Log in

View Full Version : station wagon fuel tank - crossmember mods



rfurzer
24th February 2016, 05:46 PM
Gday

Ive been having a look at the "factory" solution for routing the fuel filler pipe on the station wagon variants.

Thanks to Inside for his photo of the setup on his vehicle - matching a diagram in the EMEI.

The body crossmember (part labelled "9" in the defender parts diagram and seen on a wrecked vehicle in another pic) is a "top-hat" cross section with the open channel down. JRA modified this by cutting off the bottom half of the sides and bolting on a reinforcing bracket.

To go under the channel, the pipe then needs to be lower at this point - it goes over the next crossmember.

Is there any reason that it would be undesirable to modify the crossmember so that the filler pipe is as high as possible - closer to the floor?

Dervish
24th February 2016, 06:46 PM
Is there any reason that it would be undesirable to modify the crossmember so that the filler pipe is as high as possible - closer to the floor?

As far as I can tell, the way JRA did it on the station wagon variants is the only way it could be done successfully. They seem to have gone as high as they can without completely destroying the strength of the station wagon crossmember. As you know, having a low point in the pipe by going under the crossmember would cause problems filling the tank.

rfurzer
26th February 2016, 10:10 AM
I have been wondering whether a 65x65 tube welded in (and with some reinforcing not shown) might be more elegant and allow a higher location for the filler pipe - the top of the existing channel is 20mm below the floor level and the JRA solution is 20mm lower still.

rar110
26th February 2016, 11:07 AM
I did similar to what's in your diagram, then had the cross member galed. I'll take pic tonight. I wanted to keep the pipe as high as possible.

rfurzer
26th February 2016, 12:58 PM
Awesome ! Thanks RAR110

rar110
27th February 2016, 12:54 PM
Pics as promised.

106189

rar110
27th February 2016, 12:54 PM
106190

rfurzer
27th February 2016, 04:01 PM
Thanks RAR110

The pipe didn't end up much higher than the JRA "official" mod but it looks more elegant.

What did you do about the donor vehicle fuel filler spot - did you patch it?

rar110
27th February 2016, 05:32 PM
Thanks RAR110 The pipe didn't end up much higher than the JRA "official" mod but it looks more elegant. What did you do about the donor vehicle fuel filler spot - did you patch it?

True, but I didn't fancy cutting the x member and possibly weakening it.

Initially I plated over the standard filler point. However, recently I had a section welded in with a supporting plate behind. I the tidied it up with a little filler and some primer coat. Here's some pics.
106201

rar110
27th February 2016, 05:33 PM
I'm in the middle of a very long winded refurb.
106202

rfurzer
27th February 2016, 08:40 PM
Thanks for that - very interested to see how the tool box went with relation to the seatbelt anchor reinforcing plates.

I'll post some photos when I have something to show like u!

rar110
27th February 2016, 09:19 PM
Thanks for that - very interested to see how the tool box went with relation to the seatbelt anchor reinforcing plates. I'll post some photos when I have something to show like u!
The toolbox access hole is smaller than standard due to the the position of the seatbelt anchor mounting plate toward the back of the 110.

I finished my 110 conversion in 2006. We've done lots of memorable trips in that time.

106222

rfurzer
28th February 2016, 09:49 AM
yes - I could see how you solved that problem.

I have a couple of spare anchorages - the one that goes frontmost of those three side anchors will fit in the rear spot.

The issue of the "perentie" cutout for the toolbox notwithstanding, the front ones look superior to me anyway.

I struggle to see why LR used a different design for the rearmost ones. The differences (compared with the frontmost one) are

1. The angle reinforcing under the stiffener goes outboard
2. There is no additional reinforcing above the stiffener at the outboard end
3. The actual fixing point is further inboard.

rar110
28th February 2016, 11:27 AM
Here's some pics of each anchor point. My wagon body is a 1988/9 model 110.
Rear:
106233

rar110
28th February 2016, 11:28 AM
Middle:
106234

rar110
28th February 2016, 11:29 AM
Front:
106235

rar110
28th February 2016, 11:36 AM
The rear most anchor design may be different as the floor level changes/drops. Here's the inside view of the rear most anchor.
106236

rfurzer
28th February 2016, 04:41 PM
The last pic sheds the light!

The 110 has a light cover for the wiring to the rear lamps that means that there wouldn't be enough room for the seatbelt fitting. I dont think the floor level change matters. If keeping the perentie lights and blanking off the 110 fittings then no light cover is needed and the seatbelt anchor could be moved outboard.

I was very interested to see the vertical front end of your toolbox compartment. My donor body is 1986/7 and has a 45deg front wall on the LHS toolbox- identical to the perentie. The pre-1987 110s had a different centre anchor/stiffener for the LHS to suit.

I see that your stiffeners are fastened by bolts rather than "monobolt" rivets.

Finally - am I right in seeing that the rear seats are fastened to "riv-nuts" - my donor just has a hole.

rfurzer
28th February 2016, 04:42 PM
That step down at the rear of the wheel-arches seems to be there on all the non-series 1 landys that I've seen.

What's it there for?

rar110
28th February 2016, 05:28 PM
I have another perentie wagon refurb project. It has an early 110 body with the passenger side tool box fitted by British Off Road. It has no wiring cover at the rear.

The angle of the vertical section is steeper on my silver Perentie.
106252

rar110
28th February 2016, 05:28 PM
106253

rar110
28th February 2016, 05:37 PM
I've just compared the location of the middle anchor. The later body has the anchor bar bracket mounted about 60mm forward of the earlier 110 body. That's why the vertical toolbox floor had to be steeper on the later body to avoid the middle bracket.

rfurzer
28th February 2016, 08:02 PM
The white one has a factory tool box - the 110 had that until 1987. The stiffeners are different left and right - the 1986 parts book reveals all.

The left stiffener has a different design so it doesn't get in the way of the front wall of the toolbox.

My plan is to make up a mirror image (of the left) stiffener for the right and then have symmetrical toolboxes .

rar110
28th February 2016, 09:33 PM
Yes. The White 110 is a standard early 110 body with a driver side tool box.

The Zambezi silver 110 (also originally white, wish it still was, but moment of madness stays with me) is a late county body with no factory tool boxes. The driver and passenger side toolboxes were modelled off the original FFR body and the doors are from the same FFR body. The toolbox floor section was copied from the FFR. I remember the metal fabricator had problems copying the original exactly.