Longer front shock towers

[Wal Rat]

I am about to fit 5 inch longer front shocks,2inch longer shock towers ,cones and spring retainers to my defender the question is what do I do about the drivers side shock tower that is below the expansion tank. I think it is going to hit, so do I get an alloy expansion tank made with a hole in the middle or has some one out there got a better answer.

[Offender90]

I am about to fit 5 inch longer front shocks,2inch longer shock towers ,cones and spring retainers to my defender the question is what do I do about the drivers side shock tower that is below the expansion tank. I think it is going to hit, so do I get an alloy expansion tank made with a hole in the middle or has some one out there got a better answer.

I suspect it would be much easier to relocate the expansion tank. There should be plenty of room to move in a Defender engine bay.

[Wal Rat]

I suspect it would be much easier to relocate the expansion tank. There should be plenty of room to move in a Defender engine bay.Problem is there is not a lot of room as forward of expansion tank is power steering tank,and behind is the master cylinder.

[LowRanger]

Problem is there is not a lot of room as forward of expansion tank is power steering tank,and behind is the master cylinder.

This is exactly why the system that Terrafirma "borrowed" from Gwyn Lewis isn't complete,as they left out a few details.

When I fitted my Gwyn Lewis +2" towers,they came with approx 2" standoffs to space the expansion tank off the inner guard,just enough to clear the towers.
All you will require is a couple of pieces of threaded rod approx3" long, some washers and nyloc nuts and a couple of pieces of metal tube approx 2" long that will fit over the threaded rod.Mine is 6mm threaded rod and approx 10 mm tube.Just need to drill a couple of holes in the inner lip of the guard (right near where the original mounts are) and fit it up:D
I think the longest part of the job was getting the tools organised to do the job.
And make sure that you check the bonnet stay doesn't hit the expansion tank when you close the bonnet.I found that I had a fair amount of movement (laterally) in my bonnet stay,and needed to add a couple of washers to the bottom mount to stop it moving sideways and fouling on the expansion tank.

Hope this helps

Wayne

[Wal Rat]

Thanks:) that is just the answer I was hoping for you have made my day will pick up the bits tomorrow . Thanks again:D

[IGL002]

I am about to fit 5 inch longer front shocks,2inch longer shock towers ,cones and spring retainers to my defender the question is what do I do about the drivers side shock tower that is below the expansion tank. I think it is going to hit, so do I get an alloy expansion tank made with a hole in the middle or has some one out there got a better answer.

Why?

[wagoo]

Is there enough compliance in the radius arm bushings to take advantage of the longer dampers?
Wagoo.

[lambrover]

Why?

In the landrover world there are some who think they a perfect and need no modification, by the sounds of it you may fit into this category.

Then there are owners who are looking for more out of there landy, mods not only make the vehicle more capable but more reliable as the upgrades are stronger than standard. With suspension mods the benefits are longer wheel travel, this gives better stability offroad and due to the longer wheel travel you don't need to push the car as hard as a standard car. I know this from experience as I have just sold my county with long wheel travel and my new defender is standard and to go over the same ground I have to push the defender as the wheels come of the ground.

I hope this helps people understand why people mod there cars

[lambrover]

Is there enough compliance in the radius arm bushings to take advantage of the longer dampers?
Wagoo.

I had longer shocks in my county and I had more travel than standard but to get that extra little bit more you would need cranked radius arms

[rovercare]

Is there enough compliance in the radius arm bushings to take advantage of the longer dampers?
Wagoo.


I had longer shocks in my county and I had more travel than standard but to get that extra little bit more you would need cranked radius arms

I think wagoo is asking a question he already knows the answer too;)

[Wal Rat]

check out the thread "Show us your flex" for some of the answer.

wal

[LowRanger]

Is there enough compliance in the radius arm bushings to take advantage of the longer dampers?
Wagoo.

