|
|
|
|
|
Now from what I understand the original land rover series 1 chassis was actually just a Rover P4 chassis modified for 4x4 use I think the original Land Rover Series 1 chassis was based on the Willys Jeep - initially they just beefed up the Jeeps 'U' section design but eventually had to box it because it had to be less flexible due to alloy (rather than steel) bodywork - obviously modified for Rover P3/P4 components too. Doesn't mean that Series 1 bodywork can't be made to / won't fit a P4 chassis though! |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First up, the P4 chassis is quite different to the Land Rover one.  Which is in turn quite different to a Jeep one. I will note the IIA chassis in the picture is missing a bulkhead outrigger.  I will agree with the earlier link suggesting the 200/300 Tdi will attach to a P4 '80' gearbox as they're both the four cylinder Land Rover bellhousing pattern, but would mention the 200 hasn't been produced for 24 years, whilst the youngest 300 -in ROW spec vehicles- is now ten years old, with the youngest UK spec being around 19 years old with corresponding mileages, and good ones are beginning to fetch rather strong money. As with the Rover V8 -another engine I've run a few of and retain a fondness for- there are better options out there now for the same or less money, whilst there's also better gearboxes than the old Rover 4 speed plus O/D. As to bodywork, there's a few variation you could look to: This Series II sat on a Beetle.  A 90 on a Corvette floor pan.  A Jeep in the style you originally envisioned, which I would venture is a look that would work well if you started with a Lightweight.  And a couple of photoshops/renderings.   ![]() |
| |
|
|
mylittletony
Posted a lot
Posts: 2,421
Club RR Member Number: 84
|
|
|
|
...which I would venture is a look that would work well if you started with a Lightweight. Like this one?  |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
...which I would venture is a look that would work well if you started with a Lightweight. Like this one? With the rest done right to match the front view I'd say exactly like that. |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Like this one? With the rest done right to match the front view I'd say exactly like that. That is a photoshop, and if you built it in real life the finished car would be ridiculously wide. Let's say those rear wheels are on 6" rims and spaced 4" away from the bodywork. That makes it 20" wider than a normal Land Rover! |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
daslandroverman many thanks for the info, I must admit seeing the differences between the two chassis was a bit disheartening at first, but after a few minutes desperately looking it seems to me that the main difference is the height and shape over the rear axle? If my thinking is right this will mean there's more space for the body on the P4 chassis (correct me if I'm wrong). I see where you're coming from on the engine and gearbox choices, given a limitless budget I'd go for an OM606 with a bmw ZF box and conversion kit, but then you have to factor in mounts, shifter linkages, and a live axle strong enough for all the torque. My thinking with the 200/300tdi is it'll bolt up and work with minimal fuss, and while the torque delivery will be a lot harsher the weight behind the wheels will be much less, so it should last for a while at least. My goal isn't to make something mega fast, I've done that before and suffered through the gearbox and axle rebuilds that go along with it. The whole plan is just to have fun, and a 2/300tdi with a vertical stack and the boost wound up a bit will tick that box nicely, probably...
|
| |
|
|
welshpug
Posted a lot
Posts: 4,371
Member is Online
|
|
|
|
|
i think a lightweight body over a p4 chassis would work, I'd have the wheels on standard location not outboard though, with the even more angular shape than the series it might just work without the front arches, or maybe some very trimmed ones
|
| |
|
|
welshpug
Posted a lot
Posts: 4,371
Member is Online
|
|
|
|
|
if you want to use an om series engine why not use its original gearbox, keep things much simpler, transmission crossmembers are easy to do, itll need a custom prop regardless.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if you want to use an om series engine why not use its original gearbox, keep things much simpler, transmission crossmembers are easy to do, itll need a custom prop regardless. I probably didn't explain myself properly, I meant money being no object I'd run a tuned Om606, i.e. dieselmeken pump, hx40 etc, and that would need the strength of the BMW box. With my current plan I'll be sticking with the P4 gearbox, eliminating the need for custom props, transmission mounts and so on, and in conjunction with the 2/300tdi I wont need to worry about engine mounts either, making it a much easier project to get up and running. |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
daslandroverman many thanks for the info, I must admit seeing the differences between the two chassis was a bit disheartening at first, but after a few minutes desperately looking it seems to me that the main difference is the height and shape over the rear axle? If my thinking is right this will mean there's more space for the body on the P4 chassis (correct me if I'm wrong). It's a bit more involved than that, for instance the wheelbase is somewhat longer than a SWB at 111", but would lend itself to a LWB (109") body relatively well. The front end is an independent coil spring setup rather than the leaf sprung live axle on a Land Rover, whilst the main rails taper outward front to rear. However, this isn't a reason to despair as you wouldn't be the first person to build a Land Rover bodied hotrod on a P4 chassis (see the slammed Series I mentioned a few times above) which started life as an 80" and a P4. Engine and gearbox wise, the Tdi and stack pipe idea holds up well, although i will relate that I recently picked up a good BMW M52 with 5 speed ZF auto on the back for £140 (engine is for my 110) whilst I've previously managed to score an M51 diesel with the GM auto -which wants throwing a long way away- as a swop for