Series Gearbox

[whitehillbilly64]

To open a can of worms,
which is, in YOUR opinion, is the strongest, best SERIES gearbox, and WHY.
Sorry.

whitehillbilly

[pop058]

Late 2A with the (supposed) down side of not having syncro on 1st & 2nd. I don't mind as it stops most people driving my Series vehicles. [biggrin]

[JDNSW]

The Series box originated when Rover went to four speeds in 1932. It was fitted with synchromesh on the top two gears in 1939, and was fitted to all Series Landrovers except Stage 1. Throughout production it had progressive improvements to fix issues that appeared in use, but without significant changes in design.

However, with the very last of the Series 2a (home market station wagons only) the box was extensively redesigned to have synchromesh on all gears. Since this box needed to be the same size as its predecessor to avoid too much other redesign, the new box not only came with the inevitable issues with any new design, but some compromises were needed to fit everything in. It did not help that this was happening as the Leyland disease was taking hold.

From this, it would be expected that there was a marked drop in strength and reliability of the box with the start of the all synchro box, and experience has confirmed this. Some believe that the last of the S3 boxes had regained the strength and reliability of the last of the 2a boxes, but this is not universally accepted.

[mox]

Late 2A with the (supposed) down side of not having syncro on 1st & 2nd. I don't mind as it stops most people driving my Series vehicles. [biggrin]

I reckon would be a good idea if everyone who drives manual geared vehicles should have to learn to drive boxes without synchromesh. There would then be a lot less abuse of synchronisers due to some people having no idea of the unnecessary wear and tear on them due to their driving styles. Last year I acquired a S2 ute. When gearbox eventually needs to come out to do clutch and /or bearings get too noisy, hope to replace it with later S2A type which is apparently more reliable but with ratios spread out more. Especially the slightly lower speeds in first and reverse would be overall an improvement with my uses for it around farm. Also a good place for teaching visitors how to drive gearbox with no synchro in first and second.

[JDNSW]

The ratios were changed on later 2a boxes to have lower first and reverse, and more spread on two and three, but this was compensated for by raising low range so that the same maximum reduction was attained, so the only was of getting a greater overall reduction is to use a later box with an earlier transfer case. But not too early, so you get the later bigger diameter intermediate shaft.

[gromit]

Thread in 'sticky's' above.

Series Gearbox ID (https://www.aulro.com/afvb/series-land-rovers/154562-series-gearbox-id.html)

Colin

[rover-56]

I believe from reading various posts and websites that the S3 Suffix 'D' box had most of the design 'weaknesses' fixed, with bigger shafts and grooves removed.
I want to believe it because I own one.
Happy to be corrected[smilebigeye]

Terry

[101RRS]

While the series 2a box may have been stronger, the series 3 box was good enough for the job it was designed for. My very early series 3 was my everyday driver for may years and used for quite a bit of towing of cars - did axles, did wheel bearings, did UJs and clutches but never had problems with the gearbox.

My previous everyday driver as a 56 series 1 86 which I drove for 8 years so I had the gearbox down pat but I have to say driving the series 3 gearbox and steering wise was a breath of fresh air compared to the series 1.

So if given the option and using a Series as intended I would always go for the series 3 box but there are always other considerations.

Garry

[Slunnie]

I think the LT95 was by far the best gearbox used in a series.

[JDNSW]

As Garry comments, the Series box has always been quite adequate. Most box failures result from very bad driving or poor maintenance or repair with one major exception. This is that some adapters for fitting a Holden motor are not made accurately enough, and the result of this is inevitably a failure of the gearbox, usually blamed on th e gearbox, not the misalignment. This single issue is likely to be responsible for the majority of serious issues with Series gearboxes in Australia.

[whitehillbilly64]

Thanks for all the replies.
Guess its a bit like my Fergy at home and the 100HP JD a work.
Or my LH brake on my Greeves or RH on my Honda.
you have to drive to suit whats fitted.
Also my youth as a Linesman in Cornwall, Mid 70's driving S3 LWB Land Rovers, being told by older co workers, to
'Double D Clutch, all the time, when I was driving. S3 had syncro.

whitehillbilly

[mox]

The ratios were changed on later 2a boxes to have lower first and reverse, and more spread on two and three, but this was compensated for by raising low range so that the same maximum reduction was attained, so the only was of getting a greater overall reduction is to use a later box with an earlier transfer . But not too early, so you get the later bigger diameter intermediate shaft.

Do you have info on when these bigger diameter intermediate shafts were introduced in the transfer boxes with 2.88:1 low range? from build time or gearbox serial number? I now have an Australian assembled 1961 LWB, Last registered maybe 20 years ago, still has 1961 issue Victorian plates on it and an old rego sticker indicates 13th June expiry.

However, I have an LT230 transfer box with 1.222 high lying around. its 3.32 in low should be better than the older Series low range. I reckon constant 4WD should put less stress on drive components with my type of usage than having driveline "wind up" when on hard ground and would get rid of need to regularly engage and disengage free wheeling hubs. Am interested in trying it behind a Series 2 or 2A gearbox if not too many problems making them fit. Has anyone ever done this?