range rover wheel spin

W

Warwick Barnes

Guest

• Nov 29, 2004

• #1

got this problem with a p38 range rover, gets onto mud and both,
soetimes one front wheel spins until it digs itself in, never seen a RR
do this before, any ideas?
ABS? sensors?
ETC ? poss none or back wheels only?
viscous coupling?
ecu?
other?

 

S

SimonJ

Guest

• Nov 29, 2004

• #2

"Warwick Barnes" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> got this problem with a p38 range rover, gets onto mud and both,
> soetimes one front wheel spins until it digs itself in, never seen a RR
> do this before, any ideas?
> ABS? sensors?
> ETC ? poss none or back wheels only?
> viscous coupling?
> ecu?
> other?

Nut behind the wheel?

 

R

Richard Brookman

Guest

• Nov 30, 2004

• #3

So Warwick Barnes was, like

> got this problem with a p38 range rover, gets onto mud and both,
> soetimes one front wheel spins until it digs itself in, never seen a
> RR do this before, any ideas?
> ABS? sensors?
> ETC ? poss none or back wheels only?
> viscous coupling?
> ecu?
> other?

Earlier models only had TC on the rear axle, hence front wheelspin, quite
normal. Try being gentler on the throttle and use more momentum. Works for
me.

--

Rich

Pas d'elle yeux Rhone que nous

 

W

Warwick Barnes

Guest

• Dec 1, 2004

• #4

The message <[email protected]>
from "Richard Brookman" <[email protected]> contains these words:

> So Warwick Barnes was, like

> > got this problem with a p38 range rover, gets onto mud and both,
> > soetimes one front wheel spins until it digs itself in, never seen a
> > RR do this before, any ideas?
> > ABS? sensors?
> > ETC ? poss none or back wheels only?
> > viscous coupling?
> > ecu?
> > other?

> Earlier models only had TC on the rear axle, hence front wheelspin, quite
> normal. Try being gentler on the throttle and use more momentum.
> Works for
> me.
Yeaar momentum got the vehicle onto the grass, getting off from parked
was the problem.
Very early models had no ETC and did not suffer like this one does, and
until "99 MY" models
rear wheel ETC was an optional extra after which it was fitted to all 4
wheels, at least that's what the workshop manual says. Also my Classic
doesn't do this, and the owner of the P38 is well used to driving over
muddy grass etc. Other 4x4 vehicles did not have a problem driving off
from here at the same time.
Put it another way; Classic Range Rovers were by far the best off road
in the mud vehicles I have ever seen, this P38 has to rate as the worst!
if this is the best generation 2 RRs can manage then definately count me
out! My old, pre my RR, 3.5 V8 rear wheel drive Rover SD1 towing a horse
box containg 3/4 ton of shire horse used to pull better on muddy
slippery grass!

 

R

Richard Brookman

Guest

• Dec 1, 2004

• #5

So Warwick Barnes was, like

> Put it another way; Classic Range Rovers were by far the best off road
> in the mud vehicles I have ever seen, this P38 has to rate as the
> worst! if this is the best generation 2 RRs can manage then
> definately count me out!

Have to agree to disagree, then. Apart from a longer rear overhang, my P38
is every bit as good as my old RRC on all kinds of terrain - wet grass, mud,
shale, rocks, ditches - if not better. Excellent suspension and very little
wheelspin at any time. All on BFG ATs. If your mate's car is worse than a
RRC in those conditions, there's summat wrong. Either with him or the car.
My money's on the nut that holds the wheel.

--

Rich

Pas d'elle yeux Rhone que nous

 

D

Dave Reynolds

Guest

• Dec 3, 2004

• #6

"Richard Brookman" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> So Warwick Barnes was, like
>
> > Put it another way; Classic Range Rovers were by far the best off road
> > in the mud vehicles I have ever seen, this P38 has to rate as the
> > worst! if this is the best generation 2 RRs can manage then
> > definately count me out!
>
> Have to agree to disagree, then. Apart from a longer rear overhang, my P38
> is every bit as good as my old RRC on all kinds of terrain - wet grass, mud,
> shale, rocks, ditches - if not better. Excellent suspension and very little
> wheelspin at any time. All on BFG ATs. If your mate's car is worse than a
> RRC in those conditions, there's summat wrong. Either with him or the car.
> My money's on the nut that holds the wheel.

Well either way you're buggered Rich. Can't you remember getting stuck
in yours while marshalling that comp? And Chris pulling you out with
his 300 quid Dai****su?
So what's it to be vehicle or nut??

Dave (awaiting verbal slappage!)

