Landrover engine/box compatibility

This site contains affiliate links for which LandyZone may be compensated if you make a purchase.
T

TVS

Guest
I'm sure there must be a definitive guide to landrover engine and gearbox
compatibility somewhere on the internet, but I bloody well can't find it!

As far as I know (and have guessed). the LT77 and LT85 (basicly the same but
stronger?) have the same bolt paten as the series (4 cylinder) gearboxes and
will bolt straight onto the back of 2.25 2.5 2.5TD and 200Tdi. Where as the
R380 will only bolt onto the 300Tdi?? I'm ignoring V8s and TD5s etc!

I'm asking this as I'd very much like to bolt a 300Tdi from a Disco onto a
LT77 or LT85...

Thanks! Toby


 
Hi Toby,

I am sure that an R380 will go onto a 2.5tdi

A


"TVS" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I'm sure there must be a definitive guide to landrover engine and gearbox
> compatibility somewhere on the internet, but I bloody well can't find it!
>
> As far as I know (and have guessed). the LT77 and LT85 (basicly the same
> but
> stronger?) have the same bolt paten as the series (4 cylinder) gearboxes
> and
> will bolt straight onto the back of 2.25 2.5 2.5TD and 200Tdi. Where as
> the
> R380 will only bolt onto the 300Tdi?? I'm ignoring V8s and TD5s etc!
>
> I'm asking this as I'd very much like to bolt a 300Tdi from a Disco onto a
> LT77 or LT85...
>
> Thanks! Toby
>
>


 
On Sun, 2 Jan 2005 17:51:53 -0000, "TVS" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>I'm sure there must be a definitive guide to landrover engine and gearbox
>compatibility somewhere on the internet, but I bloody well can't find it!
>
>As far as I know (and have guessed). the LT77 and LT85 (basicly the same but
>stronger?) have the same bolt paten as the series (4 cylinder) gearboxes and
>will bolt straight onto the back of 2.25 2.5 2.5TD and 200Tdi. Where as the
>R380 will only bolt onto the 300Tdi?? I'm ignoring V8s and TD5s etc!
>
>I'm asking this as I'd very much like to bolt a 300Tdi from a Disco onto a
>LT77 or LT85...
>
>Thanks! Toby

In the summer I helped my mate to put a 5 speed gearbox from a 90
(2.5TD) onto a 2.25 petrol engine. So they definately fot together!

Works our about the same price as getting an overdrive for a standard
series box (excluding any other costs such as props), and works a lot
nicer.

 
>>
>>As far as I know (and have guessed). the LT77 and LT85 (basicly the same but
>>stronger?) have the same bolt paten as the series (4 cylinder) gearboxes and
>>will bolt straight onto the back of 2.25 2.5 2.5TD and 200Tdi. Where as the
>>R380 will only bolt onto the 300Tdi?? I'm ignoring V8s and TD5s etc!
>>
>>I'm asking this as I'd very much like to bolt a 300Tdi from a Disco onto a
>>LT77 or LT85...
>>
>>Thanks! Toby
>
>In the summer I helped my mate to put a 5 speed gearbox from a 90
>(2.5TD) onto a 2.25 petrol engine. So they definately fot together!
>
>Works our about the same price as getting an overdrive for a standard
>series box (excluding any other costs such as props), and works a lot
>nicer.

Apart from the problems associated with running a Series front axle on
a permanant 4wd xfer box.

Alex
 
On Mon, 03 Jan 2005 00:25:04 GMT, Alex <[email protected]>
wrote:

>>>
>>>As far as I know (and have guessed). the LT77 and LT85 (basicly the same but
>>>stronger?) have the same bolt paten as the series (4 cylinder) gearboxes and
>>>will bolt straight onto the back of 2.25 2.5 2.5TD and 200Tdi. Where as the
>>>R380 will only bolt onto the 300Tdi?? I'm ignoring V8s and TD5s etc!
>>>
>>>I'm asking this as I'd very much like to bolt a 300Tdi from a Disco onto a
>>>LT77 or LT85...
>>>
>>>Thanks! Toby
>>
>>In the summer I helped my mate to put a 5 speed gearbox from a 90
>>(2.5TD) onto a 2.25 petrol engine. So they definately fot together!
>>
>>Works our about the same price as getting an overdrive for a standard
>>series box (excluding any other costs such as props), and works a lot
>>nicer.
>
>Apart from the problems associated with running a Series front axle on
>a permanant 4wd xfer box.

