Possible New project vehicle...

[Jonno_G]

Hi all,

I have an idea for a project vehicle, and I wanted to see if anyone on here has either done it before, or seen it done, and if they have any suggestions/warnings etc.

I don't even have the project base yet, but there are two vehicles that are currently advertised on this site that I think could provide a great basis.

Anyway, my problem is this - I currently have four kids, aged 5 and under. I've recently heard that our govt. plans to implement laws that require all children under 7 to be in either baby capsule, child seats or booster seats with harness. This means that even the 7 seat Pajero that I currently have will not be suitable if we have another child, which we would like to. This is because you can't fit three baby seats &/or boosters across the 2nd row seat and the last row are not suited for them at all. Whereas a few accounts on here say that they have put three across the 2nd row of a County or Defender, however I still wouldn't be able to fit another one or two into the last row seats as they can't be used (legally) in fold up seats and there's nowhere to anchor to.

So, my potential solution is this: I buy two 9 seater Counties, cut the body of County one in front of the C pillar, and the body of county two in front of the B pillar, extend the chassis etc. by the required amount and graft the front section of County one to the rear section of County two - thus resulting in a 7 door, twelve seater County! :D:D

Of course, I would still face the pre-existing issue of having to add anchor points for the child seats, but I figure that I'm going to have to get it engineered anyway, so they can be incorporated into the overall design. Initial thoughts on that would be to incorporate a full internal roll cage into the project and fix the anchor points into the cage, but other options will certainly be considered.

Any comments or suggestions on the idea will be gladly accepted, but with one caveat - if you're going to howl me down, come prepared with a very convincing argument! ;):p

[frantic]

I have a far easier solution! Get a 5 seat defender with the A frame with a horizontal bar going across behind the 2nd row(3 bolts) and buy 2 forward facing seats from one of the british suppliers that are made to have a child seat attached. I am 100% certain they have them made for the 90 by an after market supplier and they are designed to comply with the pommie laws so should meet aussie standards as well. I was looking for some to try and convince the other half to let me buy a 90 a few years ago , we got a 3rd child instead!:D
Defender & Series Load Area Seats (http://www.exmoortrim.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=37&Itemid=65)

[Jonno_G]

they are designed to comply with the pommie laws so should meet aussie standards as well...

I'm not so sure on that - I've read many times that our design rules and laws are much stricter than theirs when it comes to child restraints. (I'd happily be proven wrong, though, as that is definitely a cheaper 'in the meantime' option.)

Also, if we decide to go for kid number six (which isn't out of the question) then I'd still be in the same situation I'm in right now, but I'd have to get a whole new vehicle and modify that one too! :(

(At least by number six, then number one would be beyond the 7 y.o. requirement for restraints.)

My thinking was that if I built the 12 seater then I'm not likely to be limited in how many kids we can have by the choice of available vehicles on the market. Also, I like the idea of still being able to have the full load area available to use with up to eight people in the vehicle. Not many vehicles can do that!!:D

[Jonno_G]

...with the A frame with a horizontal bar going across behind the 2nd row...

I forgot to ask, is this a LR option? Or are you simply referring to the CRAB that is mentioned in other threads on this site?

[Blknight.aus]

similar things have been done before.

IMHO, it'll be easier to engineer in a set of rear seats that are suitable but that doesnt solve the doors problem you'll have

[jerryd]

Mulgo's yellow machine is built on a 130 chassis isn't it ??

There's also a company in the uk who use stretched landrovers for a funeral business, I think they look smart.

[3pointa]

You need a 147, 2 rows of passenger seats with side doors and you still have a normal luggage area.
Ring L/R HQ, South Africa. ( tell then you have quintuplets, live in a remote area and needed a real 4wd)

3pointa

[Jonno_G]

So what you are really building is a Land Rover "Stretch Limo":)I reckon that would look really cool... ....My vote,do it.:BigThumb:

Yeah, I thought so too! I even considered going 'pillarless' between the second and third rows of doors and making the third row a set of 'suicide doors' - effectively meaning that the side of the wagon opens right up. :D


...IMHO, it'll be easier to engineer in a set of rear seats that are suitable but that doesnt solve the doors problem you'll have

Also, as all child restrains must face forward by law in Australia, it limits me to only adding another two seats, still only giving seven in total. Adequate, just, for one more bub, but after that I'll hit the same wall I'm looking at now.


