SIII 109 body on a 110 chassis?

[junkyddog11]

That's why they make saw's and nibblers..:littlefriend:

makes for a bloody big hole mate. You'd need some big meat to fill it. Looks seriously (haha) odd with the truck in the yard. I'll have to take a picture eh?




TeriAnn.....Nice work on the translation from images. I'm envious. When I try to express myself in that context it sounds very much like a walrus flopping in the dust and putting it in print is completely out of the question.:ylsmoke:

 

[TeriAnn]

makes for a bloody big hole mate. You'd need some big meat to fill it. Looks seriously (haha) odd with the truck in the yard. I'll have to take a picture eh?

The wheel arch is wider and taller to provide clearance for both additional articulation and them funny eyebrow thingies manufactures like to put of 4X4's these days.

The only example I have is the front wing arch. Below is a picture showing the front vehicle with the Defender wheel arch and the rear vehicle has the stock Series arch and smaller tyres.

The outer wing panel on the closer vehicle is from a early One Ten or Ninety. The Defender ones have lamp holes in the sides. But you can see that even with taller tyres, there is a lot more clearance and that the coiler wheel arch has a lot more clearance behind the tyre. Based upon that additional space I wonder if coilers use that space rock crawling. It would be interesting to look at a close up video of a tyre dancing in the wheel well going over obstacles.

Bottom line is that I suspect the rear wheel is supposed to sit forward of the rear wheel arch centre and anything smaller than 37 inch dia tyres will look small in there without the eyebrows.

As I mentioned previously you can move the rear axle rearwards about 2 inches with an off the shelf axle offset plate (as long as you remember a longer rear propshaft & rear fuel tank clearance).

I just remembered a second picture where I laid one panel on top of the other.

 

[Oilburner]

As stated the 110 has its wheelbase pushed back with respect to the 109. The axle location is moved back almost 3 inches in comparison to a 109, and the front axle is also moved rearward in relation to the body as well. Use of a 109 body on a 110 chassis would result in the wheel opening being much further forward of the axle centerline. I used a 110 tub on my 109 and had to move the axle back significantly to center it in the wheel opening, I am pretty sure it was three inches.

 

[junkyddog11]

yup, thats what I'm talking about. The rear axle of a 110 frame would have to move forward 3 or 4 inches (no easy feat) or as Keith said....saw and nibblers..but that would lead to an awfully big hole. Way bigger than the 110 wheel well by about 7 inches.

I have several rolling 110 chassis at the shop and several 109 tubs. It would be great to have an easy solution to putting these together, but unlike the leafers it's fairly difficult to move the axle in a coiler....

 

[junkyddog11]

yeaaah, about that wheelwell.

 

[Michael Slade]

Wow, those images are amazing. I would never have guessed it was that much different.

 

[TeriAnn]

Wow, those images are amazing. I would never have guessed it was that much different.

Yeh. I thought all the extra cut out to the rear of the front wheel arch was a bit strange but when I see the rear, I really find myself wondering how they moved both the front and rear wheels towards the centre AND picked up an extra inch of wheelbase.

It appears that the factory decreased the approach & departure angles when they switched from leaf springs to coil springs.

Since my rear axle now sits an inch and a half closer to the rear crossmember I know not to even consider a 110 rear body tub if my 109 tub ever gets damaged.

The pictures of the 110 rear tub on a 109 frame, is it a 110 rear tub & 109 cabin area on a 109 frame, or is it a complete 110 body on a 109 frame? I'm wondering how they got a 110 and not a 105.

 

[Michael Slade]

The pictures of the 110 rear tub on a 109 frame, is it a 110 rear tub & 109 cabin area on a 109 frame, or is it a complete 110 body on a 109 frame? I'm wondering how they got a 110 and not a 105.

After several years playing with Land Rovers and Land-Rovers of various types, I'm surprized they ever got anything at all!

My big truck ends up being 145 inches. My short one is 81.5 inches. I also have the 108 inch 'Plushmobile' (TM).

 

[Oilburner]

Series trucks have the wheels noticeably closer to the leading edge of the wheel opening. The 90/110/130s have the front wheel centered in the wheel opening. The opening appears to be in the same spot, but the axle is definitely moved back, same as the rear. The approach angle does not suffer much because the coilers do not have the front leaf spring mount sticking out the front.

I think it was a good move, the departure angle was improved and the approach angle is about the same.

Edit: The photo is of a 109 tub on a 110 frame. The coil springs can be seen in the photo.

 

[TeriAnn]

After several years playing with Land Rovers and Land-Rovers of various types, I'm surprized they ever got anything at all!

My big truck ends up being 145 inches. My short one is 81.5 inches. I also have the 108 inch 'Plushmobile' (TM).

My 1960 109 measured 109.5" axle centre to axle centre before I moved the rear axle rearwards 1.5 inches. So I drive a Land Rover 111 RV with better than stock departure angle.

Next time I'm around a 110 I'm going to have to get out a measuring tape.

 

[junkyddog11]

The pictures of the 110 rear tub on a 109 frame, is it a 110 rear tub & 109 cabin area on a 109 frame, or is it a complete 110 body on a 109 frame? I'm wondering how they got a 110 and not a 105.

