Building a NEW SERIES Land Rover. Why cannot it be done?

[w3526602]

Hi,

I, and others, have said it would be impossible to build a NEW Series Land Rover.

But why not?  Anti-lock brakes come to mind. Seat belt mountings. Is there anything else?  The JAGO GEEP came with "approved" seat belt mounts, but I suspect that every chassis had been tested with a 2-ton weight, on rollers, trying to rip the mounts off the chassis .... and that was about 40 years ago.

Why am I asking?  Barbara has given me executive authority (her pension is bigger than mine, but she loves me) to buy a battery powered vehicle ... which NEED NOT be capable of carrying HER.

OTish ... the current Citroen AMI is battery powered and costs circa £8,000 new, but is possibly slower and uglier than the 2CV. I believe that a car charger, suitable for nailing to the front of your house costs between £1000 and £2000. The Tesla owner, a few doors away, has such a box on his front wall.

My only research, so far, reveals that a 40HP electric motor, intended for canal cruisers, costs about £5000, and is tiny. It has a drive flange that looks similar to the output flange on a Series transfer box. Boats doing more than about 5 knots feel like they are  permanently going up-hill. Having bow-hauled my 20ft (?) Norman Conquest GRP about 6 miles, single handed, against a breeze, I can confirm that.

It appears that Honest John is very ill, and unable to answer questions. Who else can I ask.

If the FIRST OVERLAND 80" S1 Land Rovers were very early, they would have had 1600cc 40BHP engines, and pulled well laden trailers. Can anyone here confirm that?

I suppose, sensibly, I should return to the Hyundai Main Dealer, from whom  Barbara bought her Hyundai, circa 4 years and 13,000 miles ago, and trade it in for a new Hyundai Kona, as advertised on TV. But where's the fun in being sensible?

I suspect that a new WAV, for a disabled person, would/should be VAT exempt, which would be virtually cancelled out by the cost of the necessary bodywork conversions.

Does anybody here have in experience in such matters? I assume that Discovery/Freelander/Range Rover are out of the question ... or would the conversion cost be similar, but the VAT saving substantially more?

602

PS. Private Messaging has ceased, and I am unable to receive/send emails, or ( assume) similar. Alan, do you consider it safe to post Barbara's Email Address here?

[w3526602]

Hi,

A new Discovery (presumably electric) is circa £50,000. Assuming my sums are correct, it would be £41,666, if VAT free.

That gives a saving of £8,888 which could be put towards the cost of conversion to Wheelchair Accessible.

It seems that a WAV Discovery would cost less than standard specification, but still more than I can justify.

OT. There a several Benefits available to disabled car buyers/users, but I think NONE once you turn 65. MOTABILITY is dependent on receiving other benefits, but those benefits have the 65+ age restriction on new applicants. If you suspect that you are going to need such benefits, but not yet, get your application in ASAP.

Oooops! Sorry! ATTENDANCE ALLOWANCE is available to over-65s, but my current experience is that your local Social Services will cut you down to the lower level. Everything seems to depend on what time the household go to bed. I spend most of the day in bed (single hospital bed) beside Barbara, but our ladies change me into my jim-jams at

602

[w3526602]

Sorry ... change me into my jim-jams at 19.30,  and return at 07.00 to give me my morning shower. I need help getting my socks on, but they also slide my pants and trousers over my feet, and apply Nivea where/when necessary.     Then back to bed, where they bring us breakfast.

I feel a crusade lurking in the background. The disadvantage is that the rules allow them to rethink what I am already getting, if I appeal. I stand to lose what I am already getting.

602

[gcc130]

Re:First Overland, the vehicles were 86" and would be 2l and as far as I'm aware they didn't tow trailers.

[GlenAnderson]

A new series Land-Rover would never be able to come even remotely close to passing crash test requirements, pedestrian safety standards or any of the current regulations on lighting, and occupant protection.

A Citroen Ami plugs into a standard 13a socket. No need whatsoever for a dedicated charging point.

If you want an electric car with range and performance beyond 28mph and 40 miles then a Nissan Leaf or Renault Zoe can be had with significant discounts new, or with even more savings if purchased a year or two old, but they both will need a proper charging point.

Honestly, you're at the point where you're better off, both physically and financially, in not having a car at all anymore, and getting a taxi whenever needed instead.

[NoBeardNoTopKnot]

A friend of mine lives in Central London. He's not a car-person, with no interest in one other than transport, he has no car.

To me this flies in the face of all that's in the holy gospel written by er... me. Thing is, when he gives his reasons, I struggle. His reasons amount to blasphemy, yet in the  finish I was forced to agree with him. For the odd occasion he actually requires a car, a taxi is pricey yet overall, infinitely cheaper.

And for 95% of his miles The Tube is cheaper/quicker. He spends less on transport than I do running a leafer as a daily. This when a 'paid-for' no MOT; £180ish insurance; nil tax leafer is not dear.

Which made me think again. I'm left to consider why I own one? If for the rest of us, there was access to the Tube as any Londoner, I reckon you dear reader - along with me - would face some inconvenient questions.

[simonbav]

My Land Rover performs an artistic function, and supports my mental health. I have a community of like minded folk I can currently rub brain cells with, and at some point enjoy face to face over the bonnet conversation. I don't care much for the carbon zero targets. The electric rush is agenda'd non-sense...eight billion people charging off a grid? I don't think so. Keep burning fossil fuels please, because I like the aerosol masking effect.