Mulgo's yellow machine is built on a 130 chassis isn't it ??...

I did consider using a 130 chassis to reduce the cost of engineering it, but I think that I'd have to sacrifice load bay area and fabricate a smaller middle row door plus modify the rear doors to fit the third row. Certainly possible, but maybe a bit more fiddly.


You need a 147, 2 rows of passenger seats with side doors and you still have a normal luggage area.
Ring L/R HQ, South Africa. ( tell then you have quintuplets, live in a remote area and needed a real 4wd)

3pointa

I have seen the 147's that were made in South Africa, but unfortunately there were only ever 10 made, and one safari business still owns four of those, so I think they are going to be a little hard to get my hands on.

The 147 is essentially what I want to end up with, though.


The way he is going he will need a 747 never mind a 147 to transport his offspring around.;)

Thanks, I needed a laugh! :clap2::Rolling:

(That was far funnier than most of the comments we usually get even with only four atm. Occasionally someone rolls out the line "Haven't you got a TV?" - it really stumps them when I come back with "Yeah, but what would you rather do?!? :eek:)

[rar110]

I agree. A 130 would be the easiest way to go. Anything longer would start to get really painful to drive around in. You could do a drop side tray triple cab set up. Because the tray is higher it allows more rear overhang without causing dramas. Also allows under tray options like fuel/water tanks/pullout draws etc.

With this set up I would take the third row of doors back to the rear wheel arch as is with a 110, have two b-pillars on each side and fabricate a door that fits btw the two b-pillars. You might be able to get away with a door on one side only. The door/s could have fixed glass or small sliding glass opening (for simplicity). A bar for anchor points could be made to fix to a fabricated under floor chassis cross member and to each b-pillar that holds the third row of doors. When the kids get bigger the second row seats could face backward so the 2nd and 3rd row face each other.

[spudboy]

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/08/595.jpg (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/22/Defender_Stretch.JPG)

[juddy]

Have a vasectomy!!!!! aint 4 enought?





Hi all,

I have an idea for a project vehicle, and I wanted to see if anyone on here has either done it before, or seen it done, and if they have any suggestions/warnings etc.

I don't even have the project base yet, but there are two vehicles that are currently advertised on this site that I think could provide a great basis.

Anyway, my problem is this - I currently have four kids, aged 5 and under. I've recently heard that our govt. plans to implement laws that require all children under 7 to be in either baby capsule, child seats or booster seats with harness. This means that even the 7 seat Pajero that I currently have will not be suitable if we have another child, which we would like to. This is because you can't fit three baby seats &/or boosters across the 2nd row seat and the last row are not suited for them at all. Whereas a few accounts on here say that they have put three across the 2nd row of a County or Defender, however I still wouldn't be able to fit another one or two into the last row seats as they can't be used (legally) in fold up seats and there's nowhere to anchor to.

So, my potential solution is this: I buy two 9 seater Counties, cut the body of County one in front of the C pillar, and the body of county two in front of the B pillar, extend the chassis etc. by the required amount and graft the front section of County one to the rear section of County two - thus resulting in a 7 door, twelve seater County! :D:D

Of course, I would still face the pre-existing issue of having to add anchor points for the child seats, but I figure that I'm going to have to get it engineered anyway, so they can be incorporated into the overall design. Initial thoughts on that would be to incorporate a full internal roll cage into the project and fix the anchor points into the cage, but other options will certainly be considered.

Any comments or suggestions on the idea will be gladly accepted, but with one caveat - if you're going to howl me down, come prepared with a very convincing argument! ;):p

[juddy]

Now i like this......

Whos going to start build one here???


https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/08/595.jpg (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/22/Defender_Stretch.JPG)

[frantic]

LR aus dont fit bolts :mad:. I was reffering to either the "crab" or the twin A frames behind each door with a steel tube with padding going horizontally across with 3 bolts on it( not the vertical bars out of the floor as they are a pain and a trip hazard+ impalement hazard to whoever is sitting behind!). As another poster mentioned you could go a def 110 with 3 rows of 3 seats( toss the middle cubby box and put in a middle seat in the front.) or a version of the yellow 130 camper adv. here and have 2front, 3 middle, 2 third row and either another 2 forward facing OR 4 inward facing in the load area for the bigger ones! With a 130 you will be hard pressed for a decent parking spot in cities and if you go the modified 12 seat + load area route the vehicle will be over 6m and with 12 seats may require a bus license? You would be better off in a 130-110 with a trailer for when you go away. There are several fully covered/ sealed that carry go carts/ custom bikes or cars + gear that would be handy to carry a large families bags and gear. You could get any size from a standard box 2x3 to a full sized car carrier2.5x6+!

[abaddonxi]

Has anyone said OKA yet?

[haggisbasher]

got 4.....and a tele. Found the easiest was to get rid of the cubby box and put a middle front in with a H harness. Back has h harness in midlle and 2 capsules. Also have 2 county inward facing seats for the rear.... one will be added at a later date once the crab bar is gone.

Would give 8 - 10 seats.....

Chris....

[Jonno_G]

Have a vasectomy!!!!! aint 4 enought?

Ain't NOBODY goin' near there with a knife!! :eek::eek:


Now i like this......

Whos going to start build one here???

Thanks, I already have that photo - that's what inspired me to follow up on the idea in the first place.

[abaddonxi]

Ah, that reminds me.

I've had three capsules across 110 and 130 second row seats. 110 currently has two big boosters with harness and baby seat in second row. I've got a pair of Puma Defender third row seats waiting to go in the back and 110 is engineered for centre seat instead of cubby box. Which'd make eight seats once it's done.

Not 100%, but I'd reckon the third row seats are probably built to take a capsule mount as part of the seat. They appear a lot more sturdy than standard Defender seats.

[spudboy]

Has anyone said OKA yet?

I said it once, but my missus hit me on the head and I've never said it again.

[Jonno_G]

Has anyone said OKA yet?I said it once, but my missus hit me on the head and I've never said it again.

:Rolling:

I think that's about the same reaction I'd get, too. Even used they seem to go for about the same money as we paid for our house!

Looks great, but sorry, no can do. :no2:

[Jonno_G]

...I've had three capsules across 110 and 130 second row seats. 110 currently has two big boosters with harness and baby seat in second row.

Thanks for confirming that for me. I thought I'd read it somewhere on here.


I've got a pair of Puma Defender third row seats waiting to go in the back and 110 is engineered for centre seat instead of cubby box. Which'd make eight seats once it's done.

Not 100%, but I'd reckon the third row seats are probably built to take a capsule mount as part of the seat. They appear a lot more sturdy than standard Defender seats.

I'm not 100% sure either, but I think that the ADR's state that the child restraint anchor point must be separate to the seat itself.

Either way, if the law changes the way the pollies want then we'll be required to have all kids in baby seats/boosters up to the age of seven, and also no kid under seven will be allowed to ride in the front of a vehicle. (At least, that's what I read the other day. Doesn't mean that it will definitely pass like that.) Unfortunately, that rules out the extra seat in the middle front.

Also, a part of the wife's preferred requirements for our next vehicle is that we be able to give someone a lift if they need it. Her first suggestion was a bus (Coaster, T3500 etc.) as she knows that I flatly refuse to drive a Tarago/Urvan/Hi-Ace type tin-can-on-wheels. (Nobody will change my mind on that - my brother was killed in one of those vehicles.) I couldn't come at the idea, though, as to get a decent second hand bus I'd be up for at least $15k, plus engineering costs to have anchor points fitted, plus the fact that I'd have to either get a light-rigid license or remove enough seats to bring it back to a 12 seater and then register it as a motor home. (The idea of adding a stack of bunks in the back did have its appeal, though.;))

So, I came to the idea that I could buy an Isuzu powered County for about $8-10k (less, if I'm lucky) and then a rolling wreck for another few grand. I can do most, if not all, of the work myself, and hopefully for less than $20k I can have my 12 seat, 140"(ish) County with 12 seats and a full size cargo bay! :BigThumb:

[abaddonxi]

Thanks for confirming that for me. I thought I'd read it somewhere on here.



I'm not 100% sure either, but I think that the ADR's state that the child restraint anchor point must be separate to the seat itself.

Either way, if the law changes the way the pollies want then we'll be required to have all kids in baby seats/boosters up to the age of seven, and also no kid under seven will be allowed to ride in the front of a vehicle. (At least, that's what I read the other day. Doesn't mean that it will definitely pass like that.) Unfortunately, that rules out the extra seat in the middle front.

