Factory discs in my '99 130, but my County with D1 booster and rear disc conversion stops MUCH better.
As Isuzurover said - no residual valve. Perhaps that's why they seemed to have a lot of pedal travel even when newly adjusted.
Steve
Printable View
Factory discs in my '99 130, but my County with D1 booster and rear disc conversion stops MUCH better.
As Isuzurover said - no residual valve. Perhaps that's why they seemed to have a lot of pedal travel even when newly adjusted.
Steve
Sorry for replying to this post years after the event.Quote:
Originally Posted by uninformed
Original fitment RRc/Disco/Defender Xtreme alloy rims won't fit on two door Range Rover hubs. So the consideration of using 2 door RR hubs for a drum to disk brake conversion has to be tempered with the potential wheels you will be using.
I have access to 4 of these RRc axle assemblies, but am unable to use them because of the LR alloy rims I have as a spare set for the defender.
Wakey wakey.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lotz-A-LandiesHave been unable to acquire the FTC 1740 stubs in Sydney, does anyone close by have one I could borrow Friday till Sunday?Quote:
Originally Posted by steveGThat would be a really good option for those who already have an investment in early style (long) aftermarket axles.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lotz-A-Landies
Steve
Well not finding an FTC 1740 stub, I went and purchased four after market ones. Now wish I hadn't.
I started to finish off the middle axle over the last weekend and everything has come to naught. The FTC 1740 will give me the correct hub face using the D1 hubs I have, but when setting everything up I find that my D1 hubs are the same 60mm wide spaced (overall) bearings not the narrow 52mm spacing. This means that the outer bearing is only partially supported and there's only enough thread for one nut and maybe the lock tab but barely a couple of threads for the outer nut. :BigCry: The whole system would be a failure.
My only other option would be to get the later narrow spaced hub and hope the wheel face is the same. :(
Well I have just found the Kit I bought. Its been hiding all these years. Too much junk coupled with losing a bunch of memory cell a couple of years ago led to this. Never mind.
I was thinking of getting back into it using the bits off a 92 Disco V8 I have here and found this old thread but of course Photobucket has dumped all the pics of how it all goes together.
Thats going to make it a bit harder and as I need the 110 quite often I might just postpone it a bit longer
Anyone got non photobucket pics to share of how the calipers etc bolt up?
Keith
Hi Murray,Quote:
Originally Posted by rijidij
can you please confirm that the late 110s (pre Defender) did indeed have a different rear stub axle that had a different/narrower wheel bearing spacing compared to the older early 110 stub FRC3132.
I think the part number for the 87, 88 110 (pre Defender) rear stub is FRC8540.
Do you have any idea how much difference/narrower the wheel bearing spacing is between the 2?
Reason I ask Is im trying to figure out when LR made the change, not just on the 110, but on other Rover rears. Most think it was just the 300 Tdi change over but Im not quite sure.
Unfortunately it's a bit hit and miss when it comes to part specs around the time of the County to Defender transition. Mine, being a 1988 model, I've found I need to physically check parts before ordering because you can't rely on it being 100% correct for the model year. For example, mine had stubs with key ways on the front and flats on the rear.Quote:
Originally Posted by uninformed
Regarding the bearing spacing difference, there were actually three different ones, I did measure them at the time but I can't find the reference. From this pic it looks approx 15mm between those two.
I can confirm my '88 model County did have narrower bearing spacing on the back, but others with earlier model Countys said they were able to use the original rear stubs with the key way, mine had the flat.
Cheers, Murray
My '86 County already had rear discs when I bought it in 2006. The previous owner told me it was a "factory conversion kit".
totally agree on the hit and miss part...Quote:
Originally Posted by rijidij
From my digging, and a lot of inturpelation, it looks like there was a change around 1986, wit both RRC and LR's . They went from a slotted key way to a flat for the locking tab and washers.
This FISRT incarnation of the Stub axles with FLATS, has a spacer in between the outer wheel bearing and the first hub lock nut. This on both the RRc and LR as shown in my old parts catalogues.
The later disc brake 300tdi defenders had no such spacer on the stub axle, even though it used the same flat section. Just a washer between the outer bearing and first hub lock nut.
The pic you added is of the very early 110 stub FRC3132 and the later 300tdi disc rear FTC1740. What I am trying to assertain is the diffenerce between FRC3132 and FRC8540 with regards to bearing spacing.
I have read many threads on the internet and there seems much confusion or vagueness regarding LR stub axles, even incorrect information, and I see many people come un stuck when trying to mix and match hubs and they dodnt even know what stubs they have.
I have both of the FRc3132 and FTC1740, and some RRC stubs, but no FRC8540, otherwise id put this difference to bed.
Thanks for this thread and your help mate.
Im digging up the past here I know, but any chance you still have this pic Steve? Im trying to find the differences between these 2 stub axles, specificly the wheel bearing spacing.Quote:
Originally Posted by steveG
That's why, where possible, I physically check parts before ordering.Quote:
Originally Posted by uninformed