Auto to Manual

Does anyone know...can I convert an 89 rangie with an Auto box to a manual using the 4speed box in my current 76 Rangie? I've found the 89 model for a reasonable price and may be a better option than the restoration job I'm doing on the 76 and in the interest of using the parts I've allready got...wondered if this conversion would work? Your right, might be more trouble than it's worth...

Reply to
john smith
Loading thread data ...

On or around Tue, 3 Aug 2004 20:38:40 +1000, "john smith" enlightened us thusly:

if you've got the 2 vehicles, then yes, but it is quite a lot of work. Done th reverse swap on a 110, and that wasn't that hard.

Mind, I'd be inclined to keep the autobox one as an auto, meself, if it's a ZF 4-speed (which it should be) it's a damned good box, and loads of fun - kickdown into second at 50 results in a lion-like roar and lots of acceleration.

Reply to
Austin Shackles

Austin Hi,

Have you also used the RaRo Borg Warner transfer box together with the autobox?

Take care Pantelis

Reply to
Pantelis Giamarellos

On or around Wed, 4 Aug 2004 09:07:04 +0300, "Pantelis Giamarellos" enlightened us thusly:

I did, yeah. The RR mounting plates and the 110 mounting plates were the same, and they place the box such that the front prop fitted and the back prop was 2" too short - the BW transfer box is 2" shorter between flanges than the LT230.

also, on my conversion, had to move the engine mounts forward about 4", but I think that was due to it not being a V8 chassis to start with.

Reply to
Austin Shackles

Austin thanks for your kind reply.

Was there a problem with the Borg Warner's transfer box operating gearlever and mounting bracket?

It appears that in order to make a Borg Warner tbox's gearlever sit properly on a NAS D90 autobox center console we will have to extend its mounting bracket a bit forward.

Thanks for the rear propshaft tip.

In our case the car is a D90 but I believe the +2 inches extension of the rear propshaft will also be required. Thanks God we do have an excellent propshaft specialist over here.

Take care Pantelis

Reply to
Pantelis Giamarellos

On or around Thu, 5 Aug 2004 00:03:51 +0300, "Pantelis Giamarellos" enlightened us thusly:

I faffed around with the centre tunnel bit and cut bits out of it 'til I could install it over the BWs lever. There wasn't a console as such on mine

- just the normal tunnel. On mine, the shifetr box which is normally in the centre console of the RR was just bolted to the seatbox where the centre seat should've been :-)

Reply to
Austin Shackles

When I did mine (done this job twice now on Defenders) I moved the bracket forward so the rear two holes of the bracket were bolted into the front two holes of the gearbox. To add some strength I then cut a rectangular piece of 3mm steel plate with 6 holes in it. The centre rear pair of holes matched up with the rear gearbox holes, the middle pair match up with the front gearbox holes and the rear bracket holes, the front pair match up with the front bracket holes. Once it's all bolted together the plate should support the bracket.

The operating rod will also need extending.

I know Austin extended his rear propshaft but, having done this job twice now, if you use the original gearbox mounting holes and the correct gearbox mounting brackets for the Bw xfer box, the rear propshaft can remain standard and the front propshaft is about 2 inches too short. A standard Classic Range Rover front propshaft for this xfer box will fit if you don't want to have one modified.

I have no idea why Austin had to modify the rear prop unless he used LT230 gearbox mounts with the BW box in which case that would explain why the engine mounts had to be moved forward. The LT230 mounting brackets have a different offset to the BW ones. The BW ones move the transfer box back a few inches.

You need to be aware that if you are using wheels larger than 205x16 on this 90 you might well find the BW box too high geared and the engine will struggle to cope with it at cruising speeds. I ran mine with 235/

85s on and found that at 60MPH, locked up, the engine was sat at around 1800RPM - too low for the engine to cope with inclines without kicking down. SWMBO's 90 (3.9V8 Auto BW) runs fine on 225/70x16s but struggled on the motorway when I fitted my 235/85x16s to it. My 100 inch Defender ( 3.9V8 Auto LT230, was BW) copes much better with the 235/85s on the motorway since I swapped from BW to a 1.4 LT230.

cheers

Dave W.

formatting link

Reply to
Dave White

On or around Thu, 5 Aug 2004 11:54:36 +0000 (UTC), Dave White enlightened us thusly:

Mine was on a 110, and used the RR mountings which came with the BW. the

110 front prop is the same as an RR front prop, or rather, was the same as the RR one that came with the gearbox. The box mounting plates were bolted to the original holes in the 110 chassis.

The chassis was originally a 2.5 NAD with LT77 and LT230.

Reply to
Austin Shackles

On or around Thu, 5 Aug 2004 11:54:36 +0000 (UTC), Dave White enlightened us thusly:

the engine mountings had to be moved forward about 4". If I'd made different brackets and lengthened the front prop instead (see other reply about prop lengths) I'd still have had the engine mounts in the wrong place by 2". I was, however, using RR engine plates on the V8, and maybe the V8 110 had different engine plates as well.

Reply to
Austin Shackles

Austin thanks.

My friend for whom I am converting his 3.5 V8 manual gearbox and LT230 tbox to 3.5 V8 and RaRo Classic ZF autobox and BW tbox wanted to also fit the NAS D90 center console so it appears that we will have to move the gearlever bracket a bit forward in order for it to line up with the repective hole in the center console.

thanks again for your kind input.

Take care Pantelis

Reply to
Pantelis Giamarellos

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.