Thread: Blown spicer yokes S2B front swivels.

From what I remember the trailer could only be powered in low range.

The coupling on the rear cross-member also replicated the low ratio in the main transfer box. In many ways it looked like the regular rear PTO assembly except for the trailer coupling.

If as you say the Salisbury would foul an Isuzu engine, it may be a good thing it has gone, although I could always have fitted it to my relatively standard SIIB.

Originally Posted by Lotz-A-Landies

If as you say the Salisbury would foul an Isuzu engine, it may be a good thing it has gone, although I could always have fitted it to my relatively standard SIIB.

As I said, there was nothing special about the front Salisbury as it still had universally jointed halfshafts. Easy enough to make a front by retubing a rear, but having done just that in the past, I found it ate up ground clearance even when trimmed and wasn't beneficial unless larger 101 CV joints and swivels were also fitted, because the Stage One CV joints were the weakest link. I used to break them easily enough(with difflocks,very low gearing and 36'' tyres) on a 4 pinion 3.54:1 Rover type diffs.
Wagoo.

Originally Posted by wagoo

<snip> because the Stage One CV joints were the weakest link. I used to break them easily enough(with difflocks,very low gearing and 36'' tyres) on a 4 pinion 3.54:1 Rover type diffs.
Wagoo.

No matter how strong you make a transmission line there is always going to be a weakest link. It is a pay off between weight and strength.

In the early SIIa f/c the weak link was the Rover diff and axles, when they went ENV the yokes on the uni-joints became the weak link.

In the work that you do with portal axles and I'm assuming rock crawling you are going to break things.

The ENV front halfshafts are only available second hand these days if you can find them at all. So my original reason behind the stage 1 CV was to keep as much standard as I could in the absence of the OEM ENV front halfshafts. I discussed the Stage 1 CVs with Mal Story and in his opinion they (and the county CVs, which are one way interchangeable with Stage 1) they are the last of the decent Rover CV's - his words.

I am not planning doing with my SIIb camper what you are doing with your vehicles and so they will probably suffice. Although I am collecting spare Stage 1 CV's and have spare Maxi-Drive halfshafts already.

Originally Posted by Lotz-A-Landies

No matter how strong you make a transmission line there is always going to be a weakest link. It is a pay off between weight and strength.

In the early SIIa f/c the weak link was the Rover diff and axles, when they went ENV the yokes on the uni-joints became the weak link.

In the work that you do with portal axles and I'm assuming rock crawling you are going to break things.

The ENV front halfshafts are only available second hand these days if you can find them at all. So my original reason behind the stage 1 CV was to keep as much standard as I could in the absence of the OEM ENV front halfshafts. I discussed the Stage 1 CVs with Mal Story and in his opinion they (and the county CVs, which are one way interchangeable with Stage 1) they are the last of the decent Rover CV's - his words.

I am not planning doing with my SIIb camper what you are doing with your vehicles and so they will probably suffice. Although I am collecting spare Stage 1 CV's and have spare Maxi-Drive halfshafts already.

I understand the points you make and not criticising the stage1 CVs per say, but just trying to show that the Salisbury front end is unnecessary overkill for that size CV and 24/23 spline halfshafts.
I did modify a set of 101 swivel balls by welding bolt flanges to them.fitting those and the Cvs would have made a more balanced front end from a strength viewpoint, but I couldn't live with the ground clearance, hence the portal conversion.
Not really rock crawling.There are very few large rocks round my way.the vehicle sees general service in addition to work around my steep bush property.
wagoo.

a few points....may or may not be fact!

ENV could be Eaton number 5

I believe the eaton to have a 3rd pinion support and to be more refined than the Sals...yes it is spiral bevel and the Sals Hypoid...

with the early development of the 101 was the original gearbox/T/c constant 4wd?

RR cvs are just as good as AEU2522 the stub shaft is the weak link and easy to change....you can also get Barry at HTE to make some Hytuf stubs to build a strong(ish) cv...

cheers,
Serg

Originally Posted by uninformed

a few points....may or may not be fact!

ENV could be Eaton number 5

I believe the eaton to have a 3rd pinion support and to be more refined than the Sals...yes it is spiral bevel and the Sals Hypoid...

with the early development of the 101 was the original gearbox/T/c constant 4wd?

RR cvs are just as good as AEU2522 the stub shaft is the weak link and easy to change....you can also get Barry at HTE to make some Hytuf stubs to build a strong(ish) cv...

cheers,
Serg

I think Eaton No 5 would be comparatively huge. Mal Story called the ENVs under his Sidewinder Eaton No 1 s
The ENVs 3rd support needle bearing is very necessary because the main taper roller bearings are too close together. Even so the support bearing was prone to failure leading to poor cwp meshing and subsequent tooth damage
the ENV pinion is substantially smaller in diameter than the 4.7:1 Salisbury.
The advantages of the ENV is better ground clearance, probably stronger axle housing, and cooler running for heavy work in hot climates due to less sliding friction of the gears compared to the Sals hypoid gears.
Not sure about early development 101's. the Falcon engined pre production prototype with powered trailer had basically a bolt on LT95 type transfercase, but had normal series swivel housings and universally jointed halfshafts, so may have been selective 4wd. Some say the even earlier versions had series all helical 1 ton transfercases.

I believe KAM in the UK build RRCv's with 24 spline plug in stub shafts,all made from aircraft quality superdoopernium.
Wagoo.
Wagoo.

Originally Posted by wagoo

I believe KAM in the UK build RRCv's with 24 spline plug in stub shafts,all made from aircraft quality superdoopernium.

KAM claim that but they won't tell you what they use (unlike every other manufacturer). Almost any metal has an Aerospace number and can be called an "aerospace alloy" or whatever BS term they use.