Someone has noticed that my 90 seems to crab a little.
It does not pull if i let go of the steering whee, and tyres are all worn evenly.
If i measure from the center to center for the wheels, one the passenger side is an inch longer. 92 vs 93.
Nothing seems bent, and it drives ok.
The radius arms are the same length, and none seem damaged.
All the bushes are tight, with no play.
Any ideas?
Bent outrigger?
AJH
but surely that would show up somewhere else too... Like twisted body panels?
More like factory tolerances adding up! Badger.
It's a 90 innit, it's supposed to be 90" wheelbase, not 92" or 93". Has it had some welding done on the chassis? I wouldn't have thought so being as it's 1996 but you never know.
Martin
Actual wheelbase is 92.9 in. subject to an unspecified tolerance. A 90 is not 90!
I assume that the front wheels were pointing straight ahead when you measured. Best achieved by coming to rest in a straight line than adjusting with the steering wheel.
What does it look like if you stretch a string across the outside of the tyres on each side? Does the string touch equally at four points or have you got gaps?
The fact that it drives OK without wearing the tyres and doesn't pull to the side is a good sign. I hope that you're worrying needlessly.
with the string test There are gaps at the back, which agrees with the drivers one being an inch closer to the front wheels..
Ive measured from the axle to the chassis mount along the rear radius arms, and its the same both sides.
I'll have a look at a pit tomorrow to have a good look, and it will go to a tracking place on Monday with one of those computer measurement things.
To be continued.....
I knew that, but what length is a 110?
Alex
110! and the 130 is, of course, only 127.
Now I thought the 127 was a different beast than the 130 give or take three inches in tolerance ;-)
Mark my IIa did this but only because I initially rewelded the leaf spring mount at the wrong angle on one side - the chaps from LRO told me about the crabbing when they followed me to do a photoshoot on JLO.
I whipped the wheel off with it jacked up and then ground off the mount then carefully rewelded checking numerous times to ensure it was right. Once I was aware the difference even though only an inch was startling visually when comparing wheel arches.
So if I can get it wrong mere mortals at Landrover haven't a hope in hell ;-)
Though I would exect all the mounts are welded on with a Jig I could be wrong.
Check the radius arms are the same length too. It doesn't take alot of movement to correct such a large difference as odd as it sounds. It could be badly worn bushes on one side and not the other - It could just be a Friday Landie.
Is it possible to shim up one sides radius arm and then diagonally likewise on the front axle??
If it's done right you shouldn't need too but I'd be amazed if you're alone in this issue having seen how easily it's done me self.
My money though is on radius arms of odd lengths / fitting.
Lee D
I'll take your word for it, what's the coefficient of expansion of a steel rule, must be bloody hot in that Landrover factory. And those unspecified tolerances ........ :-)
Absolutely, worry not, it's a Landrover.
Martin
I really should pay more attention.. Mark you've eliminated half my list.
Shims dude! Either that or ebay.
Lee D
Not necessarily the way the body is bolted onto the chassis.
I've just checked my 110 and it is 110" but the steering has to be set straight ahead. I'd go with Lee and look at judiciously shimming the radius rods, once you find where the discrepancy is.
AJH
Is it lifted? Lifting the suspension slides the front axle across to the passenger side, so to bring it back into line, you have to fit an adjustable panhard rod.
-- "For those who are missing Blair - aim more carefully."
To reply direct rot13 me
bURRt the 101 Camper
On or around Sat, 29 Sep 2007 22:30:32 +0100, Dougal enlightened us thusly:
I thought the 130 was 130 and the rapier tractors were 127.
Or does the fitted panhard rod come from somewhere else and is the wrong length for a 90?
You also need to work out which axle (or both even) is c*ck-eyed.
I thought that, too. I got the figure from a defender workshop manual when confirming the 92.9 and the 130 was listed as being 127. Perhaps someone knows what the real diffrence is.
the 130s are 127" but those in charge decided that 130 fitted in with the other names/numbers better.
Eddie
"Mark Solesbury" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@mid.individual.net...
Did you find out what this was?
No!
I aint had time - Im in New York with work at the moment... Im gonna have a look when i get home.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.