| Author |
Message |
    
SG
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 08, 2003 - 11:12 am: | 
|
OK...the time is coming when I gotta do something about the PS pump. With 100k on the clock, the seals are leaking...just an annoyance now, but a rebuild will be needed in the not too distant future.
So, I start to thinking (*always* dangerous....) about a replacement. Now I have always liked the MileMarker hydraulic winch, especially the new two-speed version. Nice set-up, other than the obvioius fact that the winch dies with the engine.
Now the stock Rover pump doesn't put out enough ooomph to run the MileMarker...it will only perform at about 70% of capacity with the flow from the stock unit. Has anybody replaced this with a Saginaw unit? This could be the best of both worlds...a cheaper, easy-to-rebuild, 'murrican PS pump and a lighter, full-power winch.
Anybody BTDT...?
Cheers |
Peter Matusov (Pmatusov)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 08, 2003 - 12:08 pm: |
|
okay, one more soul wishing for a saginaw pump in the land rover.
i don't know of any source of information about such a conversion. i'm almost sure somebody's done it, Paul Schram once mentioned willingness to take upon himself designing the brackets, but nothing's come out of it yet.
peter |
Peter Matusov (Pmatusov)
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 08, 2003 - 12:11 pm: |
|
BTW, Michel Findlay has the MM hydraulic on his disco and he swears by it. However, IIRC, he has installed an aux. pump at the PTO output at the the t-case. |
SG
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 08, 2003 - 01:39 pm: |
|
I considered this route, too. Even went so far as to try to source the PTO drive adapter across the pond.
*However* this set-up has one serious (and in my mind, fatal) draw-back. There are times when you want both winch and wheels...step on the clutch, and the winch dies, too.
Ratz.... |
SG
| | Posted on Thursday, January 09, 2003 - 10:58 am: |
|
OK...here's an update....
Did a Google search on Saginaw and LR and the first hit was TerriAnn's excellent web pages which mentioned Timm Cooper's installation of Saginaw units on the Series trail rigs he has built.
Another link led to Northeast British Parts, and a Saginaw PS pump conversion for Jags...gettin' closer....
So I made a call to Timm at BCB Off Road in Paso Robles. Timm make some interesting conversions, like fitting 283 to 350 V-8's into Series Ones with 35" tires.... Anyway, he mentioned that Rovers North has a Saginaw unit for the 3.9 engine.
Now the 3.9 and 4.0 have different mountings for the PS pump, so I enquired about the output first. If the pump's output isn't in the range of 1,500 PSI (opposed to the 700 to 800 for the stock Rover unit), then the whole question is moot.
Unfortunately, the only figures the guy at RN had are metric. Never good at math, can someone convert "77mm per kilogram squared" into PSI?
Cheers |
muskyman
| | Posted on Thursday, January 09, 2003 - 11:40 am: |
|
the only problem I see in the conversion is that the seals in a LR steering gear where not intended to take the 1400 to 1500 psi a saginaw puts out.
I once did a motor swap of a volvo that had a saginaw 125 on it .the first thing that happened on start up was the Rack and pinion blew its seals.
so i'd ask what rovers north has seen as far as the seals go first, if they sell a kit I'd bet they will have an idea if its a problem or not |
Peter Matusov (Pmatusov)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 09, 2003 - 11:53 am: |
|
Thom,
following the same link you provided, it looks easy to downgrade the Saginaw pump to about 1000psi by shimming the bypass valve.
SG,
one can do anything with the Series - it's like a blank sheet of paper. You basically have to throw everything away but the body and the frame, and start from scratch.
I take it 77mm per kilogram squared should read as 77 kilogram per cm squared? if so, it is 1131 psi.
peter |
SG
| | Posted on Thursday, January 09, 2003 - 12:06 pm: |
|
Peter - Thanks - that makes sense...I asked the guy at RN and he read the same stat twice ...77mm/kg2...and I couldn't make heads nor tails of it....might as well have been joules per dyne
Thom - I'm aware of the seal issue; the SOP is to introduce a pressure relieve valve into the box's plumbing....
Anyway, the search continues.
