Rear diff disappointment again

Seeing as Rover use Transit engines and gearboxes in the Puma, why not Transit diffs as well? Some years ago I ran modified Transit diffs with Landy hubs and swivels in my series 2a, and even with 36'' tyres, dual wheels all round and 270:1 low low range they were virtually bulletproof.
Beautifully made and finished,(made in Germany) of Salisbury style construction but with threaded side race adjusters, and nice thick axle tubes, they even gave half an inch more ground clearance than Rover diffs.With the transfercase high range gearing changed from 1.21:1 to 1.003;1 the 4.625 ring and pinion ratio shouldn't reduce speed by more than 10% either.
Wagoo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wagoo

Seeing as Rover use Transit engines and gearboxes in the Puma, why not Transit diffs as well? Some years ago I ran modified Transit diffs with Landy hubs and swivels in my series 2a, and even with 36'' tyres, dual wheels all round and 270:1 low low range they were virtually bulletproof.
Beautifully made and finished,(made in Germany) of Salisbury style construction but with threaded side race adjusters, and nice thick axle tubes, they even gave half an inch more ground clearance than Rover diffs.With the transfercase high range gearing changed to 1.003;1 the 4.625 ring and pinion ratio shouldn't reduce speed either.
Wagoo.

---

I thought the 60s/70s transits used D44s??? They certainly seem about that size. However the standard ratio is too low for a Puma. A bloke I know with a transit pulled the rear axle out and fitted a 3.2(?):1 falcon rear end - much weaker, but better on the highway...

Forget Ford Transit...I don't have one
I think that Ashcroft (Dave) has the correct approach to this issue: work the problem from an engineering aspect not a brand name.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by isuzurover

I thought the 60s/70s transits used D44s??? They certainly seem about that size. However the standard ratio is too low for a Puma. A bloke I know with a transit pulled the rear axle out and fitted a 3.2(?):1 falcon rear end - much weaker, but better on the highway...

---

Did quite a few Transit to Borg Warner falcon/valiant conversions during my time at McNamara Differentials. They were quite strong when the carrier was drilled to accept 4 pinions,never saw a broken ring and pinion, but the halfshaft size was the limiting factor.
But no the Transit was not a D44. The difference in strength and quality is chalk and cheese.Whilst the Standard ratio of 4.625:1,combined with the 1.003:1 t/case ratio may give a final drive ratio that is 10% lower than a std Puma , I was suggesting that Rover fit them in production, along with the transit engine and gearbox, in which case alternative ratio ring and pinions could be made. The Std transit carrier offset will take a wide range of ratios without alteration.
Wagoo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wagoo

I was suggesting that Rover fit them in production, along with the transit engine and gearbox, in which case alternative ratio ring and pinions could be made.

---

You suggest that LR could produce a vehicle with a properly engineered drivetrain with no built-in grenades??? :D

Are you trying to put ashcroft, hi-tough, mcnamara, rovertracks, mr_automotive, kam, and many other companies out of business :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by isuzurover

You suggest that LR could produce a vehicle with a properly engineered drivetrain with no built-in grenades??? :D

Are you trying to put ashcroft, hi-tough, mcnamara, rovertracks, mr_automotive, kam, and many other companies out of business :D

---

My God! I didn't realise that complete global financial meltdown has been averted solely by LandRovers continuing inability to make a Defender 'fit for purpose' off the showroom floor.:D
Wagoo.