RE: Land Rover Series III: PH Carpool
Discussion
I've had two Series IIIs - an 88 full tilt ex-military and a 109 hard top. Both were slow, uncomfortable, thirsty, rusty hunks but I absolutely loved them. I'll admit that the 2.25 engine is certainly the weak link but having LPG'd the 109, it at least made it reasonable to run. There's nothing quite like sitting a couple of inches from the flat wind screen, your elbows banging against the bare door frames, the smell of ep90 gear oil and the comically wide throw of the gear stick! If I still had one now, I'd certainly fit an overdrive (rare as rocking horse poo for an original Fairey one), get some parabolic springs and fit radial tyres. Canvas tops are also better as condensation used to freeze on the inside of my hard top in winter. After the heater warmed up - usually about an hour after starting her up - it used to melt and drop down your neck. I still remember summer days with the roof and frame off, wind and flies in your hair and just relishing the warmth and the noise from the cross-ply tyres.
Top car pool. I've got a 110 1986 GS 12v, its slow, happiest at 50ish though I once got it +70 and it scared me to death, ‘wobbles’ like a drunk duck at that speed, does 23.5mpg, costs just under £2k all in for the year or 55p per mile. Yes it’s a terrible road vehicle (don’t think it quite qualifies as a car), there’s seemingly a new problem every time I use it and I love it! Minor point, canvas top is best! Always puts a smile on my face when I drive it
sum pics, top 2 today.
sum pics, top 2 today.with fuel consumption like that there is definitely something wrong - carb, fuel leak etc - should get 20mpg from 2.25 really.
I would ditch the prehistoric LR motor and put a chevy 6.3 in it - like mine - see below
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n12EXemK4uM
I would ditch the prehistoric LR motor and put a chevy 6.3 in it - like mine - see below
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n12EXemK4uM
Krikkit said:
The Danimal said:
Lovely thing. Don't repaint him... he looks ace like that! Keith Richards would look rubbish with a face lift.
Indeed - you've got a lovely patina on there already, what a real Landy should have!Since the fuel economy is dire in any csae, why not bung a V8 in and enjoy the noise/extra poke?
That £6 a pair for wing mirrors has just hit a raw nerve - on of our wagons clipped a parked Jag last month. £700 insurance bill.
BLUETHUNDER said:
I hate to be the bearer of bad news. But that is not an FFR. All FFR,s were 24 volt. And needed to be 24 volt as the whole charging system for the clansman radios were 24 volt. The biggest clue apart from double batterys,armoured cable and radio shunt boxes,was the huge alternator fitted under the bonnet which is three times the size of an ordianary alternator.
I have owned a load of ex-military LR,s over the years LtWt,s 109, 101, 90 and 110 Defender. Th e CL in the spec for this one stands for "civilian" spec. As thats what it is,as a number of civvy spec LR,s were procured for the m.o.d for light duties. Here is a pic of my current 24 volt FFR LtWt......
Bob here from the article - thanks for the kind words everyone!I have owned a load of ex-military LR,s over the years LtWt,s 109, 101, 90 and 110 Defender. Th e CL in the spec for this one stands for "civilian" spec. As thats what it is,as a number of civvy spec LR,s were procured for the m.o.d for light duties. Here is a pic of my current 24 volt FFR LtWt......
I quite often get people telling me 'there's no way that's an FFR' - hence why I don't take it to shows.
What the pictures don't show is the original contract build plate which is stamped 'FFR', with an exact matching chasis number to the rest of the truck.
It also doesn't show the aerial mast and stub on the driver's side which is on its original back body tub (complete with tyre pressure stenciling hidden under the paint).
The truck wouldn't need 24v for a battery powered clansman, which has a standby life of a few days.
The theory most commonly floated by a few military experts is that Leonard was probably ordered as a simple 'Taxi', hence the four bench seats in the back.
It IS an 'odd' vehicle, and one that has had a lot of people scratching their heads upon close examination.
I just get on and drive the thing
Just read through the rest of this thread, lovely to see so much interest and fellow Landy owners!
As regards the engine situation/transplants/poor MPG etc.
Much as I love V8s, and have a lot of experience with the Rover V8, it's not a conversion I'd attempt on Leonard.
The bulkhead has to be trimmed, new engine mounts welded onto the chassis, gearbox adaptors etc. and perhaps most importantly I doubt I'd keep it in gearboxes and half-shafts.