I was excluding those costs too :)
Is it possible to make a 90 box into selectable 4x4?

 

"Alex" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>>>
>
> Apart from the problems associated with running a Series front axle on
> a permanant 4wd xfer box.
>
Alex, there's virtually no problem unless you select diff lock. I've seen
and driven quite a few, including 109V8 that have had this done (or in the
case of the V8, a normal axle (and rr diff) fitted to replace the worn-out
and very expensive special cv shafts).
You "may" experience a slight feedback through the steering at low
speed/full lock, but lets face it, if you're going slow enough to be on full
lock in the first place then it ain't no problem, is it?
Badger.
B.H.Engineering,
Rover V8 engine specialists.
www.bhengineering.co.uk
www.roverv8engines.com


 
"Alex" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> >>
> >>As far as I know (and have guessed). the LT77 and LT85 (basicly the same
but
> >>stronger?) have the same bolt paten as the series (4 cylinder) gearboxes
and
> >>will bolt straight onto the back of 2.25 2.5 2.5TD and 200Tdi. Where as
the
> >>R380 will only bolt onto the 300Tdi?? I'm ignoring V8s and TD5s etc!
> >>
> >>I'm asking this as I'd very much like to bolt a 300Tdi from a Disco onto
a
> >>LT77 or LT85...
> >>
> >>Thanks! Toby
> >
> >In the summer I helped my mate to put a 5 speed gearbox from a 90
> >(2.5TD) onto a 2.25 petrol engine. So they definately fot together!
> >
> >Works our about the same price as getting an overdrive for a standard
> >series box (excluding any other costs such as props), and works a lot
> >nicer.
>
> Apart from the problems associated with running a Series front axle on
> a permanant 4wd xfer box.
>
> Alex

What problems would those be then?

Steve


 
>> >In the summer I helped my mate to put a 5 speed gearbox from a 90
>> >(2.5TD) onto a 2.25 petrol engine. So they definately fot together!
>> >
>> >Works our about the same price as getting an overdrive for a standard
>> >series box (excluding any other costs such as props), and works a lot
>> >nicer.
>>
>> Apart from the problems associated with running a Series front axle on
>> a permanant 4wd xfer box.
>>
>
>What problems would those be then?
>

You can experience premature wear of the UJ's in the front axle. That
said, as somebody else has pointed out, it could be many thousands of
miles before this happens, and the UJ's are fairly cheap to replace
anyway. Depends if you're willing to spend out on the cost and trouble
of finding a Stage1 109V8 front axle, or fitting RR axles in the first
place.

Up to you, but you should be aware of the potential problem before you
make a decision. Personally I'd be quite happy to do it, and prepared
to put up with the occasional replacement of the UJ's

Alex
 
On Mon, 03 Jan 2005 12:22:54 GMT, Alex <[email protected]>
wrote:

>You can experience premature wear of the UJ's in the front axle. That
>said, as somebody else has pointed out, it could be many thousands of
>miles before this happens, and the UJ's are fairly cheap to replace
>anyway. Depends if you're willing to spend out on the cost and trouble
>of finding a Stage1 109V8 front axle, or fitting RR axles in the first
>place.

Does the 101 front axle have CV's in it?
 

"Tom Woods" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Mon, 03 Jan 2005 00:25:04 GMT, Alex <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>>>
>>>>As far as I know (and have guessed). the LT77 and LT85 (basicly the same
>>>>but
>>>>stronger?) have the same bolt paten as the series (4 cylinder) gearboxes
>>>>and
>>>>will bolt straight onto the back of 2.25 2.5 2.5TD and 200Tdi. Where as
>>>>the
>>>>R380 will only bolt onto the 300Tdi?? I'm ignoring V8s and TD5s etc!
>>>>
>>>>I'm asking this as I'd very much like to bolt a 300Tdi from a Disco onto
>>>>a
>>>>LT77 or LT85...
>>>>
>>>>Thanks! Toby
>>>
>>>In the summer I helped my mate to put a 5 speed gearbox from a 90
>>>(2.5TD) onto a 2.25 petrol engine. So they definately fot together!
>>>
>>>Works our about the same price as getting an overdrive for a standard
>>>series box (excluding any other costs such as props), and works a lot
>>>nicer.
>>
>>Apart from the problems associated with running a Series front axle on
>>a permanant 4wd xfer box.
>
> I was excluding those costs too :)
> Is it possible to make a 90 box into selectable 4x4?
>
yes, use the early 110 4 cylinder LT230 with selectable 2/4wd. VERY rare.
Badger.