[GHOBHW]

theres a place in asia, can't remember the country right now, thailand maybe...?

anyway, you can buy a complete flat pack land rover from a company there, minus the engine, gearbox, chassis, axles.

all body parts are included, so its almost there I guess!

[dartymoor]

If the FIRST OVERLAND 80" S1 Land Rovers were very early, they would have had 1600cc 40BHP engines, and pulled well laden trailers. Can anyone here confirm that?

I've towed with such a thing. An old heavy ifor williams horse box with a dartmoor pony in.

I did not enjoy the experience and would not consider it safe today. The main issue is speed - 40mph on the flat and 20mph on any kind of a hill on a dual carriageway is not relaxing. (I've had this with a NA 90 diesel and heavier loads on the M5, it's bloody scary).

Last time I borrowed it, it also overheated badly going up a not-very-steep hill, forcing a stop and many trips back and forth to refill the radiator with a crisp packet - the only thing we had with us.

In the lanes, 40bhp is fine and of course the gearing makes it enough for any gradient, but on modern open roads it's not so fun - perhaps it would be wise to put on a flashing beacon.

I'm also doing stuff with electric motors on a smaller scale (constantly reinventing a r/c lawn mower for a steep field) and the maths involved in gearing and speed can get a bit overwhelming. Can't imagine it's any simpler doing it for a car but if you go ahead, be sure to keep us updated. There's some good stuff on Youtube from people who are experimenting with this sort of stuff.

[Peter Holden]

Back in the 60s we towed other land rovers long distances on ropes with both 1600 S1s and 2l diesel S2s.

In fact my brother in law used to tow an Aveling Barford Calf Dozer
around Sheffield  behind his 2l diesel.  The dozer and trailer weighed over 2 tons all up.  Fortunately the trailer had brakes

Peter

[Exile]

On the question of towing, fifty plus years ago I used to pick up 80" Land Rovers that no-one else seemed to be interested in, for next to nothing and tow them home.

(Why? Because LR's were a passion then - and still are).

I once hired a horribly heavy solid wooden plant trailer with tall sides and lorry wheels. Believe me, it was heavy!

Collected a 1949 with it, and towed it from North Lincolnshire back to Essex behind my Series One 2lt diesel with a knackered engine, no overdrive and 600x16 wheels.

Suffice to say that I grew a beard during that journey home.....

[dkenner]

I, and others, have said it would be impossible to build a NEW Series Land Rover.  But why not? 

I'm not sure which way the question is going.  Buy all the parts and build one?  Certainly doable.  Want to drive this on the road?  That is a different question.  It depends on what jurisdiction you are in and what they say about road use.  In some, it is simply no way.  In others, various provisions in the regulations, like that you are using an engine from the targeted year in this new vehicle, sure you could.  But, everything brand new?  Register it for the road in a Third World jurisdiction would be a starting point.  You can always Ship of Theseus an existing Series ...
 

[jonhutchings]

Re:First Overland, the vehicles were 86" and would be 2l and as far as I'm aware they didn't tow trailers.

Also even the 1595cc IOE engine fitted to the 80" up until 1951 managed to squeeze out 50bhp. An early 80" is actually a bit nipper than an 86" despite a few less bhp as it's over 200kg lighter - especially if comparing with   the staion wagon hard top and all the kit the first overland ones had.

[w3526602]

Hi,

An 80" can be identified as NOT AN 86"/88", by a quick glance at one the doors. On all (?) other models the trailing edge of the doors are vertical, but on an 80" the back of the door slopes in order to clear the rear wheel arch. Even then, there is only about 3" of wing between the back of the door and the wheel arch ... very obvious once you know what you are looking for.

Less obvious, until you climb in, is that the front seat box is very close to the pedals (which are non-pendant), and to me, feel like they move vertically. Uncomfortable!

Personally, I would not want an 80"

I am aware that Rovers made a hundred 81" varients, for comparing fifty Rover powered versions, with fifty Champ RR engined versions, to fill future MoD requirements.  Guess which engine won?

The 86"/107" and later 88"/109" models can be differentiated by a quick glance at the bolt head, low down behind the front wheel arch, for the strut that steadies the lower wing.

On the 86", the bolt head is very close to the rear edge of the wheelarch.

On the 88", the wheel was moved 2" forward, with the wheel arch in close pursuit. But the same length strut was used, leaving a very obvious gap between the rear edge of the, and the screw head. Once you know, you can't miss it.

I learned recently, on this forum, that 86" and 88" chassis rails are the same length, but with the holes for the front springs drilled 2" further forward, to move the axle. Further thoughts about track rod geometry makes my brain hurt.

Also even the 1595cc IOE engine fitted to the 80" up until 1951 managed to squeeze out 50bhp.

Hi John,

I think the 4-pot Rover 60 used the 1595cc IOE engine, possibly with an aluminium cylinder head.

I occasionally ponder if the 60 FREEWHEEL was fitted to the front of the transfer box on the 80" ... and if so, could a similar unit be fitted to the back-end of LR transfer boxes? Please don't ask me to justify such ponderings!


602

[Andys101]

I'm pretty certain that if you wanted to build a series Land Rover that I could get if through an IVA  and get it registered as new.