D1 v D2.

**Slunnie** · 25th January 2021, 08:44 PM

Originally Posted by Tins

.
I don't think I meant that the suspension itself was a problem. But there are many horror stories online, including here, of double cardan failures, resulting in catastrophic transmission damage, due to the incorrect angles through the unis following a lift. My own car has a 2" lift unmodified, but I worry about that joint. Never occurs to me in the D1, which is also lifted. . Maybe I'm spooked. You and twr7cx are maybe reassuring me.

Thats a really interesting point about the DC. There are a few opinions on why they fail and to be honest I think it comes down to the way they get used, but never the less they shouldn't be failing... but do. What I found there is that when using them heavily offroad the DC become prone to failing and the more lightly they get driven the less likely there is to be a failure. I would break one every 11 months and even when I started using the Tom Woods 1310's they would still fail. When Tom changed his socket flange to cast steel and made the centre bearing greasable I've never had a failure since, and that was several years ago now in both front and rear applications. My opinion is that its the centre bearing that first fails, but its externally seen as a uni joint bearing failure and it also explains why it happens on the D2 but not the D1. Never the less, if you're worried about the DC joint failing, or if it does fail, there is a permanent fix for it which is a Tom Woods Shafts 1310 shaft. They typically give you warning before they fail and you can check it with a quick twist and shake of the shaft. BTW, Tom is just the most lovely bloke you will ever meet, he is really just that nice a fellow and an absolute pleasure to deal with.

**Vern** · 25th January 2021, 08:52 PM

I've never looked into it, but never understood why the d2 needed a dc front shaft? Anyone care to elaborate for me?

**Slunnie** · 25th January 2021, 08:58 PM

Originally Posted by Vern

I've never looked into it, but never understood why the d2 needed a dc front shaft? Anyone care to elaborate for me?

I think it was just a part of the process of improving NVH. In the D1 they went to the rotoflex on the rear which is standard practice on cars these days, and then the next was to address the issues with the phasing and ocillations of the front shaft which they did in the Disco2 with the DC. They obviously had a love affair with 1300 uni joints at the time, but it was under done, well at least the centre bearing in a 1300 DC is under done, where I'm pretty sure the 1310 runs the same bigger centre bearing as the 1350.

**Tombie** · 25th January 2021, 08:59 PM

Originally Posted by shack

This got me thinking, could you get ACE with a spring suspension rear end?

I've never seen one, doesn't mean they don't exist.
And LRs random option packages don't go up in spec level with any logical process.

Yes. I have one.

**Vern** · 25th January 2021, 09:14 PM

Originally Posted by Slunnie

I think it was just a part of the process of improving NVH. In the D1 they went to the rotoflex on the rear which is standard practice on cars these days, and then the next was to address the issues with the phasing and ocillations of the front shaft which they did in the Disco2 with the DC. They obviously had a love affair with 1300 uni joints at the time, but it was under done, well at least the centre bearing in a 1300 DC is under done, where I'm pretty sure the 1310 runs the same bigger centre bearing as the 1350.

Sounds like its more hassle than its worth, just like to rotoflex.

**Slunnie** · 25th January 2021, 09:30 PM

Originally Posted by Vern

Sounds like its more hassle than its worth, just like to rotoflex.

Yeah, they just needed to spec them right. I think the DC is undersize, and the earlier and later ones that LR used in other vehicles were bigger. The rotoflex I think they got right. It needs a pretty big jolt to break it in the Disco2, and I tend to think it actually buffers driveline shock a bit which helps it to not break the rear end. There is an off the shelf rotoflex which is the same but a bit thicker (BMW M3 or V8 Commodore part I think it is) but the stiffer it is the less it deals with NVH. The Disco2 rear geometry is also less prone to tearing them apart with lift, where the Disco1 drops the pinion angle with lift, the Disco2 arcs around the transfer case end and maintains the proper angle in the rotoflex.

**twr7cx** · 25th January 2021, 09:46 PM

Originally Posted by 101RRS

His view is not RUBBISH - it is just different to yours

No, his claim that castor correction is not available for the D2 was rubbish because it is untrue. It's not an subjective opinion thing, it's a fact that they exist for it. And here's the first three links that come up on the Google search as evidence to disprove his claim and show that they're available:
Land Rover Discovery 2 Front 3 degree Castor Corrected Radius Arms | eBay
Discovery 2
https://thomasperformance.co.uk/stor...dels-1998-2004

**Tins** · 25th January 2021, 10:02 PM

Originally Posted by twr7cx

No, his claim that castor correction is not available for the D2 was rubbish because it is untrue. It's not an subjective opinion thing, it's a fact that they exist for it. And here's the first three links that come up on the Google search as evidence to disprove his claim and show that they're available:
Land Rover Discovery 2 Front 3 degree Castor Corrected Radius Arms | eBay
Discovery 2
https://thomasperformance.co.uk/stor...dels-1998-2004

All of that is true. It wasn't when I was searching. You have enlightened me. So, maybe accept that you were correct in this instance, and move on?
I accept that you have knowledge that I did not have. This place is about learning, friendship. If that isn't who you are, well......

**twr7cx** · 26th January 2021, 06:05 AM

Originally Posted by Tins

All of that is true. It wasn't when I was searching. You have enlightened me. So, maybe accept that you were correct in this instance, and move on?
I accept that you have knowledge that I did not have. This place is about learning, friendship. If that isn't who you are, well......

The above second post on the matter was not directed at you. It was for 101RRS in response to his comment about differing opinions and clarifying why I stated what I did, hence why his comment was quoted above it. I'm more than happy to move on, but also happy to respond to further replies regarding the matter. I don't disagree with your comment about what this place is about, but it's also a forum for discussions to occur...

**biggin** · 26th January 2021, 06:39 AM

Originally Posted by Tins

All of that is true. It wasn't when I was searching. You have enlightened me. So, maybe accept that you were correct in this instance, and move on?
I accept that you have knowledge that I did not have. This place is about learning, friendship. If that isn't who you are, well......

The insinuation at the end of this quote isn’t particularly friendly.

Thread: D1 v D2.

Thread Tools

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions