Front chassis cross member assistance please

[drifter]

Hi,

A couple of months ago I 'rescued' a 1971 88" 2a from a paddock near the South Coast (NSW). The vehicle was complete but has a very rusty chassis and there is quite a lot of rust in the firewall. Mechanically, it all seems intact and recoverable (It would need things like a replacement exhaust manifold).

Today I went to look at (and purchased) an older 2a that has been sitting in a paddock not far from here for a couple of years.

The chassis and firewall are in excellent condition - except for 2 things:

1. it is a 109"
2. the front crossmember has been cut out, flipped over and re-welded in as the PO was going to put a holden engine in it.

Apart from the missing engine - it is all complete and looks good (pictures to come when we do the recovery in the coming 7 days).

Now, my dilemma. Do I continue to look for a donor 88" chassis or do I shift focus a little and try to resurrect the 109"?

If it is easy to re-cut the front crossmember out and put it back where it belongs, it that feasable? I could probably use the crossmember from the shagged chassis as that is still OK. I could then think about moving the engine from the 88" across to the 109"

You guys have done all of this stuff before, I haven't, so I would appreciate your input.

Thanks in advance
John

[drifter]

I should also mention that, whatever I do, I am going to have to do quickly as she-who-shakes-her-head-a-lot is not going to be too impressed with 2 Series 2 vehicles getting stripped on her front lawn.

[Blknight.aus]

depends on what you need and want it to do.

the SWB was great for me when I was only doing recovery work or mechanicing work but once I started putting both hats on at once or needed to carry more than one other person the SWB was just too short.

[drifter]

Thanks, Dave

What do I want it to do?

I have been sitting here pondering the same question.

I used to have a 1957 LWB Series 1 and found it to be a very handy 'utility' for carting stuff around.

I chose the SWB 2a because it was free and because I was assured it was in great condition - so I went and got it. It is only the after sale inspection that showed up all the problems with rust (I am a novice - making mistakes and bound to make a few more).

The desire is to have something I can drive - sometimes take it to work (the Disco is racking up way too many miles, expensively) - something I can continue to carry 'stuff' in without having to strap it to the roof...

I am thinking that I'll try to get the 109 roadworthy

so - how feasible/problematic is it to replace the front chassis crossmember. Legalities? Problems with registration?

[Blknight.aus]

its easy...

how good are you with the welder and the cutting gear?

[drifter]

absolutely hopeless


but I have a friend.....


if you say it is easy, I will look more to that path than any other.

Thanks

[JDNSW]

Thanks, Dave
.......

so - how feasible/problematic is it to replace the front chassis crossmember. Legalities? Problems with registration?

Should be easy as Dave says for a competent welder. Legally the vehicle has the identity of the chassis (number on LH rear spring hanger on the flat above the shackle - you'll probably have to remove all the paint to see it). All you need to do is to have a receipt for that vehicle and the one with the engine.

Just check that the 109 is not a six - it gets more complicated if it is. Easy to tell - the six has the engine/gearbox/transfer case further back, just check the two firewalls have the same size bulge for the engine - the difference is very obvious if you compare them.

John

[drifter]

Thanks John.

The receipts will be a worry. The first one was given to me - I didn't ask for a receipt for the second...

I'll chase that up.

As for the 109 possibly being a 6 - he told me they (the owner before him) had taken a 2.25 out of it before he got it.

[Blknight.aus]

dont panic about that they'll take a stat dec.

[drifter]

dont panic about that they'll take a stat dec.

It will be a while before I am at the rego stage so I'll have something sorted by then.

Thanks.

John

[drifter]

Just another thought...

I am assuming that the front crossmember has 2 purposes;

the main one for strength and rigidity in the chassis, and
a mount place for the radiator, surrounds, etc


apart from providing a hole for the crank handle. ;)

So....

If the one they have engineered in there is providing strength and is far enough forward, what is to stop me putting some other 'thing' in there for the radiator and associated body stuff?

(Apart from the fact that it would look crappy when you look from underneath?)

[Blknight.aus]

it also mounts the steering relay box.

you cant just use any old thing.

[drifter]

it also mounts the steering relay box.

you cant just use any old thing.

understood - but the 109 currently has the steering all setup and working.

[101RRS]

It will be a while before I am at the rego stage so I'll have something sorted by then.

Thanks.

John

Well you had better have it sorted by early May for the Outback Heritage Drive :D.

Garry

[drifter]

Hey Garry,

I already have the Disco booked on that as a support vehicle. (I have some of the shirts you ordered for the other 'section' of the club, too ;) )

I doubt that I have enough time to get it rego'd and fully road tested before that trip.

John

[drifter]

Well - post #1 in regard to the crossmember is all bollocks - the original crossmember is in place - just has a bit cut out and strengthened some so it was still functional and would allow the 186 in there...

I can use the original crossmember.

I will get to the pictures soon.

It is a bit of a mongrel - the vehicle number on the firewall plate is different to the number stamped on the chassis

but both are 'b' suffix numbers.

The closest Calvin can come to dates is March 1963 to April 1966.

Is there something I can look at to home in on a more exact date?

If it helps, it 'was' a positive earth model.

Thanks in advance

John

[JDNSW]

Well - post #1 in regard to the crossmember is all bollocks - the original crossmember is in place - just has a bit cut out and strengthened some so it was still functional and would allow the 186 in there...

I can use the original crossmember.

I will get to the pictures soon.

It is a bit of a mongrel - the vehicle number on the firewall plate is different to the number stamped on the chassis

but both are 'b' suffix numbers.

The closest Calvin can come to dates is March 1963 to April 1966.

Is there something I can look at to home in on a more exact date?

If it helps, it 'was' a positive earth model.

Thanks in advance

John

Anything prior to 1967 would be positive earth, so that does not help. As far as I can remember, there were no significant changes in that time range. By 1963 the changes round about 2 to 2a had all been completed (Suffix b), and the ones which came with the change in battery polarity had not happened. There are quite a few differences in parts that are listed in the parts book without a changeover chassis/engine/gearbox number, just as "alternatives", and some of these will have one item generally but not always earlier and the other later, but which is used does not pin down the date.

John

John

[drifter]

Thanks John

[clubagreenie]

I was going to question th "flip the cross member over". I've done 5 of these and only ever cut out the upper rear section of the member and replaced it into the cutout upside down so there was room for the radiator to move forward. Don't know if it's still done this way but it was the late 70's.

[groucho]

The way it was done
notch the crossmember and use angle iron and two flats either side
lots and lots were done no worries. Not a goog piccy but the general
idea........Mark





https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2010/02/644.jpg

[drifter]

Thanks guys. As I said in post #16, the contents of post #1 with regard to the crossmember is not right.

When I looked at the vehicle last Sunday, it was teeming with rain and none of us were too keen to spend much time out there looking at things - so I didn't get a good look at it and the owners description of what had gone on was obviously misunderstood by me - or not explained clearly - or something.

Anyway - I've got it now. Let the good times begin!