Also, a part of the wife's preferred requirements for our next vehicle is that we be able to give someone a lift if they need it. Her first suggestion was a bus (Coaster, T3500 etc.) as she knows that I flatly refuse to drive a Tarago/Urvan/Hi-Ace type tin-can-on-wheels. (Nobody will change my mind on that - my brother was killed in one of those vehicles.) I couldn't come at the idea, though, as to get a decent second hand bus I'd be up for at least $15k, plus engineering costs to have anchor points fitted, plus the fact that I'd have to either get a light-rigid license or remove enough seats to bring it back to a 12 seater and then register it as a motor home. (The idea of adding a stack of bunks in the back did have its appeal, though.;))

So, I came to the idea that I could buy an Isuzu powered County for about $8-10k (less, if I'm lucky) and then a rolling wreck for another few grand. I can do most, if not all, of the work myself, and hopefully for less than $20k I can have my 12 seat, 140"(ish) County with 12 seats and a full size cargo bay! :BigThumb:

Ah, same shop different day, except less kids. I'm not keen on a Tarago, wife is. Have you considered a Delica? Or, that Unimog that Stooge has been drooling over at the Hobart auctions.

From what I've read, capsules and boosters don't work in the front seat of cars with airbags.

I think that with fold up seats and ADRs it comes down to the manufacturer and whether they've done the engineering/crash testing. From what I've read of this stuff, the ADRs for child seats apply in a couple of ways. If the manufacturer stipulates - in whatever way that pleases FORS or whoever it is - that the seats in the vehicle suit the standards, then they get passed, if it's an aftermarket thing, then they have to fit all of the ADR criteria.

When I put the bar in the back of the 130, the engineer who designed it for me told me he couldn't approve the bar in place because the ADR requires a 10cm gap between the back of the seat and the rear bulkhead. If you look at a Hilux, there is no 10cm gap, and yet they come with three approved restraint anchor points.

Similarly, the anchor point on an aftermarket bar/mount is supposed to be no lower than something like 10cm from the top of the seat that the baby seat is on. Again, no shortage of cars with factory fitted restraint points built into the seat base.

So, Puma Defender third row seats might be easy to get restraints into. I was only planning on putting older kids in them.

[Jonno_G]

I agree. A 130 would be the easiest way to go. Anything longer would start to get really painful to drive around in. You could do a drop side tray triple cab set up. Because the tray is higher it allows more rear overhang without causing dramas. Also allows under tray options like fuel/water tanks/pullout draws etc.

Now that's not a bad idea. It doesn't suit my needs, but it's still a good idea.

Stretching anything, be it a dual cab 130, or a 110 wagon, is going to be roughly the same amount of work if you leave the chassis alone. It gets more complex once you stretch the chassis too, but I'm OK with that.

As for it being painful to drive around in - I can see that it would be a problem in mainland cities, but here in Tassie it's not a big issue. I'ts pretty rare not to be able to find two parking bays end to end in supermarket car parks or similar, and if you have to park on the street somewhere then it usually only means that you would have to walk a block or two at most to get to where you want.


With this set up I would take the third row of doors back to the rear wheel arch as is with a 110, have two b-pillars on each side and fabricate a door that fits btw the two b-pillars.

That would essentially be my approach, too, but with a wagon body as a base. I figure if I consume a full set of doors I can take the bottom and back half of the window frame of the front doors, and mate them to the front half of the window frame of the back doors, then all I would have to have made is the custom glass, all of the window regulators, latch mechanisms, hinges, etc. would all be OEM. Then I'd just need to make the doorway to fit, and I'd already have the front doorway right there to measure from - too easy! ;)


You might be able to get away with a door on one side only. The door/s could have fixed glass or small sliding glass opening (for simplicity).

I don't think that it would pass engineering without doors on both sides, likely too far from an egress point in an emergency. Also, all passenger seats are supposed to have an opening window of some description, so fixed glass is a no-no, but the sliding glass might pass.


A bar for anchor points could be made to fix to a fabricated under floor chassis cross member and to each b-pillar that holds the third row of doors. When the kids get bigger the second row seats could face backward so the 2nd and 3rd row face each other.