Bill

As you are aware there is not enough compliance in the standard Rover setup to gain 5" of droop,but I have found that having the raised towers and longer shocks,as well a Holey bushes,when taking the extra UP travel into account,as well as the down travel,I am able to use the extra shock length.
And yes I know the reason for you question;)

Wayne

[wagoo]

Bill

As you are aware there is not enough compliance in the standard Rover setup to gain 5" of droop,but I have found that having the raised towers and longer shocks,as well a Holey bushes,when taking the extra UP travel into account,as well as the down travel,I am able to use the extra shock length.
And yes I know the reason for you question;)

Wayne

Wayne. It's been about 9 years and my memory is getting fuzzier by the day, but when I was building a RR based hybrid and doing articulation experiments I vaguely recall that at standard(low) suspension height, as the right hand front tyre(36'') would tuck up, it would roll around the upper spring mount and eventually foul about half way up the witches hat. When the static suspension height was increased with longer springs/ spacers the axles articulation/roll axis was lower down in relation to the chassis, so the tyre would foul badly on the coil spring and upper spring mount.This didn't happen with the left hand wheel due to the panhard rod giving a different roll geometry left to right.The problem was eventually solved by replacing the panhard with a Watts Link.(yes I know, bump steer and all that).
Once you have completed your installation and tested it, would you post up the results ?
Wagoo.

[LowRanger]

Wayne. It's been about 9 years and my memory is getting fuzzier by the day, but when I was building a RR based hybrid and doing articulation experiments I vaguely recall that at standard(low) suspension height, as the right hand front tyre(36'') would tuck up, it would roll around the upper spring mount and eventually foul about half way up the witches hat. When the static suspension height was increased with longer springs/ spacers the axles articulation/roll axis was lower down in relation to the chassis, so the tyre would foul badly on the coil spring and upper spring mount.This didn't happen with the left hand wheel due to the panhard rod giving a different roll geometry left to right.The problem was eventually solved by replacing the panhard with a Watts Link.(yes I know, bump steer and all that).
Once you have completed your installation and tested it, would you post up the results ?
Wagoo.

Bill

I have had mine fitted for quite some time now,and as you say,with the standard offset wheels,and at the time I had 265/75 tyres fitted,I found that the tyres fouled on the upper spring towers under nowhere near full articulation.
I now run 35" tyres and -25mm offset rims and find I can fully tuck the tyres into the wheel well,(which is what I was after to gain maximum usable articulation out of what is basically the standard design)without fouling on the spring towers or on the shock tower.
My shock towers are not conical like the originals and the design gives me more clearance as well I have attached a picture of the shock towers amongst other stuff(sorry but the pic was taken with a point and shoot camera)but the towers are standing up against the wheel.
The setup was designed in the UK by Gwyn Lewis,and is used by a majority of competitors in their winch challenge events.
The design was so effective that Terrafirma "Borrowed" the design as Gwyn never copyrighted it.
I would never say it is the best system by any means,but it does work to give the best articulation from a standard design setup with just a small lift,maximising the ability to tuck the wheel full as well as allow the full droop allowed by the front bushes etc which is what I was after.
Having said that,a bolt in 3 link would be nice:angel:

[wagoo]

Bill

I have had mine fitted for quite some time now,and as you say,with the standard offset wheels,and at the time I had 265/75 tyres fitted,I found that the tyres fouled on the upper spring towers under nowhere near full articulation.
I now run 35" tyres and -25mm offset rims and find I can fully tuck the tyres into the wheel well,(which is what I was after to gain maximum usable articulation out of what is basically the standard design)without fouling on the spring towers or on the shock tower.
My shock towers are not conical like the originals and the design gives me more clearance as well I have attached a picture of the shock towers amongst other stuff(sorry but the pic was taken with a point and shoot camera)but the towers are standing up against the wheel.
The setup was designed in the UK by Gwyn Lewis,and is used by a majority of competitors in their winch challenge events.
The design was so effective that Terrafirma "Borrowed" the design as Gwyn never copyrighted it.
I would never say it is the best system by any means,but it does work to give the best articulation from a standard design setup with just a small lift,maximising the ability to tuck the wheel full as well as allow the full droop allowed by the front bushes etc which is what I was after.
Having said that,a bolt in 3 link would be nice:angel:
Thanks for the reply Wayne. I did do a bolt on 3 link with drop brackets for the lower links, and with a clamp on upper link mount, that I believe is still holding up well. You obviously know about the Safari G uard 3 link kit, and I think there is now a British copy.Not sure about the dive/anti dive geometry of the upside down link placement,but from photos at least it would appear that ground clearance across the whole width of the front axle has been reduced to that of the differential.
Wagoo.

