6cyl Chassis vs. 4cyl

[Sleepy]

I am looking to replace the chassis on my 1960 SII. It is probably repairable but does look very sad. I have found a good donor vehicle (with lots of other goodies too) but it is a later SIIa 6cyl. It has a great chassis but I have read that the gearbox cross member is further back in the six.

Should I:
1. proceed with purchasing the 6cyl chassis (and all the other good bits) then modify it for my 4?
2. keep looking for a 4cyl?
3. repair the current chassis to keep it original? (It'll need new rear x member new outriggers and some main rail repair - doesn't seem worth the hassle)
4. save up for a nice new shiny galvanised one? (sounds ‘spensive)

Thanks in advance
Sleepy

[langy]

In the absence of any SII owners piping up, I used to have a S3 6cyl , and made some investigations with 4 and 6 cyl chassis when considering a engine and transmission swap. I found that the crossmember is in the same place, but the engine mounts are further forward than in a 4 cyl. The engine block mount points are more toward the front of the engine on the 6, and to fit it all in the engine bay, LR added adapter plates to the gearbox mounts which pushes the gearbox back a few inches (Which explains the difference in gearsticks on 4's and 6's.). I am reasonably sure that it is the same in the 2, since it's easier to weld in different engine mounts than it is to change a crossmember on the production line.

FWIW - I'd go with keep looking for another 4 cyl chassis. If you found one that was in good nick you could always clean it up and get it galvanized.

[gumby190]

My 1958 Series 2 chassis is cracked, I looked into getting a replacement crossmember, out rigger & repairing the front leaf mounts & came to the conclusion that it was easier to buy a donor. I would have had to body stripped mine to get the repairs done right anyway.


The 6cylinder have the engine mounts in a different position, further back, but I believe that these are easy to relocate & a hell of alot easier than repairing & replacing the bits on yours.
If the donor is in good nick why don't you strip & gal it???

[Blknight.aus]

this is going to be the problem....

while its easy enough to make up mounts for a 6 pot and turn it into a 4 pot chassis (even easier if you have a whole 4 pot chassis to model it from) you may need to get an engineers certificate for the work. I deliberately put my year limit for my project vehicle as 66 as after then ADRs and the like started to be a problem, Im fairly certain that engineer certs became a reauirement for mods at about the same time as seatbelts.

your vehicles age is based on the production date of the chassis/monocoque

[JDNSW]

........

your vehicles age is based on the production date of the chassis/monocoque

Which means that if you use the chassis you have found the vehicle identity changes!

But I see no real problem in using parts of the chassis you have found to replace the rusty bits on the original, provided you retain the bit with the chassis number on it - RH rear back spring hanger (or perhaps even just the outer face of it with the number stamped on). Provided the specification remains the same there should be no problems.

John

[Sleepy]

Thanks for the info guys - especially Dave's comment about ADR's. I like the idea of keeping my 1960 "2" as original as possible so may have to take Langy's advice and keep looking. As you probably guessed I am a newly converted "tragic" so like all good tragics I can't pass this donor vehicle up - it has too many other goodies. So I think I'll buy it and see if John's option of grafting the best. (Just gotta convince the missus that 2 old landies on the front lawn IS a feature!)

Paul