Thread: 101 front shaft fix

Thanks Ron - hell of a lot cheaper than my freelander UJs - $70 each from a industrial supplier

Garry

Well I went to the local industrial supply place and they have Hardy Spicer P/N K5-13XR UJs for $25 each. But the guy then asked, did I actually need the Heavy Duty version P/N K5-13XRHD which are $100 each or the HD Premium version for a $120 each. What the ??????

I said I did not know and I would get back to him. Another bearing place did not sell Hardy Spicer but had a SKF equivalent. Repco has them but charge $35 for the basic UJs, $135 for the HDs and about $160 for the premium models. The Repco brand equivalents are the same price.

Interestingly, none of the sales people were prepared to convince me the heavy duty and premium versions were actually better than the standard UJs.

So given the loads on the front UJs in a 101, do I need the heavy duty versions or not? I will use the standard UJs in the rear driveshaft.

Somewhat confused.

Garry

The part no I use came from what came out of my UJs and I think is standard with the series three rover.
I dont know anything about heavy duty versions.
Its your choice.
SKF are a good brand.

Usually a heavy duty bearing has more and smaller rollers to transfer the load.
I personally would go the cheaper version.
Another interesting thing is the series three brake shoes (new) I have in the back of the 101 are on the last part of the adjuster cam.
They looked to have thin linnings new.
My drums are perfect and have not been machined.
Standard 101 shoes must have thicker linings than series three.
I will get my old shoes relined to a thicker spec.
I will check the brake drum size of the 101.
Does any one know the standard brake drum diameter of a series three.
I have ordered some shoes and wheel cylinders for the front from Anthony Johnson,so it will be interesting to see what happens there.

The 101 workshop manual states the 101 drums should be 280mm or 11 inches as standard.
A haynes workshop book for a Landrover (late 1980s rear) states 280 mm with a minimum linning thickness of1.5 mm.
the 101 drum has 281mm cast into it for maximum dia .
I think the replacement shoes we are getting are not up to stratch with too thin bonded linings.

When I was looking at my brakes - I realised there was only about 1mm wear allowance on the drums.

Shoes were carried in stock at my local brake supplier - $65 a pair for standard (no exchange) but as soon as I indicated I wanted oversize the price went up to $100 a pair - they also carried second oversize.

As far as the UJs are concerned I think that I will go the standard ones and if they chew out quickly I know that I can put in a heavy duty version - if they do not chew out quickly I will have saved $75-$100 a go.

My current UJs are still tight but I would prefer to replace them as a precaution. The slide on the front shaft is relatively tight with just a tiny amount of sideways movement - so should be OK for a good while yet.

Garry

Originally Posted by 101 Ron

<snip>.....
The Range rover transmission with third diff must be of set alot to the RHS and the 101 chassis is high and narrow.
Even though the Range transmission was designed with the 101 in mind it is not possible for a small production run vehicle of the 101 to have a transmission complelely redesigned for it, or was it possible to use the narrower rover diff on the front , or the earlier and weaker series transmission.
The special short bell housing was the compromise answer,
At the time of the design of the 101 it was not common to use a front drive shaft with a rolled diff and double carden joint and this still doesnt fix things in the side ways plane of operation.
....<snip>

Sorry for jumping back in this thread as I hadn't read the all the posts before!

Ron is the 101 the same width between the chassis rails as the Rangie?

Why I ask , is because the 101 was originally designed off the Land Rover and in fact using series FC transmission parts on the early prototypes. Similarly the Range Rover got the same chassis width as the series LR for the same reason and it follows that when they adapted the Ferguson/David Brown gearbox for the RR it was done using the LR chassis width.

Originally Posted by 101 Ron

<snip>.....
As for the steering box , adjust the silly thing !
It is a recirulating ball ball type.
That means if the thing has oil in it and then bearings are OK it will be perfect.
I did a steering box adjustment in the sand at Stockton beach with two shifters......its easy.
.....<snip>

Garry

Ron is correct the recirculating ball steering box is very good and you should be able to adjust the slack out of it.

If you can't adjust the slack out of it, it could be because of wear and the usual fix is to replace the ball bearings with some a few thou' oversize.

I have however also heard of the Land Rover box where the steel plate that returns the balls to the recirculating channel had worn through and the balls were dropping out into the bottom of the box. The symptoms immediately before the terminal failure was that the steering was rapidly becoming vague as more balls dropped through.

What I'm saying is that adjust it up but if it doesn't improve either dismantle it and inspect the condition yourself or send it off to a steering specialist.

Diana

Originally Posted by Lotz-A-Landies

What I'm saying is if it doesn't improve either dismantle it and inspect the condition yourself or send it off to a steering specialist.

Diana

Or just replace it with the brand new one I have sitting in my garage.

Garry