Converting to the later, stronger LT77/LT85/R380 boxes is possible, but again it means more cutting and welding.
One of the reasons the 2.25 petrols are so inefficient is because they were designed to accpet very low grade fuel, and hence run a very low compression ratio.
Now, there are still a few things to check (speedo accuracy etc.), but I rebuilt the carburettor, set the mixture with a gas analyzer and set the ignition to workshop manual specs along with new plugs, leads etc. and still 15MPG is about the average.
Tdi conversions are rife, but I'm not a fan of Diesels and it's not a cheap conversion to do properly.
Originality and character are also very important to me, hence come July I'll be transplanting a mildly warmed over 2.5 Petrol along with an LPG kit.
Coupled to the Overdrive I'm hoping to fit this weekend, an electric fan conversion and possibly some FWH it should make a hell of a difference.
Funds allowing, I'd also like to put parabolic springs on at some point, although it's a costly upgrade.
For now, oiling the heck out of the original springs will have to suffice!
Bottom line though, is that if you're looking for something fast and economical, a Series Land Rover is not the place to look.
Again, thanks for all the kind comments. I'm now very inclined not to paint Leonard, and just to leave him as is. Overhwelmingly, people seem to love the patina of the bodywork - so who am I to argue?
As regards the engine situation/transplants/poor MPG etc.
Much as I love V8s, and have a lot of experience with the Rover V8, it's not a conversion I'd attempt on Leonard.
The bulkhead has to be trimmed, new engine mounts welded onto the chassis, gearbox adaptors etc. and perhaps most importantly I doubt I'd keep it in gearboxes and half-shafts.
Converting to the later, stronger LT77/LT85/R380 boxes is possible, but again it means more cutting and welding.
One of the reasons the 2.25 petrols are so inefficient is because they were designed to accpet very low grade fuel, and hence run a very low compression ratio.
Now, there are still a few things to check (speedo accuracy etc.), but I rebuilt the carburettor, set the mixture with a gas analyzer and set the ignition to workshop manual specs along with new plugs, leads etc. and still 15MPG is about the average.
Tdi conversions are rife, but I'm not a fan of Diesels and it's not a cheap conversion to do properly.
Originality and character are also very important to me, hence come July I'll be transplanting a mildly warmed over 2.5 Petrol along with an LPG kit.
Coupled to the Overdrive I'm hoping to fit this weekend, an electric fan conversion and possibly some FWH it should make a hell of a difference.
Funds allowing, I'd also like to put parabolic springs on at some point, although it's a costly upgrade.
For now, oiling the heck out of the original springs will have to suffice!
Bottom line though, is that if you're looking for something fast and economical, a Series Land Rover is not the place to look.
Again, thanks for all the kind comments. I'm now very inclined not to paint Leonard, and just to leave him as is. Overhwelmingly, people seem to love the patina of the bodywork - so who am I to argue?
carmadgaz said:
Gotta love a Landie
Currently trundling around in 'Tilly'
200TDi so goes better than it looks . Going to give the roof a paint at somepoint as it looks to of been done with house paint but I like it looking aged, yours OP looks fantastic with the lived in look, don't change it 
yer camouflage lacks adequate distribution.Currently trundling around in 'Tilly'
200TDi so goes better than it looks
. Going to give the roof a paint at somepoint as it looks to of been done with house paint but I like it looking aged, yours OP looks fantastic with the lived in look, don't change it A V8 should be a fairly easy transplant tbh. The stock gearbox will be fine as long as you don't abuse it too much.
If the ride is bad it'll be because the springs are rusted solid. There are things you can do to improve them, but to be honest you'd just be better off replacing them with some parabolic a and some new shocks. It should then ride almost as well as a coil sprung 110.
Similar story with the steering, it really shouldn't be that heavy. If it is then it would sound like worn or seized box and links.
If the ride is bad it'll be because the springs are rusted solid. There are things you can do to improve them, but to be honest you'd just be better off replacing them with some parabolic a and some new shocks. It should then ride almost as well as a coil sprung 110.
Similar story with the steering, it really shouldn't be that heavy. If it is then it would sound like worn or seized box and links.
If you think the 2.25 petrol is bad in a series they fitted them to early 90's as well, so little power (I think they were rated at 74bhp at the end) and mine only did 15mpg, it now has a diesel in it, still only does 20 to 22 mpg, a conversion that is becoming more popular for Series LR is to use any of the newer LR diesels but with turbos removed, you only end up with 70 or 80 bhp but as its a much newer engine design you get better fuel economy and great reliability, But personally if its not doing many miles that originality is a good thing, find a turner high compression head and fit it to a good 5 bearing 2.25 and its not actually terrible, in a swb series.
bencollins said:
yer camouflage lacks adequate distribution.