 
"Tom Woods" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Mon, 03 Jan 2005 12:22:54 GMT, Alex <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>You can experience premature wear of the UJ's in the front axle. That
>>said, as somebody else has pointed out, it could be many thousands of
>>miles before this happens, and the UJ's are fairly cheap to replace
>>anyway. Depends if you're willing to spend out on the cost and trouble
>>of finding a Stage1 109V8 front axle, or fitting RR axles in the first
>>place.
>
> Does the 101 front axle have CV's in it?

Yes... I think they were borrowed from a B52 parts bin though and unlikey to
fit a series unless you use them as rims and bung the tyres on them too ;-)

Lee D


 
"Badger" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

>> I was excluding those costs too :)
>> Is it possible to make a 90 box into selectable 4x4?
>>
> yes, use the early 110 4 cylinder LT230 with selectable 2/4wd. VERY rare.
> Badger.

Or bung on some FWH's... not ideal but then hey!

Lee D


 
>>What problems would those be then?
>
> You can experience premature wear of the UJ's in the front axle. That
> said, as somebody else has pointed out, it could be many thousands of
> miles before this happens, and the UJ's are fairly cheap to replace
> anyway. Depends if you're willing to spend out on the cost and trouble
> of finding a Stage1 109V8 front axle, or fitting RR axles in the first
> place.
>
> Up to you, but you should be aware of the potential problem before you
> make a decision. Personally I'd be quite happy to do it, and prepared
> to put up with the occasional replacement of the UJ's

The real reason for using CV joints with permananent four wheel drive
has nothing directly to do with wear.

Unlike constant velocity(CV) joints, UJs do not exhibit an output
velocity that directly follows in the input. Whilst pairs of UJs can be
installed in a manner that largely overcomes this effect (as on a front
or rear propshaft) the single UJ used in a front hub can not. Such lack
of constant velocity was considered to be inappropriate for permanant
on-road use hence the use of CV joints.

Many will 'happily' live with a front end UJ installation and the UJ
life will in most circumstances not disappoint. In a vehicle such as the
Land Rover the additional vibration generated is usually well concealed
amongst the others! In part-time four wheel drive or off-road use it's
not an issue.



 
On Mon, 03 Jan 2005 16:00:05 +0000, Tom Woods wrote:

> Does the 101 front axle have CV's in it?

Well how do the wheels steer if there aren't any CVs? I guess the
debate then becomes are the CVs part of the hub or the axle...

--
Cheers [email protected]
Dave. pam is missing e-mail



 
On Mon, 03 Jan 2005 16:18:26 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Liquorice"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Mon, 03 Jan 2005 16:00:05 +0000, Tom Woods wrote:
>
>> Does the 101 front axle have CV's in it?
>
>Well how do the wheels steer if there aren't any CVs? I guess the
>debate then becomes are the CVs part of the hub or the axle...

I meant CV's as opposed to UJ's
 
>>>Does the 101 front axle have CV's in it?
>>
>>Well how do the wheels steer if there aren't any CVs? I guess the
>>debate then becomes are the CVs part of the hub or the axle...
>
>
> I meant CV's as opposed to UJ's

Yes, it has CVs. Part of shaft assemblies 593838 and 593839.


 
> >>>>As far as I know (and have guessed). the LT77 and LT85 (basicly the
same
> >>>>but
> >>>>stronger?) have the same bolt paten as the series (4 cylinder)
gearboxes
> >>>>and
> >>>>will bolt straight onto the back of 2.25 2.5 2.5TD and 200Tdi. Where
as
> >>>>the
> >>>>R380 will only bolt onto the 300Tdi?? I'm ignoring V8s and TD5s etc!
> >>>>
> >>>>I'm asking this as I'd very much like to bolt a 300Tdi from a Disco
onto
> >>>>a
> >>>>LT77 or LT85...
> >>>>
> >>>>Thanks! Toby
> >>>
> >>>In the summer I helped my mate to put a 5 speed gearbox from a 90
> >>>(2.5TD) onto a 2.25 petrol engine. So they definately fot together!
> >>>
> >>>Works our about the same price as getting an overdrive for a standard
> >>>series box (excluding any other costs such as props), and works a lot
> >>>nicer.
> >>
> >>Apart from the problems associated with running a Series front axle on
> >>a permanant 4wd xfer box.
> >
> > I was excluding those costs too :)
> > Is it possible to make a 90 box into selectable 4x4?
> >
> yes, use the early 110 4 cylinder LT230 with selectable 2/4wd. VERY rare.
> Badger.