I've no idea whether it would pass or not, but I do like the idea of having the second row turned about once they get a bit older. I might look into that while I'm researching/designing.


( not the vertical bars out of the floor as they are a pain and a trip hazard+ impalement hazard to whoever is sitting behind!).

I've never seen them up close, but I don't see how the vertical bars can be approved due to exactly the issues you've just mentioned.


...With a 130 you will be hard pressed for a decent parking spot in cities...

Isn't that what bullbars are for? ;):p


...and if you go the modified 12 seat + load area route the vehicle will be over 6m and with 12 seats may require a bus license?...

A car license is good for up to (and including) 12 seats, I think, and a GVM of up to 4.5 tonnes.

[Jonno_G]

...Have you considered a Delica?...

Briefly, but a delica is still only 8 seats though, and if their seats are anything like Pajero seats then there's no way you can get three booster/baby seats in a row.


Or, that Unimog that Stooge has been drooling over at the Hobart auctions.

Awesome! Where do I get a passenger body for that?!?:eek2:


From what I've read, capsules and boosters don't work in the front seat of cars with airbags.

100% correct. I think it is actually illegal to fit them into the front seat of any vehicle with passenger airbags.


I think that with fold up seats and ADRs it comes down to the manufacturer and whether they've done the engineering/crash testing. From what I've read of this stuff, the ADRs for child seats apply in a couple of ways. If the manufacturer stipulates - in whatever way that pleases FORS or whoever it is - that the seats in the vehicle suit the standards, then they get passed, if it's an aftermarket thing, then they have to fit all of the ADR criteria.

That pretty much agrees with my understanding of it, too, but I also seem to remember reading somewhere that when adding an aftermarket anchor point the anchor point must be affixed to a separate part of the vehicle structure than the seat mounting points. I just can't remember where I read it - whether it was a govt. document of some sort, or whether it was just somebody's interpretation of the laws on this matter.

Aside from that, though, am I correct in my thinking that 110/defender 2nd row seats are not crash tested and that is why the anchor points must be less than 100mm from the top of the seat?


When I put the bar in the back of the 130, the engineer who designed it for me told me he couldn't approve the bar in place because the ADR requires a 10cm gap between the back of the seat and the rear bulkhead. If you look at a Hilux, there is no 10cm gap, and yet they come with three approved restraint anchor points.

I assume you're talking dual cab Hilux there? I hadn't heard that particular rule before, and I have to admit that I really can't see any good reason for it being so. (Then again, when has that ever stopped something from being true?)


Similarly, the anchor point on an aftermarket bar/mount is supposed to be no lower than something like 10cm from the top of the seat that the baby seat is on. Again, no shortage of cars with factory fitted restraint points built into the seat base.

I think that this is specific to vehicles that have not been crash tested for compliance with the baby seats/boosters in. I think it's something to do with the simple tube frame of the seat in a 110/Defender, and its ability (or otherwise) to hold up to the increased vertical shock loading in an accident where the child seat is thrown forward, thus pulling down on the top of the seat frame with the anchor strap. With the anchor near the top height of the seat back, even if the seat frame collapses then the child seat can only move forward a small amount.

[abaddonxi]

ADR for child restaints here-
http://www.comlaw.gov.au/ComLaw/Legislation/LegislativeInstrument1.nsf/0/7682534496EF20FDCA2570D5001E9CDD/$file/ADR+34-01+ES+%5BFINAL+FRLI%5D.pdf

http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/roads/motor/design/pdf/34A.pdf

And our own child restraint library.
http://www.aulro.com/afvb/good-oil/57559-child-restraint-anchor-points-defender-kiddie-seats-baby-seats.html

[Jonno_G]

Thanks for those links. I've printed the ADR's to read through, and I'll read through your other thread as soon as I get a chance.

Cheers,...Jon.