 

R

Richard Brookman

Guest

• Dec 4, 2004

• #7

So Dave Reynolds was, like

> Well either way you're buggered Rich. Can't you remember getting stuck
> in yours while marshalling that comp? And Chris pulling you out with
> his 300 quid Dai****su?
> So what's it to be vehicle or nut??
>
> Dave (awaiting verbal slappage!)

Yeah but no but yeah but, yer a slag anyway, right?

The Rangie was on almost-bald Pirelli Zeros (full road pattern, what there
was of it) at the time. That's when I decided to get the BFGs. AND we were
in a ditch with about two foot of chocolate mousse. AND Chris's Daiwhatsit
was on mud tyres and flat dry ground. And yes we were stuck, OK, fair
enough. But that's the only time - were you there when we took it round the
sections at Wood Park setting out for the Sly Fox? It was pretty good
there, I recall. To go back to the topic, I doubt if the RRC would have
been any better, or even your 90 on similar tyres. <ducks and runs>

--

Rich

Pas d'elle yeux Rhone que nous

 

D

Dave Reynolds

Guest

• Dec 5, 2004

• #8

"Richard Brookman" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> So Dave Reynolds was, like
>
> > Well either way you're buggered Rich. Can't you remember getting stuck
> > in yours while marshalling that comp? And Chris pulling you out with
> > his 300 quid Dai****su?
> > So what's it to be vehicle or nut??
> >
> > Dave (awaiting verbal slappage!)
>
> Yeah but no but yeah but, yer a slag anyway, right?
>
> The Rangie was on almost-bald Pirelli Zeros (full road pattern, what there
> was of it) at the time. That's when I decided to get the BFGs. AND we were
> in a ditch with about two foot of chocolate mousse. AND Chris's Daiwhatsit
> was on mud tyres and flat dry ground. And yes we were stuck, OK, fair
> enough. But that's the only time - were you there when we took it round the
> sections at Wood Park setting out for the Sly Fox? It was pretty good
> there, I recall. To go back to the topic, I doubt if the RRC would have
> been any better, or even your 90 on similar tyres. <ducks and runs>

I see your point, and respectfully disagree with it. i'd forgotten she
was on road tyres then, but I think that the 90 is still going to be
better on the same tyres simply because of the weight difference. Mind
you, you're right in the fact that in areas of poor traction it doesnt
matter what vehicle you;re in you're always going to be limited by the
tyres you have.

So, we've decided that your RR isn't at fault, so that only leaves one
option for failing then?..........(pause for penny to drop)

Anyway, we'll finish this "conversation" over a pint or six on
Saturday.

Dave

P.S. fancy a greenlaning trip up to Llandeilo in the Xmas break. I've
been doing some research.

 

R

Richard Brookman

Guest

• Dec 5, 2004

• #9

So Dave Reynolds was, like

> "Richard Brookman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
>> So Dave Reynolds was, like
>>
>>> Well either way you're buggered Rich. Can't you remember getting
>>> stuck in yours while marshalling that comp? And Chris pulling you
>>> out with his 300 quid Dai****su?
>>> So what's it to be vehicle or nut??
>>>
>>> Dave (awaiting verbal slappage!)
>>
>> Yeah but no but yeah but, yer a slag anyway, right?
>>
>> The Rangie was on almost-bald Pirelli Zeros (full road pattern, what
>> there was of it) at the time. That's when I decided to get the
>> BFGs. AND we were in a ditch with about two foot of chocolate
>> mousse. AND Chris's Daiwhatsit was on mud tyres and flat dry
>> ground. And yes we were stuck, OK, fair enough. But that's the
>> only time - were you there when we took it round the sections at
>> Wood Park setting out for the Sly Fox? It was pretty good there, I
>> recall. To go back to the topic, I doubt if the RRC would have been
>> any better, or even your 90 on similar tyres. <ducks and runs>
>
> I see your point, and respectfully disagree with it. i'd forgotten she
> was on road tyres then, but I think that the 90 is still going to be
> better on the same tyres simply because of the weight difference.

OK, you can have that one.

> Mind
> you, you're right in the fact that in areas of poor traction it doesnt
> matter what vehicle you;re in you're always going to be limited by the
> tyres you have.
>
> So, we've decided that your RR isn't at fault, so that only leaves one
> option for failing then?..........(pause for penny to drop)

Ker-ching.

> Anyway, we'll finish this "conversation" over a pint or six on
> Saturday.

Right you are. First one there lines 'em up.
>
> Dave
>
> P.S. fancy a greenlaning trip up to Llandeilo in the Xmas break. I've
> been doing some research.

If not otherwise occupied (family issues), yes.



--

Rich

Pas d'elle yeux Rhone que nous