| Author |
Message |
    
Javier Velador (Jvelador)
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 26, 2002 - 10:59 am: | 
|
So I've been saving my nickles and dimes and occasionally stealing my kids' lunch money to get a Series.
Between a diesel and a gas engine, which is less troublesome? Which is less costly to repair? Which is easier to work on?
Your comments, as always, are appreciated.
Javier |
Leslie N. Bright (Leslie)
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 26, 2002 - 11:22 am: |
|
Tough question, IMHO.
I'd go w/ petrol, ALL else being equal.
Diesels are smelly, slower, noiser.
I'd wager that you're more familiar w/ a gasoline engine already... I know that, to me, I understand it better, and it makes more sense.
With that said, though, diesels do get better mileage, they are a bit more simple since they don't have points, etc., they are more suited to wading, and, as far as Series Rovers go, they're not that different from the petrol version.... it's the same block, even!
If you had two Series Rovers sitting side-by-side, one gas and the other petrol, I'd pick the nicer of the two, ignoring the engine choice. Only if everything was the same, would I favor the petrol.
And, since I've got a petrol Series, I just may favor a diesel Series so that I would have one of each... I dunno, though...
Another thing.... I've been tempted to think about playing around w/ a biodiesel setup... I think a Series Rover would be an ideal candidate for such a project...
As I said, pick the nicer vehicle, IMHO....
-L |
David Gage (Davidg)
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 26, 2002 - 11:38 am: |
|
The Petrol engine is a diesel converted, most of the lower end stuff is interchangable. It's all in the top end. As Les points out the diesel is slower, noisier, and stinkier. But more torque and deeper wade-ability. The major mechanical drawback of the diesel is..it was never officially imported into the US so parts are harder to get. I do stock a few items and can get anything, but you might have to wait a couple weeks. |
Ron
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 27, 2002 - 04:57 am: |
|
"Between a diesel and a gas engine, which is less troublesome? Which is less costly to repair? Which is easier to work on?"
Petrol is much easier but the good thing about diesel is that it either runs or it does not. If it does not there is little YOU can do about fixing it.
diesel is infinately cooler and much better offroad.
petrol is eassier and much better on road |
Tom P.
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 27, 2002 - 10:30 am: |
|
Ron,
Although I'm intrigued by the diesel, for praticality I'd go with the petrol. Especially if you're talking about the LR 2.25 diesel/petrol. I'd furhter favor petrol for the ease of sliding in a Robert Davis conversion. If I was to consider a diesel, it would probably be a 2.5NA or 200tdi.
Tom P. |
Javier Velador (Jvelador)
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 27, 2002 - 10:36 am: |
|
Thanks all for your advice and comments.
The one I finally decide on (and can afford) will get plenty of road use, as I plan to drive it occasionally to work. So a gas engine sounds more appealing.
But I think Ron just helped me decide. I can do most repairs outside of engine and tranny work. If there is something wrong and there is nothing I can do to fix it, then I'm screwed.
Do any of you have diesel run Series?
David, I will definitely keep your info handy when I get mine. Jeff B had some good things to say about your service. Also, how's the Freelander coming along? Have you posted pics anywhere?
Javier |
Leslie N. Bright (Leslie)
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 27, 2002 - 10:37 am: |
|
I'd furhter favor petrol for the ease of sliding in a Robert Davis conversion
Huh?
Since the 2.25 diesel and petrol are SO much the same, I don't know that it'd be any more work to swap out either one over the other for a RD conversion.
I do like the RD conversion, though... and, I also agree, the later diesels are improved over the 2.25...
But, I'd still buy the nicer Rover, regardless....
FWIW...
-L |
David Gage (Davidg)
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 27, 2002 - 10:45 am: |
|
Javier, I have had a couple Rover's with the 2.25 diesel. (Stinky 1, 2, and 3) All of them performed well and all are in daily use now with new owners. Stinky 3 is still in the local area and I see it on occasions puttering down the road.
Stinky 2 is in the Greensboro NC area and has driven distances as well as locally. You just don't get in a hurry. They are brutes off road with all that low down torque, but givin a choice I would still have a gas engine for the convenience.
The Freelander is doing great. I am looking forward to having at the Uwharrie Safari for some off-roading. I am still expecting the Safety Devices underbody protection and roofrack in this next container. |
Tom P.