Whats the chances of finding one of these nowadays? Wating to see if one
turns up on ebay is just a bit too hit and miss if I where to be planing on
using one in a project!
Thanks! Toby


 

>The real reason for using CV joints with permananent four wheel drive
>has nothing directly to do with wear.
>
>Unlike constant velocity(CV) joints, UJs do not exhibit an output
>velocity that directly follows in the input. Whilst pairs of UJs can be
>installed in a manner that largely overcomes this effect (as on a front
>or rear propshaft) the single UJ used in a front hub can not. Such lack
>of constant velocity was considered to be inappropriate for permanant
>on-road use hence the use of CV joints.
>

Something to do with non-constant output velocity of the halfshaft
fighting the somewhat more constant velocity of the roadwheel and thus
putting higher stress levels on the UJ, which would result in
premature wear... oh sorry I appear to have shot your original
statement down in flames.....

Alex
 
> >The real reason for using CV joints with permananent four wheel drive
> >has nothing directly to do with wear.
> >
> >Unlike constant velocity(CV) joints, UJs do not exhibit an output
> >velocity that directly follows in the input. Whilst pairs of UJs can be
> >installed in a manner that largely overcomes this effect (as on a front
> >or rear propshaft) the single UJ used in a front hub can not. Such lack
> >of constant velocity was considered to be inappropriate for permanant
> >on-road use hence the use of CV joints.
> >
>
> Something to do with non-constant output velocity of the halfshaft
> fighting the somewhat more constant velocity of the roadwheel and thus
> putting higher stress levels on the UJ, which would result in
> premature wear... oh sorry I appear to have shot your original
> statement down in flames.....

I wouldn't say flames... The front and centre diffs alow the front UJs to
run at a diferent speed to each other and the rear prop shaft. So the slight
variation in half shaft speed, which will be nessesary to result in a
constant roar wheel speed, will be alowed for when the front wheels are
turned to steer around a bend. At full lock, when the variation in velocity
will be at its greatest, the sensation could be described as judder though
the steering wheel. This rapid change of acceleration will increase wear on
the UJs but I sertainly woudln't sujest it would cause noticiably premature
wear under normal driving conditions.
Toby


 
Should I retain the original series front axle(with UJ's), would front
free-wheel-hubs do any good ? And what about the ratio, knowing the
LT230 differs from the Series X-box ?

Hertriono Kartowisastro


TVS wrote:
> > >The real reason for using CV joints with permananent four wheel
drive
> > >has nothing directly to do with wear.
> > >
> > >Unlike constant velocity(CV) joints, UJs do not exhibit an output
> > >velocity that directly follows in the input. Whilst pairs of UJs
can be
> > >installed in a manner that largely overcomes this effect (as on a
front
> > >or rear propshaft) the single UJ used in a front hub can not. Such
lack
> > >of constant velocity was considered to be inappropriate for
permanant
> > >on-road use hence the use of CV joints.
> > >
> >
> > Something to do with non-constant output velocity of the halfshaft
> > fighting the somewhat more constant velocity of the roadwheel and
thus
> > putting higher stress levels on the UJ, which would result in
> > premature wear... oh sorry I appear to have shot your original
> > statement down in flames.....
>
> I wouldn't say flames... The front and centre diffs alow the front
UJs to
> run at a diferent speed to each other and the rear prop shaft. So the
slight
> variation in half shaft speed, which will be nessesary to result in a
> constant roar wheel speed, will be alowed for when the front wheels
are
> turned to steer around a bend. At full lock, when the variation in
velocity
> will be at its greatest, the sensation could be described as judder
though
> the steering wheel. This rapid change of acceleration will increase
wear on
> the UJs but I sertainly woudln't sujest it would cause noticiably
premature
> wear under normal driving conditions.
> Toby

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

dag019
A question of gearboxes
Replies
16
Views
2K
Skolmate
Skolmate
ChrisBduck
3.6L Land rover 90
Replies
2
Views
2K
ChrisBduck
ChrisBduck
M
Pump to the steering box pipe
Replies
4
Views
1K
mma59
M
G
Land Rover 300tdi clutch not disengaging after engine out
Replies
8
Views
7K
miktdish
miktdish
M
Discovery1 lt230 in place of LT230R from a 12D?
Replies
3
Views
1K
MrF
M
Back
Top