Assuming all assembly issues are sorted, springs, snails blah, you can't beat a pressure-bleeder. More so with a 109.


20psi uses brute force to blat the air out. Yes, you can mess around with the 'glamourous assistant' method and others, but in all that's holy, why? The factory would have used a pressure-bleeder. It's not like they're all that dear, why mince about, why fight it?

None are great quality, Gunson's is the worst. This one is the best compromise.

Nah,that logic could be flipped,we want a 109 all year round because it's MORE useful? If we want an 88 for 'sunmer posing', your logic stands.  Both are correct.


Reckon I've got it... SORN makes no differnence to status for a classic. If you've a roadworthy classic you don't need to SORN?


In 1995 graghs show roughly 33% were 109s. The scrap rate has to be higher for 109s to be at 20% today. The SORN rate indicates higher attrition. More of those 109s on SORN don't exist than 88s on SORN.

We're seeing attrition. Which'd be why the lines meet for the 88s, and stay parrallel for 109.

Archie - sorry, never worked at Methil

Ian F

I think there is some logic to those figures. Could it be that some owners feel their 109s are less user friendly on todays busy roads and thus put them on the road for shorter periods e.g. when they actually need to use them

Also worth bearing in mind is the time of year that you check those statistics, a great many classic vehicles are off the road on SORN during the winter months, thus those numbers will naturally fluctuate and you'll see a recovery in the summer 

No more daft than my explanation! It is odd, yet numbers don't lie. The stats say, 109 owners are twice as likely to SORN what in all other respects is the same thing.

That's a stark difference. Makes no sense?

.... perhaps it's because they can't bleed the brakes 

 

I note the graphs level-out. Numbers are fiarly stable amongst both - I'd guess 'classic' status aids this.

Only, what is going on Here?

Roughly the same number of 88s are licensed as SORN. Fair enough. But...

Twice as many 109s are SORN as licensed? What is it about a 109 that explains 109 owners having double the proportion sent to SORN?

I think its easy to get fixated by this, but fundamentally, the chassis number as stamped on the chassis frame is in effect the vehicle's identification number. By that I mean that it is the unique identifying number that the relevant authorities use to identify that specific vehicle. Whether its called a VIN following the standardised introduction of the 17 digit sequence in 1979 or manufacturers' own format "chassis" numbers prior to that is largely an irrelevance.

IanF does make an interesting point though. Did all manufacturers stamp the number on the chassis? Is there a chassis number stamped into the frames on post war Rovers for example?

Historically, with all chassis built Land Rovers, we look to the chassis frame for the definitive number as Rover have always stamped it there. Apart from a few Series Ones and some overseas later production vehicles, the chassis number / VIN has always been stamped on the RHF chassis leg (it even still is on the Grenadier!). The chassis plate being a screw on affair should only be regarded as a secondary information source - much like the VIN plate on the pedal boxes of L316 Defenders. The windscreen "visible VIN" came in for 1995 MY and is deemed acceptable by DVLA for initial verification purposes as the plate is attached to the windscreen frame or dash assembly by security fixings and cannot be removed easily with out quite some invasive activity.

Hi,

Has anyone contrived to fabricate a pipe to link the top calliper to the bottom calliper, but then move the flexi-hose to to bottom calliper, which will move bleed nipple to the top (highest) point?

Probably converting to disc front brakes would be the easiest solution ... but maybe not the cheapest. Soft pads would obviate the need for servo-assistance, with the transmission handbrake, also playing a part in holding the car when parked facing uphill.

The 2.4 & 3.4 "Inspector Morse" Jaguar, and similar looking Daimler, had disc handbrakes, which were reputed to be ignored at MOT time. I never got the handbrake to work on my auto 2.litre V8 Daimler, so I "moved it on", before its MOT was due.

Yes, I did tell the buyer ... but he said he was already aware of the problem. If push had come to shove, I would have made new pads, fitted with rubber cut from "Phillips Stick-a-Soles". What a motor! ... bought for £200 ... sold for £200.

602

VIN numbers were introduced long after S2 production ended. Chassis numbers are what S2 have stamped on the O/S dumbiron and screw on bulkhead plate