[frantic]

HEY here's an idea!:eek: Instead off having a 6-7 door 12 seat stretch landie why not make a LARGE sliding door that Is square from behind the passenger side front door all the way down to the rear wheel arch and runs on 2 tracks with 1 set at just below window level and the other in betwen the side steps and the bottom trim panel that gets removed for rocksliders.This would make it easier to get them in and out and also stop the older ones bashing the doors on whatever you parked near( walls , trees, other cars) Look at vw multivans/ chrysler voyagers etc to see how to balance it. This would also give you other seating options e.g 2 front(driver and passenger), 2 middle( or 3 in a bench for 10 seats as with a large door the rear occupants could still pass), 2 third row and 3 rear. they could either be 2 seats together in the middle rows or give 8 out off 9 a window with the 6 front as a single captains chair style and the back a 3 seater bench on tracks that you could roll out like a voyager/ tarago.

[Jonno_G]

HEY here's an idea!:eek: Instead off having a 6-7 door 12 seat stretch landie why not make a LARGE sliding door that Is square from behind the passenger side front door all the way down to the rear wheel arch and runs on 2 tracks with 1 set at just below window level and the other in betwen the side steps and the bottom trim panel that gets removed for rocksliders.This would make it easier to get them in and out and also stop the older ones bashing the doors on whatever you parked near( walls , trees, other cars)...

Now THAT IS a good idea!!:cool:

I think if I did that I would be inclined to go with 2 in front, 3 in second row, 2 in third row with a 'walk-thru' in the middle, plus the existing 2 x 2 centre facing seats of a county. That way you have more than one option for getting passengers in and out of those last two seats. Also, it may be possible to use a removable middle seat for the third row in this configuration - still giving the 12 seats if necessary (with a little prior notice).

Alternatively, to do it without stretching the chassis, one could build a 130 wagon and shorten the centre facing seats to a single seats and end up with a 9/10 seater 130 wagon with a smallish but reasonable load bay.

[Jonno_G]

Has anyone said OKA yet?


I think that's about the same reaction I'd get, too. Even used they seem to go for about the same money as we paid for our house!...

Turns out I was wrong - on both counts! :redface:

There's a few about at 10-15 years old between the $30-40k mark, including one here in Tassie. I think I might go for a drive on the weekend and look at that one. It's still a big chunk o' money, but I'm not going to run out of seats with that one. :BigThumb:

The thing that really surprised me, though, was that when I showed the photo's of one to my wife she said "I want one, let's buy it!!!" :D

[lardy]

if you really want a landy look at foleys in the u.k. they have been producing quality varients for donkey's years

[flagg]

Turns out I was wrong - on both counts! :redface:

There's a few about at 10-15 years old between the $30-40k mark, including one here in Tassie. I think I might go for a drive on the weekend and look at that one. It's still a big chunk o' money, but I'm not going to run out of seats with that one. :BigThumb:

The thing that really surprised me, though, was that when I showed the photo's of one to my wife she said "I want one, let's buy it!!!" :D

:) Pretty sure though that you will need an MR license to drive one. Not hard to get, though.

[Jonno_G]

:) Pretty sure though that you will need an MR license to drive one. Not hard to get, though.

Yup, you're right on that one. I read somewhere that the GVM of the LT110 is just over 6 tonne, which puts in the Light Rigid category, except that it has 14 seats, which then pushes it up to the Medium Rigid class.

[Chucaro]

Extending the chassis of a 110 it is going to be a big job and the resale value it is going to be bad

get on of this 17 seater remove some of them, fit few beds and bingo motorhome and people moover in one and finish the dilema ;)

http://www.amesz.com.au/upload/pages/12-17-seater-amesz-4wd-coach/303x212-grace-maria-francis-017.jpg

The site is HERE (http://www.amesz.com.au/view/12-17-seater-amesz-4wd-coach/)

[flagg]

Na, this is what you want!

http://www.aulro.com/afvb/fcs-military-variations/86940-series-fc-8-seater-sale.html

:D:D:D:D

All you have to do is drop a 4bd1 in it :angel:

[Jonno_G]

Extending the chassis of a 110 it is going to be a big job and the resale value it is going to be bad

What makes you say that? (On either count, actually?)

I would expect that the chassis extension is actually the simpler part of the job - extending the roof is going to be the hardest part.

Also, as far as resale goes, why would that matter? If you're building a vehicle like this then you're obviously building it for a specific purpose anyway and you're not going to be selling it in any hurry. By the time I'm finished with, if the resale is going to be low it's because it's done a couple of million kilometres, not because it's a 12 seater. Frankly, I would expect something like that to go up in value over a standard vehicle, not down.

