My '89 has one. A fair few have been swapped out for the LT230 of course.Quote:
Originally Posted by Baggy
Printable View
My '89 has one. A fair few have been swapped out for the LT230 of course.Quote:
Originally Posted by Baggy
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baggy
G`day ,
1989 were the first that used the Borg Warner with chain VC etc .
So around 6 years of them all used VCs and all P38A RRs use the exact same VC around 9 years worth with more ponies and torque .
With a seized VC they will still drive .
With the splines stripped on the output shaft , there is no drive not unlike putting the transfer in neutral .
I have been stuck for a short while in or 85RR because i forgot to put the lever across in time , put the lever across and it is unstuck .
I think the Borg Warner is a good thing and much maligned as with the EAS .
I Love My BorgWarner Transfer case
Its quiet it works
I dont have to do anything but go to low or high range. They are easy to fix (chain or drive shaft or vc)
I have no idea why so many people dont like them.
I got 320000 out of the original in my rangie and then replaced it with one that someone chucked in a bin at a landrover repair place, which I dismantled and checked and found the shaft stripped on the splines. A new shaft was 120 bucks and now that one now has 95000k from when I fitted it.
Rangie has 414000kms on it now
My original had the chain loose and it was making noises, a new chain would have fixed it. The VC unit was still ok and I still have it as a spare.
I have LT 230 in my disco TD5 But I still prefer the Borg warner.
I have gone as far in my VC rangie as I did with my LT95 in my 82 rangie.
Anyway Thats my 2 cents worth
Brad[bigsmile1]
I agree.
My RRC Borg Warner just worked unobtrusively.
It is wise to check at about 200KK whether the rear output shaft is worn. I checked mine just before going to Cape York and it was so worn that it had jammed in place on the tips of the splines. A replacement cost about $100 plus a rear bearing which I replaced as insurance.
I had a spare which I bought for $20 and it had worn out the output shaft also.
Its funny that the RRCs seem to wear out the output shaft while 38As seem to stretch chains.
My VC was fine although I was lucky to score a low K one for $80.
I must take back my comments years ago that the LT230 is noisy and clunky, as my D2 one is quiet and smooth, but I still think I prefer the BW. There is a reason that almost all transfers these days are variants of the BW ie chain driven not gear driven..
Regards Philip A
I was lucky the viscous unit in the 2nd range rover I had here died "open" rather than "locked" (the other took out the front 'cv). The trouble is these days ... can you find the viscous unit for sale anywhere .... and if you can, is its cost more than the cars market value :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilipA
The drivechain lash reduced massively when I put an LT230 in as well (I'm assuming the chain in the borg warner was stretched so introduced a lot of slop into the driveline).
the easiest way to pick (without getting dirty and crawling underneath) which transfer case you have .... is look for the center diff lock. if you can't move the lever sideways, you have a borg warner (or a retro-fitted lt230 that can't be locked I guess).
seeya,
Shane l
Thanks everyone....
Didn't realise VC were used in 89 Classics.
Not to hijack the thread I actually haven't engaged the transfer box since owning this 92 Classic.
Shane I'll check the lever for movement ....understand previous owner did swap out auto geatbox for one that was better suited to touring.
He's swapped out the ABS (thanks bee utey) so maybe the VC has gone as well ....although the car is quiet.
Cheers
Baggy
if you stick your head under they look really different.... the borg warner is HUGE!
borg warner
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/im...017/04/115.jpg
lt230
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/im...017/04/116.jpg
The reason why "everyone" uses a CHAIN drive transfer case is... efficiency vs co$t and they're normally much quieter. Despite my old Paj having a damaged chain & cogs... (PO drove it in 4WD-H for HOURS on a highway !) it was perfectly silent in RWD.
Bigge$t problem with the LR / BW is...the ridiculous co$t (NON-availability now at ANY price... ?) and unpredictable life of the viscous coupling.
Second biggest, IMHO, is foolishness... I'd like to use stronger and different terms, but. Why BW elected to use THAT particular VC for ONE model of Transfer case only, is beyond sensible thought. I understand that BW make more than one model of case for more than one vehicle manufacturer...
Lastly, because of the 'brilliant design', the VC must be physically in place to transmit drive, so there is no work-around or fall-back position. Continued use as it approaches 'failure' (usually locked-up) stre$$e$ and damage$ other drive-line component$.
Only a few Range Rover owners are fortunate enough to have an 'open' failure, where the only give-away is being bogged.[bighmmm]
Interesting about the P38 eating chains, whereas the Classic destroys output splines first... My guess is a difference in weight and/or loading, front to rear axles.
BTW the RRC and 38A VCs are the same part so if you see a 38A being wrecked for the many other problems they have , then grab the BW.
Regards Philip A
Hi Shane,
A picture says a thousand words .... its an lt230 transfer box.
Cheers
Baggy