It seems to me that if no one is selling a direct conversion, this might be a marketable product for the future. Just curious, how many would be interested in an adapter plate/mount to be able to use a Saginaw pump? |
Peter Matusov (Pmatusov)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 09, 2003 - 12:38 pm: |
|
oh, i definitely am, for two rovers 
i'd also take the saginaw box along with the pump, if anyone designs a nice conversion kit.
out of two rover boxes, both leak.
out of three saginaw boxes, not a drop.
peter |
muskyman
| | Posted on Thursday, January 09, 2003 - 12:44 pm: |
|
good call peter !
brain fart here I guess, my brain rarely thinks about reducing performance...lol
thom |
Jake Hartley (Jake)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 09, 2003 - 12:50 pm: |
|
I would be interested in a box and or pump conversion. At 260k miles, I am leaking steering fluid like a rotten boat. |
Peter Matusov (Pmatusov)
| | Posted on Thursday, January 09, 2003 - 01:21 pm: |
|
reducing performance is all the 4x4 should be about, Thom. make everything downstream stronger than upstream |
Paul T. Schram (Paulschram)
| | Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 01:10 pm: |
|
OK guys, time for me to weigh in again.
I have made some prototype brackets and am nearing the point where I can start bolting parts to the engine.
First off,this is a very common conversion in OZ, something I found out when trying to sound like an authority... I have been told by folks who have provided pictures of their trucks with Saginaw pumps that there is nothing to worry about with the increase of pressure and the flow characteristics are painfully compatible with the Rover.
I'm not there yet, but so far, everything is going together far easier than I'd expected, right down to putting the Rover three-ear flange on the Saginaw pump! As a result of this recent discovery, the brackets which were the easy part have now become the hard part. RIght now, my brackets aren't very pretty and have room for improvement in the "Customer Appeal" department. One of the pleasant surprises (there have been MANY in this project) is the numerous mounting methods on the Saginaw pumps! They can be attached from the front, the rear, the side, and the bottom!
I have plans to run some trails with Timm this coming summer (actually, Jeff Briggs invited him to tag along) and I hope to be able to discuss such topics with him then.
One last comment. Do not attempt to disassemble the ZF pump. They appear to have been made to be throw-away pumps. Once you open the case, you open a can of worms and will end up with roller bearings all over the place. Sourcing the bearings resulted in me being told very sternly not to fool around with these pumps by the manufacturer of the bearings. But, they did sell me two sets of bearings as engineering samples.
Peter: I also have a Saginaw box I'm working on. Of course, I've also got the Series project and maybe another Rover (a Rangie this time) that might come to live at my house so I wouldn't plan on anything soon, at least from me.
SG:
You have to be careful when describing 3.9 vs. 4.0. My Disco was built in '95, has a 3.9 with serpentine belts and a distributor! I also have the engine with the composite head gaskets and only ten head bolts, so I know it was made after June 15, 1995. If the story Rover tells were true, my truck would either have multi-V belts with the distributor, or no distributor with the serpentine belt. Yes, this does make buyng parts a challenge. The issue with respect to PS pumps is whether or not you have the pump with the stamped body, or the cast body. They can be interchanged, but the mounts for the cast body pump (4.0...) make the plumbing of the older pumps more of a challenge as the outlets point toward the mount... Also, if you do this swap, you lose the support from the rear of the pump as there is nothing to bolt the mounting tab to.
Back to the pumps, if you look hard enough, you can find delivery specs for the ZF pump, but GM is much more closed-mouth about the specifics, at least from what I could find.
If I can stop breaking parts, blowing up my engine and the kid quits crashing my other vehicles, this project might get done. I'm down to the easy parts now.
Peace,
Paul |
Dean Brown (Deanbrown3d)
| | Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 01:23 pm: |
|
The PS pump (at least on the D2) is rated at 1500 psi. Is this not accomplished then for some reason? |
Peter Matusov (Pmatusov)
| | Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 01:31 pm: |
|
Paul, which Saginaw box did you work on to make the mount for? (I mean front-, rear- or bottom-mounted)?
peter |
SG
| | Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 01:34 pm: |
|
Excellent work, Paul.
I've got the 4.0 engine in my Disco, even through it was built in February of 1995. You see, it was the North American spec prototype, built while the 3.9 version was still coming off the line. The engine is perhaps the earliest 4.0 anywhere...it has engine number 000000017.
Sounds like you da' man on this project. I'll keep in touch. Try not to break anything wheelin' with Timm. Sounds like he drives some pretty outrageous trails....
Once you get to the fabrication step, we have several firms in the area that can do investment castings, weldments or similar complex fabrications. (One of the advantages of having so many shipyards and military bases around.) Case in point is Robert Davis' "Iron Prince" four banger engine conversion for Series Rovers. His first engine adapter, made by whittlin' down a billet of aluminium cost over a grand. Subsequent cast adapters were just $200 or so....
Cheers |
muskyman
| | Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 01:49 pm: |
|
peter ,
all saginaw 125 pumps can be mounted front back bottom or side...it is the most used power steering pump out there. the saginaw 300 can be mounted front or back and has twice the fluid volume the 125 has
paul,
you have me a little confused?...my 94 disco has a distributer serpentine belt and a cast ZF pump?
dean,
where did you find a rating of 1500?...most the suff I have found says 1100psi when I was messing with mine on my D1 replacing a hose I put a t flange in it and tested mine because I hoped to use it for MM winch and it only peaked at about 975psi at full lock.
i would trust a saginaw 125 in a blink I turn 35/13.50's with my 125 in my scout and have had very little in the way of problems with it. this is most likely a simpler way of running a MM winch then the march pulley and second belt I'v been planning. so haering that guys have had no problems with the seals in the steering gear makes me say full ahead mr checkov! |
Dean Brown (Deanbrown3d)
| | Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 02:02 pm: |
|
Muskyman - its in the shop manual. Perhaps its different for the D2, someone already told me the hydraulic fittings are different on the two pumps. |
Paul T. Schram (Paulschram)
| | Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 03:30 pm: |
|
Thom:
you have just illustrated further the lack of standardization in Rovers as I have seen '94s with the stamped pump and multi-V belts. I find it even more curious that SG's truck is obviously older than mine, yet his is one of the very first GEMs engines, built in '95. I have also seen '95s with younger build dates than mine with multi-V belts and 4.0 litre engines. No wonder we have so much trouble with our vehicles, the factory couldn't keep it straight. Do you have the Lucas alternator, or the Marelli? Yours is a 3.9, right?
Peter: I don't have any idea what the box is. I went to a boneyard operated by a friend and business associate of the wife and poked around in his junk pile until I found one he'd give me! My only considerations were that it be the canned ham style and have an integral reservoir. I thought the pulley would be compatible, however, the GM belt width was far too narrow compared tothe Rover belt. At first, I thought I'd have a problem spacing the pump to mate the belt, then I realized it was an even half-inch I needed to make up! Two quarter-inch pieces of aluminum stock and away we go! |
Peter Matusov (Pmatusov)
| | Posted on Friday, January 10, 2003 - 07:28 pm: |
|
Paul,
all Saginaw pumps i've seen had reservoirs mounted on them; looking under my rovers' hoods, i have a hard time visualizing the saginaw pump WITH the reservoir there. I haven't taken one apart, so i don't know if a remote reservoir can fashioned.
peter |
muskyman
| | Posted on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 12:55 am: |
|
the "canned ham" is the saginaw 125...just measured it is 1/2" thinner front to back then the ZF and almost the exact same width side to side. it is almost 3" taller from the centerline of the shaft to the cap of the saginaw then the ZF but it still looks like it will fit under the hood. i think I am going swapping as well at some point. a rebuilt one goes for under $100 and a AGR is $125..pretty cheap seeing they so rarely go bad. |
Paul T. Schram (Paulschram)
| | Posted on Saturday, January 11, 2003 - 10:50 am: |
|
Thannx Tom! I also figured that if I had further alignment problems, I might be able to space the flange on the shaft to match the backspacing of the pulley.
Peter:
If you visualize the bracket for the ZF pump not being there (when you look into the enngine compartment, you don't see the pump, just the completely enclosing mount), you might be able to see it there. I don't even think it will clear the valve cover on my truck. At the risk of being banned, there might still be some pics on the POR BBS of a Rangie in Oz with a Saginaw pump mounted up top of a 3.5! |
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page