[Bush65]

... So, my potential solution is this: I buy two 9 seater Counties, ...
Then call it done.

You drive one and your better half drives the other, each with 2 children properly restrained.

[George130]

I would be inclined to use a 130 as the starting point. Fit the rear of a 110 body to it and if there isn't room for the 6 doors then go the sliding door.

Saying that I would love a 147:twisted:. but then I like my 130 over our pajero anyway.

Paj with people in the rear most seats has no storage space.

[Jonno_G]

Then call it done.

You drive one and your better half drives the other, each with 2 children properly restrained.

All well and good, but my wife doesn't drive. :(


Paj with people in the rear most seats has no storage space.

Tell me about it!! That's what I'm driving now. We just spent two weeks on holiday in Victoria and I'm very glad I built the roof rack before hand.

[George130]

All well and good, but my wife doesn't drive. :(



Tell me about it!! That's what I'm driving now. We just spent two weeks on holiday in Victoria and I'm very glad I built the roof rack before hand.

If it's an older model watch the rear diff.
Our's is a 91 and I snapped the rear diff housing in two earlier this year.

[Jonno_G]

If it's an older model watch the rear diff.
Our's is a 91 and I snapped the rear diff housing in two earlier this year.

Funny you should say that. I bought mine this time last year with what I thought was a weeping pinion seal. (It's a '91 too, so I figured that's not too unusual for a seal that likely hasn't been replaced in 17 years.) After a clean we discovered that it had cracked along the RH Axle tube weld and then up around the back of the diff housing itself. Not sure if the factory welds weren't up to scratch, or if the material is too thin or what, but I couldn't find any evidence of any impact on mine to trigger the crack so I'm assuming a design or manufacturing flaw.

Welded up fine, though, with no further issues so I'm happy.

[George130]

Funny you should say that. I bought mine this time last year with what I thought was a weeping pinion seal. (It's a '91 too, so I figured that's not too unusual for a seal that likely hasn't been replaced in 17 years.) After a clean we discovered that it had cracked along the RH Axle tube weld and then up around the back of the diff housing itself. Not sure if the factory welds weren't up to scratch, or if the material is too thin or what, but I couldn't find any evidence of any impact on mine to trigger the crack so I'm assuming a design or manufacturing flaw.

Welded up fine, though, with no further issues so I'm happy.

Yep thats the one. Factory installed fault I found out after our.
Ours went without warning. Saw a slight leak so drive the 80km home thinking I'll fix that tomorrow. Came out the next to see the rear wheel sitting at an odd angle. It had totally gone and only the axel was holding it all in place.

[Jonno_G]

Saw a slight leak so drive the 80km home thinking I'll fix that tomorrow. Came out the next to see the rear wheel sitting at an odd angle. It had totally gone and only the axel was holding it all in place.

Ugh, nasty!! Sounds like a timebomb to me - I wonder how many other Pajero owners this has happened to?:o

Worse still - I wonder how many times it's happend while driving?!? :eek:

[George130]

Ugh, nasty!! Sounds like a timebomb to me - I wonder how many other Pajero owners this has happened to?:o

Worse still - I wonder how many times it's happend while driving?!? :eek:

Was told it's very common. Earlier on it was caused by towing and off road use. As they age it just happens. There is a diff housing mod to strengthen them but I havn't chased it yet.

[Jonno_G]

Sorry to resuscitate an old thread, but I thought some may be interested to know that I solved the problem for now - I bought a Suburban. :D

9 seats, each as comfy as my armchairs at home, heaps of cargo space (i.e. at least 2m^3) behind the third row, plus a 6.5 litre turbo diesel V8!

Of course a 3 tonne truck with IFS is no 'go-anywhere bush monster', so I'm still keen to get myself a landy as a 'weekend toy', but it will likely be either a Defender 90 or a 110 cab-chassis now as it won't need to cart the whole family at once.

BTW, I'm curious - has anyone ever heard of a chev diesel V8 going into a Landy? :twisted:

[isuzurover]

...plus a 6.5 litre turbo diesel V8!

... has anyone ever heard of a chev diesel V8 going into a Landy? :twisted:

You have my sympathies... The new 6.5 supposedly has most of the problems fixed, but I still wouldn't own one.

Several people on here have owned 6.5 powered landies (and now wish they hadn't).

There are a lot of better engine options.