It's alright I brought some more along to even it out
dutchgray said:
A conversion that is becoming more popular for Series LR is to use any of the newer LR diesels but with turbos removed, you only end up with 70 or 80 bhp but as its a much newer engine design you get better fuel economy and great reliability, But personally if its not doing many miles that originality is a good thing, find a turner high compression head and fit it to a good 5 bearing 2.25 and its not actually terrible, in a swb series.
It's not that far removed tech wise until the 300TDis. The 2.25 petrol in mine ran like a sowing machine but was hideously thirsty so it is now running around with a 200TDi with a 300TDi Turbo (due to various packaging it's easier that way). Truck will now do a checked 26mpg and will continue to run off the end of the 75mph speedo (where allowed 
)... Would like an O/D though 
Many have reported north or 30mpg with 200TDi and O/D (It's lighter than the equivalent Disco so I'm inclined to believe it)
300bhp/ton said:
Personally can't see the point in fitting a TDI minus turbo. Performance and economy will be poor and as the TDI is based on the same 2.25 block you aren't really gaining in technology either.
If you use the TD5 you gain a lot in technology plus most of the issues with these have been solved, the TDI engines have direct injection which is a big difference, economy is better than any period LR diesel and the performance is a bit better, the newer diesel engines are a lot more reliable, better at starting in the cold and with the turbo removed are so under stressed they are going to be reliable, the point is you can bolt it on to the original series drive train with out having to upgrade it all and it wont break all the time, the same goes for the brakes, they are still rubbish but you can keep them, something that is not wise if you have a lot more power, this actually makes the conversion reasonable cheap and IMO is far better than all the dodgy series body on coils sprung chassis you see about. dutchgray said:
If you use the TD5 you gain a lot in technology plus most of the issues with these have been solved, the TDI engines have direct injection which is a big difference, economy is better than any period LR diesel and the performance is a bit better, the newer diesel engines are a lot more reliable, better at starting in the cold and with the turbo removed are so under stressed they are going to be reliable, the point is you can bolt it on to the original series drive train with out having to upgrade it all and it wont break all the time, the same goes for the brakes, they are still rubbish but you can keep them, something that is not wise if you have a lot more power, this actually makes the conversion reasonable cheap and IMO is far better than all the dodgy series body on coils sprung chassis you see about.
A 200TDi will bolt in to the existing mounts / gearbox with very little work (tap a few holes IIRC), brakes are standard 109 items and it's not stressed (The V8's run the same transmission setup with no problem). You get into TD5s and you start adding complications to a simple vehicle - may as well buy a Defender. Newer diesels are not necessarily more reliable either.dutchgray said:
If you use the TD5 you gain a lot in technology plus most of the issues with these have been solved
The Td5 is a very good engine, but a lot more work to fit into a Series. I've also never heard of anyone running a TD5 without a turbo.dutchgray said:
the TDI engines have direct injection which is a big difference, economy is better than any period LR diesel and the performance is a bit better
The Tdi engines are great - period. But despite direct injection they are still very old tech using what is really the 2.25 block and crank.People do put these sans turbo into Series motors, for some European countries I see the sense as they can't convert to turbo without huge hassle. In the UK though all you end up with is a low CR under performing lump that'll have cost you double what a 2.5NAD would have cost for almost no gains.
dutchgray said:
the newer diesel engines are a lot more reliable, better at starting in the cold and with the turbo removed are so under stressed they are going to be reliable, the point is you can bolt it on to the original series drive train with out having to upgrade it all and it wont break all the time, the same goes for the brakes, they are still rubbish but you can keep them, something that is not wise if you have a lot more power, this actually makes the conversion reasonable cheap and IMO is far better than all the dodgy series body on coils sprung chassis you see about.
A stock Tdi should be fine with Series running gear so long as you don't heavily abuse it. This is true of running a 3.5 V8 in them too.dutchgray said:
If you use the TD5 you gain a lot in technology plus most of the issues with these have been solved, the TDI engines have direct injection which is a big difference,
Just to clarify, the 200 and 300tdi's are indirect injection... The TD5 is direct injection, but a very primitive form of it.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff