| Author |
Message |
    
hendrik
| | Posted on Saturday, August 24, 2002 - 02:47 pm: | 
|
Yesterday it´s been done. The problem of the double cardan driveshaft (from discoveryII) hitting the right hand cat has been solved.
Problem arose when the BorgWarner t-box which was running with that shaft without problems was exchanged by a LT230 and the driveshaft shortened. The slightest turn made the driveshaft hit the cat with awful noises and leaving ugly scratches. When parking, space between them was 5mm, no more.
Buying a 3.5Efi-Cat RRC driveshaft should have been the solution but was not an option for me (having a almost new and very nice d/s already).
So the cat was modified. The RR cat has a deep groove on both sides so there are kind of two rises (with the strengthening rips) before and behind the groove in the cat´s shell.
The anterior rise was cut out at its base. Beneath it there was a asbestos-tissue I think that was removed and then exposed the ceramic core. The cat contains two of them - one anterior and one posterior to the groove.
The ceramic is rather soft and could be flattened by scraping of as many layers as desired with a chisel. But I decided to remove the anterior ceramic core completely. That way the exhaust gas flow will be better a bit and heat radiation in this area will be reduced.
The cat´s shell was closed by a friend with better welding skills than mine and having s/s welding equipment, taking care that the surface is now 1" deeper than before.
There was even space for a heat shield, in my case a thin s/s-metal sheet that covers the front half of the cat. This was fixed by a few spot welds and leaves a few millimetres away from the cat shell. Now my thick finger finds room between driveshaft (2cm larger diameter than the OEM-one) and cat. The modification is less obvious with it and the driveshaft stays cool (might be an advantage as the sliding joint of the driveshaft is in this area, where it has been hottest before my modification. ´Can imagine what the heat does to the grease in no time)
As said, it works as it should. May be the exhasut is a bit more noisy at lower speeds now but much less than the "clack-clack-.." when cat and Driveshaft touched in turns or over speed-bumps  . Its no obstrusive noise. Bending the front exhaust pipe to make the cat clear the d/shaft seems to be impossible so was no option, increases stresses anyway and might lead to cracks. I don´t think that the Range will fail the emission test because a piece of its catalyst´s-core was removed. But I will have to wait about a year to be sure (when test is due).
If anyone encouters the same problem, don´t worry it´s solved in less than an hour.
Hendrik |
hendrik
| | Posted on Saturday, August 24, 2002 - 04:22 pm: |
|
Ah, I forgot to mention that the above is meant as a makeshift. First I need to look after many other things. I like P.F´s solution @ spanishtrailrovers.com. |
Rob Davison (Pokerob)
| | Posted on Saturday, August 24, 2002 - 05:02 pm: |
|
why are you using the DC shaft up front again? becuase you need it or beacuse thats what you had to use?
will it be an issue with the disco1 drive shaft?
rd |
hendrik
| | Posted on Sunday, August 25, 2002 - 03:17 am: |
|
1) I wanted to use it. Because I thought a new d/s would be a good idea after the milage of my truck and because there were some vibrations. A new Rover-d/s costs more than the DC shaft. I happen to suffer from vibes coming from different places. Those from the B/W t-case bearing failure that are yet solved (other t-case). Some still there must come from the rear axle, I´m still trying to eliminate the latter. I first thought the modest lift of my RRC was the cause but the 2" probably are not enough to make the OEM d/s produce vibrations. The driveshaft being removed could have been serviced and retained, I now know - but I had the DC driveshaft already.
2) I´m not sure. Go to http://www.discoweb.org/shafts/shaftcompare.jpg to see the type of shaft that was installed by Rover (above) and the design of the d/s I now use (sliding joint is not in the middle on mine and it has no rubber boot). Tom P. has a nice article in the Tech section. It becomes clear that my RRC has a different cat at the right side. But I´m sure that engine and gearbox sit in the same position in RRC and Discos. Why I had a problem and Tom P. has not is still not clear to me.
BTW which Disco I driveshaft do you mean ? If it looks like the above one in the Links then not. If it has the bigger diameter tube (50mm instead of 30mm) then maybe. |
Rob Davison (Pokerob)
| | Posted on Sunday, August 25, 2002 - 11:41 am: |
|
okay, that is good news for me, you used it because you wanted to.
i am looking at a cira 1995 tcase and drive shaft. it might me '96 though, i cant remember.
rd |
hendrik
| | Posted on Monday, August 26, 2002 - 02:48 pm: |
|
you have a RRC and with B/W t-case?
front driveshaft with LT230 is 35mm shorter than with BorgWarner t-case.
Shortening of the "solid-bar" driveshaft (30mm diameter) is not straightforward (my local driveshaft shop insisted on not shortening it but making one half out of new. Price was not attractive).
The correct one from Rover (RangeRover upto ´89 MY or DiscoI V8 cat) costs the equivalent of 650$ over here. |
Rob Davison (Pokerob)
| | Posted on Monday, August 26, 2002 - 05:34 pm: |
|
ah,, let me reword this
i am currently a stock 1989 range rover with bw tcase.
a 1995 discovery is slated to be the donor vehicle. i want to trade tcase and drive shaft from this disco.
if i throw out the range rover shaft and bw tcase...
do you know if the disco lt230 tcase requires a shortened driveshaft from that which it originally mated, to fit into my 1989 range rover?
it's not that important that you answer, at this point i'm going to have to try it and find out for myself. i'll let you know what kind of greif i get myself into. it will be another month before i swap.
rd |
Hendrik B. (Hendrik)
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 28, 2002 - 04:13 pm: |
|
Only because I´m so happy to have 4WD back again.
I now can offer a pic of the modified cat. I´m not sure my explanation was good enough.
 |
Rob Davison (Pokerob)
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 28, 2002 - 10:40 pm: |
|
nice..
i owuld have just beat on it with a hammer and been done
rd |
h
| | Posted on Thursday, August 29, 2002 - 04:38 am: |
|
I considered that. But that would have crushed the ceramic core and reduced gas flow and possibly making the cat rattle. |
p m
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 10, 2002 - 08:04 pm: |
|
Hendrik,
the possible ratlle can be further reduced with a repeated application of a big f%^&*g hammer.
OTOH, all exhaust pipes are different, so you may have encountered a problem that someone else haven't. If you were to do some welding on the exhaust, why not to cut and reweld the pipe to move the cat about 10-15mm away from the driveshaft? There's enough space between the cat and the framerail.
peter |
hendrik
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 11, 2002 - 06:25 am: |
|
Well, rerouting the pipe was sth I considered but when thinking underneath the car I felt there were several cuts and re-welds necessary and the work to be done under the car. I think this way its been slightly easier.
regards |
hendrik
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 11, 2002 - 06:28 am: |
|
Oh - and I would have to live without this tiny but noticable if you concentrate at it (at lower speeds) exhaust noise that I happen to like. Its a LITTLE roar that suits a V8 well. But of course this didnt influence my decision when starting to cut and weld. |
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page