of channel folded
> up in the local blacksmiths, and 2 bits of channel, sized to fit
> accurately over the existing channels, with a suitable overlap, could
> make a tidy job of extending the chassis.

101 Axles? / Humvee?


Lee D

On or around Sun, 1 Oct 2006 22:18:47 +0100, "Lee_D"
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>Austin Shackles <[email protected]> uttered summat worrerz
>funny about:
>> hmmm.
>>
>> Disco seems to measure about 130cm.
>>
>> Tranny measures about 150. On the front of the tranny there's a fair
>> amount of clearance inboard of the wheel, cos it has a fat damper in
>> there. not so good at the back, although there *is* a gap inboard of
>> the wheel - enough to take up the difference between a 195 section
>> tyre and a 235 section one, certainly.
>>
>> However, about 4" sounds quite a lot of spacing on the wheel. Mind,
>> the axles seem to cope OK with quite a bit more overhang than
>> "standard" - and the disco rims are offset quite a long way
>> "inwards", if you look at a steel set. Fitting them "backwards"
>> (apart from the obvious thing about the chamfers on the holes would
>> be wrong) would get you almost 4", I reckon.
>>
>
>101 Axles? / Humvee?
>

I don't think 101s have a wider track, do they?

I suspect my 130cm is an artifact of tyres, BTW - the disco I measured is on
205s, which are of course 30mm narrower than 235s (nominally) and so 130cm
less 3cm for tyres is close-as-dammit to the 126cm that others reported,
with 235s...

I think the way to go will be to put about 2" more (less) offset on the
wheels (which I've done before on a 110 with no ill-effect) and absorb the
other 2" each side in the bodywork - might require a bit of surgery on the
rear wheel arches, but that's not a huge problem. The front wheel arches
should have enough clearance. The transit has it's wheels right out near
the edge of the bodywork - having the wheels a bit further in won't hurt.

I think the turrets might give trouble, but I see no reason why they can't
be removed and substitute rear-style dampers on the front. In fact, I've no
idea why they made that system with the turrets; simple damper from the axle
to a chassis mount would have worked just as well, and been easier to
maintain and less prone to rot.
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
"Festina Lente" (Hasten slowly) Suetonius (c.70-c.140) Augustus, 25

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 10:05:51 +0100, Austin Shackles
<[email protected]> wrote:

>I don't think 101s have a wider track, do they?

On the same measurement basis I have 128cms but of course the 9:00 by
16s are wider. Also I have evidence that a 101 following a s3 through
trees doesn't always go ;-).

Blasted OS rear oil seal gone again too :-(.

AJH

AJH <[email protected]> uttered summat worrerz funny about:
> On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 10:05:51 +0100, Austin Shackles
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I don't think 101s have a wider track, do they?
>
> On the same measurement basis I have 128cms but of course the 9:00 by
> 16s are wider. Also I have evidence that a 101 following a s3 through
> trees doesn't always go ;-).
>
> Blasted OS rear oil seal gone again too :-(.
>
> AJH

Quick google shows.....

Land-Rover 101 (1975-1978): Forward control 4×4 light truck, 2-seats,
2-doors, soft top (some ambulances and other specialist bodies)
loa 4290mm, width 1830mm, height 2180mm
wheelbase 2560mm (101"),

track 1520mm/1550mm,

grnd clearance 254mm (diffs)
approach 60°, departure 45°
turning radius 7.15m
3.5L petrol V8
transmission LT95, 4-speed manual, 2-speed transfer-case, full-time 4WD,
centre differential, axle differential ratio 5.4:1.
suspension live-axle & leaf/ live-axles & leaf, brakes drum/drum,
(transmission hand-brake)
tyres 9.00×16

Lee D

--
www.lrproject.com

a.f.l. & 101ers Unofficial October 2006
<http://www.lrproject.com/afl__101_owners_unofficial.htm>

"Anti's - Give
them enough rope and they'll be stuck in a ditch with alot of rope ;-) "

On Tue, 3 Oct 2006 11:51:38 +0100, "Lee_D"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Quick google shows.....
>
>track 1520mm/1550mm,

That sounds perfect for austins transit @ 150cm !

Sounds like you need a 101 chassis/axles then Austin!

what is the wheelbase of a transit?

On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 12:31:07 +0100, Tom Woods
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Tue, 3 Oct 2006 11:51:38 +0100, "Lee_D"
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Quick google shows.....
>>
>>track 1520mm/1550mm,
>
>That sounds perfect for austins transit @ 150cm !
>
>Sounds like you need a 101 chassis/axles then Austin!
>
>what is the wheelbase of a transit?

hmm.

101 inches = 2 565mm

a 2002 on SWB transit would appear to be 2664 mm. did they change over
time?

Tom Woods wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Oct 2006 11:51:38 +0100, "Lee_D"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Quick google shows.....
>>
>> track 1520mm/1550mm,
>
> That sounds perfect for austins transit @ 150cm !
>
> Sounds like you need a 101 chassis/axles then Austin!
>
> what is the wheelbase of a transit?

Hmm, aren't 101s leafers? I know of one that's not but I think that took rather
lot of effort. Guess it don't matter if your just dropping a body on it!

--
Don't say it cannot be done, rather what is needed to do it!

If the answer is offensive maybe the question was inappropriate

The fiend of my fiend is my enema!

GbH <[email protected]> uttered summat worrerz funny about:

> Hmm, aren't 101s leafers? I know of one that's not but I think that
> took rather lot of effort. Guess it don't matter if your just
> dropping a body on it!

101's have Parabolics as standard so the ride in my experience is the same
as a coiled Rangie / Disco (I've had / got both)

Also the chassis is a flat ladder arrangement, not a roller coaster ladder
arangement as on the Rangie / Discos so I'd imagine that would actually make
fitting a whole lot simpler.

Lee D