Thread: The Dangers of Monkey See - Monkey ....

Lionel,

Hello from Sherwood.

That all seems a bit odd - perhaps not so unusual these days as fewer of the trucks are around giving the counterwallas less opportunity for gaining familiarity.

The shocks with the threaded end are off a 109” truck which highlights which side of the counter the monkey at fault was standing.

The correct front and back shockers are considerably different in size, despite both having similar top and bottom mounts. Seems odd that someone fitted rears to the front on your truck - another learning opportunity there I suppose.

Cheers,

Neil

Originally Posted by S3ute

Lionel,

Hello from Sherwood.

That all seems a bit odd - perhaps not so unusual these days as fewer of the trucks are around giving the counterwallas less opportunity for gaining familiarity.

The shocks with the threaded end are off a 109” truck which highlights which side of the counter the monkey at fault was standing.

The correct front and back shockers are considerably different in size, despite both having similar top and bottom mounts. Seems odd that someone fitted rears to the front on your truck - another learning opportunity there I suppose.

Cheers,

Neil

Hello Neil,

Getting the correct shocks was not for want of my trying Neil. I developed a mantra,

It is a 1970 Series 2A 88 inch short wheel base Land Rover...
It is a 1970 Series 2A 88 inch short wheel base Land Rover....
It is a 1970 Series 2A 88 inch short wheel base Land Rover.

When they asked me a question about the vehicle

It is a 1970 Series 2A 88 inch short wheel base Land Rover...
It is a 1970 Series 2A 88 inch short wheel base Land Rover....

Today I even showed them my phone which I took a photograph of the data plate.

It is a Series 2A 88 inch short wheel base Land Rover that was made in October 1970 .
It is a Series 2A 88 inch short wheel base Land Rover that was made in October 1970 .
It is a Series 2A 88 inch short wheel base Land Rover that was made in October 1970 .

No, it is not a 109 inch Series 2A Land Rover that is a Long wheel base Land Rover
My vehicle is a 88 inch short wheel base Land Rover - that was made in October 1970 ...
My vehicle is a 88 inch short wheel base Land Rover - that was made in October 1970 ...

One thing I can say for certain though; just having a set of shock absorbers on the Shortie's front makes SUCH a difference to the ride and handling. Especially going over the paddock. No teeth jarring bounces out the front. I simply want know myself with a set of shock absorbers under the rear end too!

Kind regards
Lionel

Hello All,

A word about the previous owner from the wife of the person who originally modified the Shortie by putting a Toyota 1B Diesel engine in it. The vehicle was the wife's daily driver. The lady of the house sold the vehicle to a "young fellow". The vehicle was driven to Cairns. Where such strange things as the passenger side dual fuel tank was removed and possibly thrown away. Things that used to work like the glow plug circuit, blinkers, brake lights, head lights gauges such as fuel - no longer worked. It was sold to the "young fellow" as a road registered vehicle. Then the young fellow managed to tip the shortie on its driver's side and took it for a fair slide down hill at the same time - the battle scars attest to this. The young fellow upgraded to a Defender and had the sheer front to offer the Shortie back to the wife who previously sold the vehicle.

I have also found literal hand-fulls of auto electrical wire that have simply been cut off or even left without insulated ends. Some of these wires are live regardless of the ignition switch being turned on.

From all accounts the vehicle that was originally sold to the "young fellow" to the one that was returned were in vastly different conditions. That the rear shock absorbers were actually mounted to the front - I probably should not be all that surprised.

Kind regards
Lionel

Lionel,

I hear you and can feel your pain.

I had something of a slightly lesser experience when I opted to replace the chassis, spring and shock absorber bushes on my own short wheel base Land Rover. That's correct all 88" of it.

While not self-electing to be thought of as stupid by my fellow man, at various times I've exhibited the slow learning symptoms that might give that impression. Not closely reading the parts manual and noting the subtle differences in part numbers for certain look alike parts is one of them.

It so happens that the first bush that I approached for removal was the chassis bush for the front left hand spring. Having come across too many aggrieved descriptions of the hacksaw approach I was glad to accept the kind offer of a home made puller/extractor that had been run up for another member's truck - I mention in passing that I didn't happen to ask what that truck was..... Anyway, the inner extractor was a little too big to pull through the crush tube - so, I returned it and took the long option of using a hacksaw anyway. Ditto for all the other bushes other than the spring eye bushes which were pushed out with an industrial press.

Now, I had also been brushing up on the pros and cons of using polybushes and came to the conclusion that a locally made product was the way to go. I'm not into mentioning brands here, but did arrive home with a box marked chassis and shocker set for Land Rover 88"/109". The counterwallah had also left me with the favourable impression that this was the correct product for the job - here's me never having taken a close look at a 109" rear shock absorber, let alone read up on the part numbers for the various bushes.

Okay, where did this get to?

Well, first off on opening the various packets in the box I noticed that there were only twelve bushes that looked like they belonged to an 88" Land Rover, whereas there should have been sixteen. The only other bushes, two in fact, were different. Putting my shoes and socks back on, I drove back to the supplier to seek the missing pieces which were kindly handed over without challenge - just the mention that they don't sell many of these kits nowadays and had forgotten that the rear shockies were different.

Problem solved - well not exactly, all of the new bushes, bar two, were two piece jobs and fitted easily. However, the two outstanders were single piece bushes and, noting the earlier issue, were destined to be placed in the chassis crush tubes for the front springs. It happened that I had opted to reborrow the same extractor tool to use in reverse - but quick examination of the bushes suggested that, although they might have been a snug fit, hell was going to freeze over before they were going to press successfully into the chassis. An anguished inquiry on the forum at about this time gave one outlier piece of advice that the 88" and 109" trucks might have had a few mills of difference in the bush diameters.

So, another trip back to the bush kit manufacturer/supplier who promptly handed me another couple of bushes with a more promising future for application in a 88" Land Rover chassis. All done and dusted with a lot learned along the way.

As an added bonus, if anyone decides to fit a locally manufactured polybush kit to their 88" Land Rover they might be pleased to note the offer of a purpose made kit for a short wheelbase Land Rover. Alternatively, should they own a 109" Land Rover, the box might also suggest that this was assembled just for them.

Happy spannering.

Cheers,

Neil

Another shock absorber problem is that the australian made shockers seem to be too long for the front axles and allow the axle to drop further than standard and then the tailshaft can be overextended and may cause damage to it of the gearbox.
I found this mostly with Monroe or Peddars front shockers.
I put Britpart standard shockers in and they where the correct lenght and give a reasonably soft ride which is excellent.

Ian
Bittern