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 27, 2002 - 11:28 am: |
|
>> I'd furhter favor petrol for the ease
>> of sliding in a Robert Davis conversion
>Huh?
Leslie, we're simply talking *ease* here and keeping the fuel supply the same *is* easier ;-)
I'm not looking at an RD any time soon. Only have 21k on a strong 2.25 right now...
Tom P. |
Jeff Bieler (Mrbieler)
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 27, 2002 - 11:50 am: |
|
I guess I simply can't imagine swapping out my 2.25. Even if it died, I would rebuild. It's the heart of the beast. |
Tom P.
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 27, 2002 - 11:55 am: |
|
Jeff,
I'm sure I'll feel the same way, once I get to know my IIa a little...
Tom P. |
Leslie N. Bright (Leslie)
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 27, 2002 - 12:26 pm: |
|
I'm not swapping it out, either... the RD engine, while I like it, costs more than my 88 did!
But, when you start seeing lost of people talking about swapping something else in, RD would be my first pick. IMHO, YMMV, etc.
-L |
Jon Williams (Jonw)
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 27, 2002 - 01:04 pm: |
|
The only drawback with a Diesel, based on my experience with it, is it's not a suitable highway engine, whereas the gas engine is (from what I hear). If you're planning to do a lot of highway driving, you'll wear the poor Diesel out much sooner than a gas engine, which is definitely better sustaining higher rpms. Certainly, the fuel mileage was good with the Diesel, but I used that thing to commute for a while and the labor ensued. Of course, it took me over 500,000 miles to wear my Diesel out, but it also took 3 rebuilds... |
Ron
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 27, 2002 - 05:29 pm: |
|
"Leslie, we're simply talking *ease* here and keeping the fuel supply the same *is* easier ;-)"
Actually not really. You are thinking in modern terms. The fuel pump is on the engine, the tanks are almost the same except the diesel has a return line which might or might not be needed on the RD conversion so besides a flush of the lines there should be no appreciable difference.
Tom Bache is the local diesel expert around here.
Ron
PS Tom P. lets see the new rover! |
Tom P.
| | Posted on Thursday, March 28, 2002 - 01:40 pm: |
|
> PS Tom P. lets see the new rover!
Hey, it doesn't even come home until tonight!
Ho could get some pics as early as this weekend. But answer this, why is this mysterious *Noah* absent from the Series Gallery?!
Tom P.
96 Disco
67 IIa (as of 7pm EST) |
Ron
| | Posted on Thursday, March 28, 2002 - 09:19 pm: |
|
Noah is in some of the pics. MAR2000 and 2001 and alyssa's gallery.
I should collect some more and get them together. I sent a few of the preproject pics of the 110 to ho but I don't have anything current as I am digital cameraless at the moment.
Here is how Noah gets places
http://www.discoweb.org/alyssa/caravan.jpg
Ron |
Tom P.
| | Posted on Sunday, March 31, 2002 - 05:58 pm: |
|
Ron,
Does Noah have free wheel hubs up front, or do you drop the front prop shaft when you caravan?
Tom P. |
Ron
| | Posted on Sunday, March 31, 2002 - 06:28 pm: |
|
Had FWH for all four corners. Bought GBR one piece rear shafts so now I have to drop the rear DS to tow. Thinking about going back to FWH on all four corners as it is a PITA
Ron |
Tom P.
| | Posted on Monday, April 01, 2002 - 09:25 am: |
|
Want to sell the GBR stuff?
Tom |
Ron
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 02, 2002 - 12:08 am: |
|
Sure.
I will email you.
Ron |
Mark Kiely
| | Posted on Thursday, April 04, 2002 - 01:42 am: |
|
Ron, Noah,
I'm interested in finding out more about Noah's Free Wheeling Hubs on both axles.
I've a couple of Qs. - I'm intending to do the same on my '73 Lightweight to pull behind my '96 Disco.
(See both at www.OKoffroad.com/OKRovers - "Members" section - Mark Kiely, Tulsa, Oklahoma.)
So far, I've gotten reports back that the Superwinch FWHs are for front axles only, but both my axles are the same. The other Series FWHs I've seen are AVM brand. What brand are you using Noah?
When I called DAP-Inc.com for a price on the AVMs, he asked me why not just put all in Neutral and that should be OK to pull behind - but I have always thought that one could/should not do this.
It would be great if I could talk to you or Noah about this - thanks in advance - hoping for some advice.
