Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Series 2 109" chassis question

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Narre Warren South
    Posts
    6,796
    Total Downloaded
    0

    Series 2 109" chassis question

    Having just taken delivery of a 1960 109" ute I was looking underneath and noticed something strange last night.
    The rear springs are mounted on outriggers not directly onto the chassis rails and the rear axle is reinforced. I had a look through the parts book and found that the springs should be hung directly under the chassis rails (as per normal).
    The track looks the same back and front (by eye) so I don't think the axle is wider just that the spring mounting points on the axle are further apart than the chassis rails ?!

    Was there a different back axle available or is this more likely a modification by a previous owner ?

    Colin
    '56 Series 1 with homemade welder
    '65 Series IIa Dormobile
    '70 SIIa GS
    '76 SIII 88" (Isuzu C240)
    '81 SIII FFR
    '95 Defender Tanami
    Motorcycles :-
    Vincent Rapide, Panther M100, Norton BIG4, Electra & Navigator, Matchless G80C, Suzuki SV650

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    australia
    Posts
    904
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by gromit View Post
    Having just taken delivery of a 1960 109" ute I was looking underneath and noticed something strange last night.
    The rear springs are mounted on outriggers not directly onto the chassis rails and the rear axle is reinforced. I had a look through the parts book and found that the springs should be hung directly under the chassis rails (as per normal).
    The track looks the same back and front (by eye) so I don't think the axle is wider just that the spring mounting points on the axle are further apart than the chassis rails ?!

    Was there a different back axle available or is this more likely a modification by a previous owner ?

    Colin
    hi colin i think you have a station wagon chassi there?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Narre Warren South
    Posts
    6,796
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Thanks Russellrovers, I guess this potentially gives it a bigger load carrying capacity ?

    I wonder whether this ute was built originally on this chassis or the chassis has been replaced at some point. I'll have to look for the chassis number and see whether it ties up with the number on the bulkhead......


    Colin
    '56 Series 1 with homemade welder
    '65 Series IIa Dormobile
    '70 SIIa GS
    '76 SIII 88" (Isuzu C240)
    '81 SIII FFR
    '95 Defender Tanami
    Motorcycles :-
    Vincent Rapide, Panther M100, Norton BIG4, Electra & Navigator, Matchless G80C, Suzuki SV650

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    1,481
    Total Downloaded
    0
    You have a normal SII/SIIA LWB chassis and axle. I have never seen an Australian SIIA axle without reinforcing.

    Aaron.

  5. #5
    JDNSW's Avatar
    JDNSW is offline RoverLord Silver Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Central West NSW
    Posts
    29,511
    Total Downloaded
    0
    That is a perfectly normal chassis. All Series 2/2a/3 109 chassis have the springs on outriggers just outside the chassis - one of the differences from Series 1. (88 kept the springs under the chassis.)

    Likewise, all (Rover) rear axles on 109s were reinforced (perhaps not very early Series 2).

    Note that you need caution in using the pictures in parts books. These often use one picture to refer to several different parts - for example, in the parts book I have in front of me both the 88 and 109 chassis use a picture of the 109 chassis (same picture). The parts book may also use an obsolete picture, even though the appearance of the part has changed.

    There were in fact at least three rear axles fitted to Series 2/2a, Rover, Salisbury and ENV, although only the first was fitted to Series 2. But the one you have is almost certainly the standard Rover axle for that date.

    John
    John

    JDNSW
    1986 110 County 3.9 diesel
    1970 2a 109 2.25 petrol

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Narre Warren South
    Posts
    6,796
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Thanks John,

    The car seems reasonably original but it was the drawings in the parts book that threw me that's why I wondered if it had been modified.
    Is the reinforced axle correct for a Series 2 ?


    Colin
    '56 Series 1 with homemade welder
    '65 Series IIa Dormobile
    '70 SIIa GS
    '76 SIII 88" (Isuzu C240)
    '81 SIII FFR
    '95 Defender Tanami
    Motorcycles :-
    Vincent Rapide, Panther M100, Norton BIG4, Electra & Navigator, Matchless G80C, Suzuki SV650

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    East-South-East Girt-By-Sea
    Posts
    17,662
    Total Downloaded
    1.20 MB
    All perfectly normal for a 109, you are getting mixed up with 88 SII which had springs under the chassis rails and no reinforcing on the front axle.

    The only long wheelbase with springs under the chassis rails were the 107 Series 1.

    BTW in SII/SIIa/SIII the only difference between the ute and station wagon chassis was the brackets to affix the body.
    Last edited by Lotz-A-Landies; 30th November 2011 at 10:27 AM. Reason: front axle

    You won't find me on: faceplant; Scipe; Infragam; LumpedIn; ShapCnat or Twitting. I'm just not that interesting.

  8. #8
    bulletproof Guest
    Even the 88 series 2 should have a reinforced rear axle right from the start of production in 1958

    142800016 which is the first series 2 made has a reinforced rear axle

    My Jan 58 series 2 parts book shows it.



    Cheers Richard

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Search AULRO.com ONLY!
Search All the Web!