TeriAnn, the pictures are a 109 tub on a 110 chassis....which is the question we have been (or supposed to have been) discussing form the original post. The "cabin" area has no effect on this as it is working forward from the rear crossmember. I'm not sure what a "105" is? ....and the 110 has a better approach and departure angle than the 109.:REExeSwimmingHL:

side note; leafers have the wheels by design, at rest, closer to the leading edge of the wheel well as the wheels travel backwards as the spring is compressed. Unless it is one of the vehicles which has spring shackles on the front of the spring in which case the opposite would be true.

This type of movement is not a consideration with coilers.

 

[revor]

side note; leafers have the wheels by design, at rest, closer to the leading edge of the wheel well as the wheels travel backwards as the spring is compressed. Unless it is one of the vehicles which has spring shackles on the front of the spring in which case the opposite would be true.

This type of movement is not a consideration with coilers.

I just love all that technical jargon!!!

The real question is are you coming to the rally??? The answer should be a resounding yes! Or I shall have my Posse of D90 owners from New England come and kidnap you!

 

[TeriAnn]

TeriAnn, the pictures are a 109 tub on a 110 chassis....which is the question we have been (or supposed to have been) discussing form the original post.

Sorry I was obviously asleep at the keyboard and got everything backwards. Maybe I was overly influenced by my focus on leaf springs.

side note; leafers have the wheels by design, at rest, closer to the leading edge of the wheel well as the wheels travel backwards as the spring is compressed.

Well that's an interesting thing. Leaf springs under the rear of a Series rig dance a more complicated pattern than you describe while rock crawling. There is forward movement of at lest 5 inches in the pattern. I moved my rear axle back to get a little more clearance between the left rear tyre and my water tank for the dance to take place. 32 inch tyres in the stock location (1 ton springs, long shackles) can move forward just farther than the edge of wheel arch while rock crawling.

But yes if you just look at spring compression and shackle movement as the axle drops, the spring arch increases and the shackle bottom eye moves forward maybe moving the wheel slightly forward. As the axle moves closer to the body, the spring flattens(lengthens) the bottom shackle eye moves rearwards and the tyre maybe moves rearwards in the arch.

With a solid axle, if one wheel drops and moves towards the front and the other side moves upwards and towards the rear the whole axle assembly becomes slightly cocked. It is possible that a tyre climbing up an obstacle cocks it even farther than it would in a static arrangement. Especially if you ad in engine torque.

Maybe the pattern should be called "Dances with rocks" It would be a good name for a rock crawler.

 

[junkyddog11]

I just love all that technical jargon!!!

The real question is are you coming to the rally??? The answer should be a resounding yes! Or I shall have my Posse of D90 owners from New England come and kidnap you!

Hah....more than likely they'll have to come and kidnap there rigs first!

I am trying very hard to get to a point where I can make the rally.:rally_guys:

First, I have a couple more frame swaps, 3 diesel conversions and tons of small stuff (completely rewiring and installing new "high tech" systems on board a 1964 Ford custom cab over Land Yacht....which will be at the rally on the way to "Burning Man").......

BACK ON THREAD:

Just curious as to if a 5 door body is more similar in dimension 110 vs. 109. I'd not thought much about it but are the body parts much more similar than the 3 door bits I've pictured ?(and discussed, now at length argh, argh). The thought that the original poster may be considering a 5 door promted this (response?from OP). Almost curious enough to toss a 109 5 door rear tub on one of the other 110 rollers just to see. Might take a couple of days to get all the right bits in the right places though.

 

[revor]

Hah....more than likely they'll have to come and kidnap there rigs first!

I am trying very hard to get to a point where I can make the rally.:rally_guys:

First, I have a couple more frame swaps, 3 diesel conversions and tons of small stuff (completely rewiring and installing new "high tech" systems on board a 1964 Ford custom cab over Land Yacht....which will be at the rally on the way to "Burning Man").......

BACK ON THREAD:

Just curious as to if a 5 door body is more similar in dimension 110 vs. 109. I'd not thought much about it but are the body parts much more similar than the 3 door bits I've pictured ?(and discussed, now at length argh, argh). The thought that the original poster may be considering a 5 door promted this (response?from OP). Almost curious enough to toss a 109 5 door rear tub on one of the other 110 rollers just to see. Might take a couple of days to get all the right bits in the right places though.

Send in the Ninja 90 owners club.. Could you see Marchand in a black Ninja outfit?

Back on track:
If a S3 'T' piece's, doors, and that little trim panel in front of the wheel are dimensionally the same as a 110 it would stand to reason that the five door body would fit right on (?) I've seen one (in Texas), it was a nice piece of work and a cool blend of new and old. But to be honest I don't know (and didn't see) any further modifications other than the wheel arches had been nicely cut to look Defender like, where they dimensionally that same? I am not sure. It had 9.50-16 tires and they did not look to have a clearance problem so perhaps they where oversized on this seemingly non-lifted truck.

I wish I had taken a picture, but since I get so much crap for driveway pics a shopping mall pic would be devistating! I waited almost an hour for the owner but couldn't wait any longer, Corpus Cristi 2001 someone else has to have seen this truck. Anyone? Anyone? Beuhler? Beuhler?