[LowRanger]

Thanks for the reply Wayne. I did do a bolt on 3 link with drop brackets for the lower links, and with a clamp on upper link mount, that I believe is still holding up well. You obviously know about the Safari G uard 3 link kit, and I think there is now a British copy.Not sure about the dive/anti dive geometry of the upside down link placement,but from photos at least it would appear that ground clearance across the whole width of the front axle has been reduced to that of the differential.
Wagoo.

Yes Bill I am aware of the Safari Gard 3 link and also the QT version,and have read all the varios threads on outers and Pirate,over the years.Unfortunately second hand units dont come up very often,and when they do,I usually hear about it 5 minutes after someone has purchased it.Unfortunately with my work commitments I don't have the time to fabricate things.But I will continue to keep an ear to the ground.

Wayne

[modman]

The trick is to use skinny radius arms, holey bushes later front housing with conical spacers to suit early arms.
You can also reverse the front dome washers on the radius arms
Then of course you need longer brake lines, rubber panhard bushes
Following nicely would be cranked arms, dc shaft, offset wheels

David
Yes bill I still have the 101 Diffs and arb gears, interesting to see the difference between newer d60 locker and sals ( arb style)

[LowRanger]

The trick is to use skinny radius arms, holey bushes later front housing with conical spacers to suit early arms.
You can also reverse the front dome washers on the radius arms
Then of course you need longer brake lines, rubber panhard bushes
Following nicely would be cranked arms, dc shaft, offset wheels

David
Yes bill I still have the 101 Diffs and arb gears, interesting to see the difference between newer d60 locker and sals ( arb style)

Hmmm

David,I have no problem with fouling on the radius arms,due to the large offset wheels that I run ie.-25mm.Apart from clearance for the tyres,do you have any other reasons for the skinny (early) type arms.I already have the later type housing,and have a set of early type (RRC) arms laying around here.
I have no problems with vibrations,so am not wanting to go down the path of cranked arms,and possibly to the problems they can induce.Also I have wide angle unis in the front shaft and have no problems with binding on full articulation,but I know that on later models ,this can be a real problem.
All the bushes in my truck are rubber,and I run 4" longer brake lines,which is OK with the setup I run.But I might go and reverse the dome washers when I get the chance,seeing that it is only one nut each side;)
And yes the Dana60 locker is very much larger than the Salisbury.
I run Dana60 bits in the rear,with a custom made flange to suit the Landy driveshaft.

Wayne

[modman]

I won' bother you with the usual purist drivel
Skinny arms/ holey bushesbind way less as proven with travel ramp (static ramp with vehicle weight only)
Skinny arms flex more in later wider housing (need spacers or it drives like pig/dangerous
Arms cranked at chassis end to relieve bush bind(reversing cone washer helps)
Been thinking of swaybar in the rear lately(butchered original above axle) for balancing front/rear flex
Many guys on here know way more/done way more than me

This is all 1% ers pushing the rover radius arm set up as far as you are comfortable
David

[rick130]

After I replaced my holey bushes with some urethane ones (daily driver work truck) it was really interesting what happened on my makeshift ramp.

The radius arm pins at the chassis end were rotating as the diff housing dropped so negating a lot of bind at the diff mounts (late type wide radius arms and little compression there with urethane, albeit soft urethane bushes)

The stock rubber pin bushes wouldn't allow this as they had pretty much fused to all the steel around them.

Upshot was I was getting virtually the same droop with bushes everyone reckoned would kill my flex, without the wallow on road of the flogged out holey bushes. (and no reflection on the holey bushes, they work well)

Now that the grease on the urethane pin bushes has long gone (I'm assuming) it probably doesn't flex as it did when they were new.

<edit> forgot to add I was only going for an extra 1.5", maybe 2" at the most of extra droop. The radius arms are pretty much totally bound at that, you'd have to do the old pop a bolt out trick on one of the radius arms to get any more droop.

