Salisbury diff housing failures

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bobslandies

In the red 110 it sure looks like the tube has just pulled out of the cast centre, maybe it had not been plug welded.

I have seen Series 3s where a full weld had been added around the joint and would be very wary of that as a solution - more likely to fail because of the weld there.

Bob

---

When I look closer at the housing from the red 110, I'm inclined to agree with you. It would have been good to have a pic of the tube near the failure.

To fail there, the tube mustn't have been a tight fit into the housing.

4x4 Bedford trucks had the same issue with both front and rear diffs they leaked oil I must admit I never saw one break.
The vehicles in question were used daily on rough roads for years.
All of the diff housing failures on 4x4 trucks that I saw were as a result of non standard tyres.
I have seen this on both Unimogs and Inters not sure if this could be a factor with Land Rovers I guess it depends upon the offset
Nothing stops you quite as quick as the rear axle housing snapping and the 2 rear tyres fold in against the coil springs on a Unimog.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jakeslouw

Looking at the registration (North West Province South Africa) and the vegetation (mopani) I'd say this is somewhere in Southern Africa around the tropic of Capricorn.
A pot-hole would be the culprit.

An axle brace could have helped, but considering the depth of some pot-holes in Africa, maybe not......... :o

---

Maybe slowing would have helped, or maybe not . . .

Did the Army have trouble with these, or did they strengthen them?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inside

http://aciai.me/i/H9A7F.jpg

---

Based on the tube OD, the wall thickness of that tube is ~5.4 mm, which makes sense as the SIII/110 tube wall is ~5.8 mm, but is then machined down slightly to form an interference fit with the cast centre (which you can see in the pic).

This thread is sure to bring out the Landy hypochondriacs! I think I can resist unbolting my Salisbury and finding a replacement for the moment. :angel:

I suspect some sort of damage started a fatigue crack and then failure. I doubt there is a systemic issue with these housings.

The 101 also has these but a wider track than the 110 so would have heavier loadings - in addition the 101 has a 1.5tonne load rating on a wider axle and as far as I am aware they have not had this type of failure. Clearly that 110 is overloaded but would still be less than a loaded 101.

Garry

I know there was a lot of failures with the Jeep J20 when they were released in Australia back in the 1980s.
They had a Dana 60 in the rear that nearly always failed if it was used.
Its not exclusively a Land Rover issue if it is an issue

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by garrycol

I suspect some sort of damage started a fatigue crack and then failure. I doubt there is a systemic issue with these housings.

The 101 also has these but a wider track than the 110 so would have heavier loadings - in addition the 101 has a 1.5tonne load rating on a wider axle and as far as I am aware they have not had this type of failure. Clearly that 110 is overloaded but would still be less than a loaded 101.

Garry

---

Yes but what is the wall thickness of 101 axle tubes???

SIII and 110 sals tubes seem to all be ~5.8 mm wall from my measurements.
IRC someone posting that 130 axle tubes are 8 mm wall???
Dana 60 axles are 0.315 - 0.500" wall (8 - 13 mm)

However as stated, the failure rates are low - and seem limited to vehicles used for extensive offroad touring while heavily loaded.

Yes the good old 101 has thicker tube walls than a defender.

Scary photos, even if it isn't my car.

Newb question: Would the same vehicles subjected to the same conditions with stock diffs have faired any better?