Series 2 109" chassis question

[gromit]

Having just taken delivery of a 1960 109" ute I was looking underneath and noticed something strange last night.
The rear springs are mounted on outriggers not directly onto the chassis rails and the rear axle is reinforced. I had a look through the parts book and found that the springs should be hung directly under the chassis rails (as per normal).
The track looks the same back and front (by eye) so I don't think the axle is wider just that the spring mounting points on the axle are further apart than the chassis rails ?!

Was there a different back axle available or is this more likely a modification by a previous owner ?

Colin

[russellrovers]

Having just taken delivery of a 1960 109" ute I was looking underneath and noticed something strange last night.
The rear springs are mounted on outriggers not directly onto the chassis rails and the rear axle is reinforced. I had a look through the parts book and found that the springs should be hung directly under the chassis rails (as per normal).
The track looks the same back and front (by eye) so I don't think the axle is wider just that the spring mounting points on the axle are further apart than the chassis rails ?!

Was there a different back axle available or is this more likely a modification by a previous owner ?

Colin
hi colin i think you have a station wagon chassi there?

[gromit]

Thanks Russellrovers, I guess this potentially gives it a bigger load carrying capacity ?

I wonder whether this ute was built originally on this chassis or the chassis has been replaced at some point. I'll have to look for the chassis number and see whether it ties up with the number on the bulkhead......


Colin

[Aaron IIA]

You have a normal SII/SIIA LWB chassis and axle. I have never seen an Australian SIIA axle without reinforcing.

Aaron.

[JDNSW]

That is a perfectly normal chassis. All Series 2/2a/3 109 chassis have the springs on outriggers just outside the chassis - one of the differences from Series 1. (88 kept the springs under the chassis.)

Likewise, all (Rover) rear axles on 109s were reinforced (perhaps not very early Series 2).

Note that you need caution in using the pictures in parts books. These often use one picture to refer to several different parts - for example, in the parts book I have in front of me both the 88 and 109 chassis use a picture of the 109 chassis (same picture). The parts book may also use an obsolete picture, even though the appearance of the part has changed.

There were in fact at least three rear axles fitted to Series 2/2a, Rover, Salisbury and ENV, although only the first was fitted to Series 2. But the one you have is almost certainly the standard Rover axle for that date.

John

[gromit]

Thanks John,

The car seems reasonably original but it was the drawings in the parts book that threw me that's why I wondered if it had been modified.
Is the reinforced axle correct for a Series 2 ?


Colin

[Lotz-A-Landies]

All perfectly normal for a 109, you are getting mixed up with 88 SII which had springs under the chassis rails and no reinforcing on the front axle.

The only long wheelbase with springs under the chassis rails were the 107 Series 1.

BTW in SII/SIIa/SIII the only difference between the ute and station wagon chassis was the brackets to affix the body.

[bulletproof]

Even the 88 series 2 should have a reinforced rear axle right from the start of production in 1958

142800016 which is the first series 2 made has a reinforced rear axle

My Jan 58 series 2 parts book shows it.

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2011/11/5.jpg

Cheers Richard