parts worth about £100. I accept neither lump is a worked over OM606, but they woukdnt murder a P4 axle, and do give some evidence that cheap and decent stuff is out there. Anyways, I'll be watching with interest when it happens. |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi, I was going to try and correct some of your assumptions about the mechanical side of this but I see daslandroverman has done some already plus I found a link to what's involved which will be at the bottom of this post. That was a Rover 80 conversion, if you start with a more common 6 pot then you will have to do engine mounts because the engine is longer and so the mounts are further forward. The other thing is depending what your driving style will be with is. If you are just going to cruise this sedately around then all well and good. If you are going have a more 'enthusiastic' style then you need to know that the gearbox will put up with it to an extent but it will not be hurried as far as quick changes go. Also try and avoid revving the engine up and dumping the clutch, the layshaft will not tolerate that, guess how I know that!! Another option is to use an LT77 or R380 but you will need a couple of different combinations of certain parts to get a gbox to 2wd to fit the engine. www.frenchsfarm.co.uk/p4.html Please don't think I'm trying to put you off but I've been through some mods on these and LRs and that was back in the days when all this could be found easily in breakers yards. If you want any more pointers come back. Colin |
| |
Last Edit: Feb 4, 2017 19:41:42 GMT by colnerov
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
colnerov Thanks for the info, I didn't know the P4 gearbox was so fragile! Obviously being a 50s gearbox it wouldnt shift quickly but I was hoping it'd handle a bit of 'spirited' use well enough, especially if I stuck with skinny tyres. As far as engine swaps go the BMW M52 is an excellent engine for sure, I currently have an E36 with the amazing M50B25 in it (70k on the clock, she's a beauty) but I think it'd be the wrong engine for this sort of car, while they're bombproof and good at what they do, they lack character (in my opinion anyway). My only reservation about doing a full engine and drivetrain swap as well as the body swap is a relatively simple project quickly becomes something that'll sit in a garage / storage unit for years while I cobble together all the parts and learn how to make all the mounts and so on. There's no doubt it would make sense on paper but I'm no master mechanic, while I could happily bolt an engine and transmission together my welding leaves a lot to be desired, the more I have to change and fabricate the higher the risk of me messing it up. Basically I don't want to bite off more than I can chew!
|
| |
|
|
LowStandards
Club Retro Rides Member
Club Retro Rides Member 231
Posts: 2,716
|
|
|
|
|
I have no idea about the gearbox/200tdi combo I'm afraid, the povo spec P4 had the 4 cyl engine so it may work, but then it may not
What you should be concerned about it's the use of a diesel in the first place ;p
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have no idea about the gearbox/200tdi combo I'm afraid, the povo spec P4 had the 4 cyl engine so it may work, but then it may not What you should be concerned about it's the use of a diesel in the first place ;p I'm 99% sure the 200tdi will fit, may need the sump modifying a little bit to get it round the steering rack but that's not a problem. As for using the diesel my reasoning is good, honest! It keeps everything simple, the fuel pump is mechanical, there's no spark to worry about, and while the 200tdi wont be breaking any land speed records it'll make turbo noises and spin the wheels with all that torque (hopefully without destroying the gearbox in the process). Mind you I'm always open to suggestions, as long as it isn't a rover V8  |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
colnerov Thanks for the info, I didn't know the P4 gearbox was so fragile! Obviously being a 50s gearbox it wouldnt shift quickly but I was hoping it'd handle a bit of 'spirited' use well enough, especially if I stuck with skinny tyres. They actually date back to the 1930's with the P3. A goodun will likely last a while with a Tdi in front of it, and if you started with a six cylinder box then it's going to have had an easier life than one that's spent 60 years being worked to death in a Series II. |
| |
|
|
LowStandards
Club Retro Rides Member
Club Retro Rides Member 231
Posts: 2,716
|
|
|
|
colnerov Thanks for the info, I didn't know the P4 gearbox was so fragile! Obviously being a 50s gearbox it wouldnt shift quickly but I was hoping it'd handle a bit of 'spirited' use well enough, especially if I stuck with skinny tyres. They actually date back to the 1930's with the P3. A goodun will likely last a while with a Tdi in front of it, and if you started with a six cylinder box then it's going to have had an easier life than one that's spent 60 years being worked to death in a Series II. I'm putting a 2jz-ge in my P4, straight 6 to match the original, an auto box the car should of come with and 200+ lazy BNP Plus they are pence... |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I guess you must mean a non-turbo one then?
A quick look at eBay shows naught but turbo ones costing thousands.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
From what I've seen even the NA 2JZs command a premium for what they are, a lot of people turbo convert them with good results after all, but hey if you've found one for the right price why not?
I can't really give a numbers and stats reason why I'm choosing diesel over petrol, it's just the simplicity and the noise. Want more boost? Wind up the actuator. Want more fuel? Wind up the fuel pump. More advance? Tweak the fuel pump.
Tuning a diesel is incredibly simple compared to mapping petrol engines and that suits me perfectly, just wind everything up and take it for full load test up a hill, if your EGTs stay under 670C you're on to a winner.
|
| |
|
|
LowStandards
Club Retro Rides Member
Club Retro Rides Member 231
Posts: 2,716
|
|
|
|
|
They come in the gs300, which you can buy mot'd for about £3.72
|
| |
|
|
|
|
