Austin ;-)

On or around Thu, 28 Sep 2006 23:30:46 +0100, "Lee_D" enlightened us thusly:

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 pissing 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.

On or around Thu, 28 Sep 2006 23:30:46 +0100, "Lee_D" enlightened us thusly:

'ere:

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" enlightened us thusly:

that's OK - it'll probably end up on 235s anyway.

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

Its going for sensible money though!

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

126cm matey, sorry about the delay!!

On or around Sat, 30 Sep 2006 13:24:44 +0100, "Nige" enlightened us thusly:

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

seems there's a consensus so far on 126cm or so.

On or around Sat, 30 Sep 2006 20:29:44 +1200, EMB enlightened us thusly:

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.

On or around Sun, 01 Oct 2006 08:36:33 +0100, Austin Shackles enlightened us thusly:

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 uttered summat worrerz funny about:

101 Axles? / Humvee?

Lee D

On or around Sun, 1 Oct 2006 22:18:47 +0100, "Lee_D" enlightened us thusly:

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.

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 uttered summat worrerz funny about:

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

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?

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!

GbH uttered summat worrerz funny about:

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