Thanks,
Mark Kiely
OKRovers Club Oklahoma
Cell# (918) 520-3754
Office (918) 294-3754
Fax (918) 294-3694 |
Noah
| | Posted on Thursday, April 04, 2002 - 01:58 am: |
|
I had warn M11 FWH on all four corners. My friend the series I BITSA IIa has four selectros, though BITSA has a IIa rear axle.
The hubs are the same in my front or back. Any manufacturer will work on either as long as you have a full float rear (do lightweights have FF rears? I think so but check if you have a hub then you are good to go) Ron had to cut the little machining nubs off the ends of my rear inner axles to fit the hubs. It did not hurt me but it was a PITA for Ron because it is hardened metal is tough to cut with a hack saw. He has since purchased a dremel and could do it again in 10minutes.
I am a good girl and follow behind the green disco very nicely with my tow bar from pep boys. It mounted easily to my bumper and uses four bolts (two per bracket) as opposed to the POS ones that use only one bolt. Ron made sure to spread the tow bar out quite far and this makes it more stable for me.
Other than a bit of increased stopping distance the the ghetto lights Ron bolted to the back of me I have no problems with the set up.
I would not like it if you towed me in neutral for a variety of reasons. If you do anything and don't have FWH (like since Ron but the fancy GBR axles in me) pull the driveshafts at the pinion.
Noah |
Mark Kiely Tulsa
| | Posted on Thursday, April 04, 2002 - 02:26 am: |
|
Yep!
Got FF axles much the same as the civi version SIII
Thanks for the advice - I knew that my thought on 'not' pulling it behind without FWHs was the right one.
I'm going for this one!
Thanks again.
My Lightweight is alot of fun, not to mention the fact that it is 24volt. I've a 24volt Hummer winch on the front, and have wired my 2 sets of 12volt spots in series to split the voltage - works a treat.
Any advice on wheels and tires - am in the process of researching for a new set - looking for 31" muds with a good offset wheel - something that will give me a wider stance - also want to be able to change out and use on my Disco for trips to out-of-state 'wheelin' areas.
Don't forget to check out the newest LR Club in the U.S. at http://www.OKoffroad.com/OKRovers
Thanks again,
Mark |
Noah
| | Posted on Thursday, April 04, 2002 - 02:35 am: |
|
I really like my 7.50x16 General Super All Grips but they are not the most fun on road or in tow.
On a lightweight anything less than 32s looks small to me. I would get 7.50x 16s on SIII LWB wheels (www.thatchedroofgarage.com)
Your choice of make/model on them (dunlop RT, cooper STT, cooper bias Super Traction Tread etc). They fit a disco ok with a bit of finessing the rear quarterpanel. |
Ron
| | Posted on Thursday, April 04, 2002 - 02:37 am: |
|
To get more offset you could run them on NATO rims which are an inch wider on the outside than the LWB wheels. GCR rims are even more offset. I "think" lightweights come with 16x5in SWB wheels which generally are useless and make the stance really narrow
235 85 R16 is another choice to 7.50x16.
Ron |
Leslie N. Bright (Leslie)
| | Posted on Thursday, April 04, 2002 - 08:20 am: |
|
Ron,
When did you teach Noah to type??
-L |
Ron
| | Posted on Thursday, April 04, 2002 - 09:29 pm: |
|
She dictates to me.
I here her call in the night.
Ron |
MTB
| | Posted on Friday, June 07, 2002 - 01:20 am: |
|
Reading over this and other Series posts.
I will soon be in the market for a II or III.
Like many what fuel Petrol or Diesel.
I would like to go with a diesel in the end.
My question is what ever I decide petrol or diesel I would like to put in a more powerful motor than a stock 2.25. What options do I have out there.
Is there any engines that just drop in using factory mounts. Would like to get away from modifing anything.
Also who,what&where can I find information about Robert Davis Conversions that you guys are talking about.
Thanks for any help you can give
Michael B |
Ron
| | Posted on Friday, June 07, 2002 - 01:51 am: |
|
Robert Davis's conversion is a modified "Iron Duke" four cylinder chevy. Gone over numerous times on the roversnorth BBS.
The 2.5 diesel and 200TDi are quite viable swaps in a Series rover. Also the mercedes diesel and the peugot diesel (sp) are good "junkyard" swaps that I have seen as is an iron duke, though you really want a RHD truck for that.