[wagoo]

David
Yes bill I still have the 101 Diffs and arb gears, interesting to see the difference between newer d60 locker and sals ( arb style)

Hi David, how's tricks? long time no see.
I might have told you all those years ago that I had an argument with ARB head office about them making the Sals difflock smaller than the D60, particularly as standard Sals have 4 pinion carriers and std 60s do not.

I asked if they would build me a D60 with the correct flange offset for 4.7 ratio ring and pinion and landrover splines in the side gear and they refused.
Yet they bend over backwards for the Yanks. Screw em.They're not the only show in town.
Wagoo.

[rick130]

You'd think it'd be good PR for them to do the odd special Bill, but I suppose money/markets are where it's at :(

[modman]

Bring back the Roberts locker!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Honestly cheaper to chase a better price in the states for arb lockers:mad:

[wagoo]

Bring back the Roberts locker!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Honestly cheaper to chase a better price in the states for arb lockers:mad:

But the ARB is basically the Roberts locker, supposedly refined over the years for mass production and to reduce production costs.
Anyway back to suspension. David, when you talk about skinny radius arms, are you suggesting that the actual arms will flex more in their vertical plain to compensate for lack of compliance in the axle end bushings? Or just that the axle end bushings can articulate further in the wider axle mounting brackets?
wagoo.

[LowRanger]

The trick is to use skinny radius arms, holey bushes later front housing with conical spacers to suit early arms.
You can also reverse the front dome washers on the radius arms
Then of course you need longer brake lines, rubber panhard bushes
Following nicely would be cranked arms, dc shaft, offset wheels

David
Yes bill I still have the 101 Diffs and arb gears, interesting to see the difference between newer d60 locker and sals ( arb style)

David

I am interested in the use of "conical spacers".I am guessing the "top" of the cone section would face the bush either side of the arm,to allow the bush to be supported at its centre and then flex around the cone,while still having a large surface area of support on the mounting brackets.Please correct me if I am on the wrong track?

Wayne

[modman]

Imagine jmac bought the rites all those years ago for that locker
Yes bill the skinnier holey bushes flex slightly more than the thicker counterpart BUT they flex with less force( not sure right word'maybe resistance)
I see it that you can run a lighter spring and still get good compression and extension cross articulating a rover
After watching what the RA's do during articulation the skinny arms can also misalign more in a later housing. Not getting into the actual material twist that may occur
I am continually surprised by the strength of rover arms compared to Nissan/ Toyota
I look at many roll overs, all makes and the rover arms seem to hold their integrity often ripping mounts off
I'm blown away by your lower front arms:eek:

[modman]

Sorry Wayne,
Yes often called misalignment spacers
Spot on with your description
David

[wagoo]

I am continually surprised by the strength of rover arms compared to Nissan/ Toyota
I look at many roll overs, all makes and the rover arms seem to hold their integrity often ripping mounts off
I'm blown away by your lower front arms:eek:

I don't use those lower arms anymore.I bent the U" shape into the side of them to clear the inner front dual wheels at full lock, but since going to portals the duals don't fit anymore, and the single Q78 tyres clear easily with the extra trackwidth.
But as I've said on another thread, Rover Radius arms are forged steel and you could literally tie knots in them without any cracking. Nissan radius arms will shatter even if you try to crank them a couple of degrees for castor correction.
Wagoo.

Edit. the skinny radius arms have a smaller diameter pin at the chassis end, and the bushings have a smaller diameter spigot, so either the plain end of the pin will need to be sleeved up to use the later bushings, or the hole in the chassis bracket needs to be sleeved down to use the earlier bushings.

[wagoo]

You'd think it'd be good PR for them to do the odd special Bill, but I suppose money/markets are where it's at :(

they wouldn't really need to be specials Rick.The most common offset Sals difflock carrier they are likely to sell is the 3.54:1, which is the same offset as 3.54, 4.1 and 4.56 D60s. They could just put 24 spline sidegears in their D60 lockers and smaller crownwheel bolt holes . A crownwheel spacer for the 4.7 and 101 5.58 ratio and it's done.
Wagoo.