Only robert's conversion uses the factory mounts. A 2.5 or 200Tdi uses one but the other one has to be fiddled with to make it work.
Ron |
MTB
| | Posted on Friday, June 07, 2002 - 04:26 am: |
|
How good are the 200tdi's.
Thanks Ron
Michael B |
Leslie N. Bright (Leslie)
| | Posted on Friday, June 07, 2002 - 08:34 am: |
|
The 200Tdi is a decent engine. The UK diesels aren't like the US type of truck diesels, the UK ones are smaller and not as powerful as the big US ones.
If you go to Art's Guns and Rovers board, you can get a lot of Series advice there. Recently there was a thread talking about getting more power out of different heads out of the stock 2.25. It had both Turner Engineering and ACR commenting in it, and, had a link to another thread on engines for Series Rovers.
One thing to remember, a Series Rover was designed for not a lot of power.
The thing that was nice about Robert Davis' conversion was that he took the stock driveline, and figured out what was it's maximum safe level, then backed off a bit on the engine specs, so that, theoretically, you've got as much engine as you need w/o killing your driveline. Pricy, though.
ACR (I think it was) now has a stroker-motor version of the 2.25 that is getting about the same horsepower as Robert's, but would cost you a couple of thousand less. Still not cheap, though.
Turner has been fiddling with the 2.25 for quite awhile, and can do really good things with it. It has quite a bit of potential in the stock motor.
Since a 200Tdi isn't a huge powerhouse, it should be okay in there too, w/o destroying your vehicle. I'm not fond, though of the other conversions out there. There's some that I'm sure can be done cleanly, but, a lot are butcher-jobs instead.
Anyway, remember... A Series just isn't a "safe" vehicle. You're riding around on marginal drum brakes if you're going faster than a Yugo... your sitting on seats that are more like boat cushions, and seatbelts were a complete afterthought. It shouldn't be driven fast at any time, whether or not it has a more capable engine.
Don't get me wrong, if I had the cash, I'd get a better engine too, but, I'd have it so that the motor could take it easy to cruise around, isntead of an old tired 2.25 having to work hard to get you to trail behind traffic......
Good luck,
-L |
MTB
| | Posted on Friday, June 07, 2002 - 09:02 am: |
|
Leslie
Thanks for the info. I am not looking to be a speed demon or wanting alot of HP. If I decide to go with a diesel I would like to get a little more power for on-road driving. we have alot of hills in my area and I would hate to see some kid passing me going up hill on his bike. I would like to keep a Series as close to stock if possible.
I think the only mods I would want to do is the motor,brakes & seats(Boat cushions may be more comfortable) Other than that it would be used to putt around town & have some fun.
Hopefully by fall I will have a new toy.
Thanks again
Michael B |
Ron
| | Posted on Friday, June 07, 2002 - 06:30 pm: |
|
200TDi is a good engine from what I have heard. Not as easy to work on as a 300TDi but a better fit for a series and cheaper used. Its right around 110hp and 195ft/lbs of torque. About all a series •••••• can handle.
Ron |
Javier Velador (Jvelador)
| | Posted on Saturday, June 08, 2002 - 02:15 am: |
|
••••••, ••••••, ••••••... Damn that Kyle!
So to update this post, I decided to go with a petrol engine. Not because it was petrol, but because it was the year I wanted, RHD and an 88".
I did have the option to get a 'running' 109" 5 door Diesel (See post for the '73 Series III for sale).
I was almost literally at a crossroad. Left to make a deposit on the 88" Petrol or right for the 109" Diesel.
BTW, I think that Diesel is still available for close to a song, looking for a good home.
Javier |
Ricky Smart (Rikstaboogie)
| | Posted on Friday, July 26, 2002 - 02:41 pm: |
|
petrol :-) |
Dave M.
| | Posted on Friday, August 02, 2002 - 04:10 pm: |
|
If I was rebuilding a Series and had a choice of engines I'd go for a 2.5 diesel. ECR uses them quite a bit and they are a nice fit for the Short wheelbase Series trucks.
http://www.eastcoastrover.com/87.html
If I was building a Series 109, I'd stuff a 3.9 Rover V8 in though. Too much weight for that 2.5 or a 2.25 petrol.
Someday I'm going to beg/borrow/buy/build me a Series! :-D |
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page