ruxy

ISTR (and forget at MOT time) for FOG GUARD to work you need your headlamps on. You need to sort your headlamps out first. It would be better if you were able to state the VRN of your Lightweight , fog lamps appeared about HG (1980) and at first there was still a Infra-Red switch with Aux. (FV) relay. IIRC by KA the Infra-Red circuit was deleted. If post KA then I would suspect the headlamp switch (copy ones are hopeless). If prior to KA - then I would first suspect failure of the Infra-Red switch (famous for leaving you in the dark with only sidelights - another story). You may best off to sign up for the ExMLRA Forum. A gent (Disco 2000) there is doing many Lightweight versions with full trace colours, this is going to be a boon for future fault finding. I have been providing him with info. the drawing you specifically need may be the one I am having difficulty with - there may be a Fog relay as well. This is where Disco 2000 (Dave) may have a for relay disconected :- http://www.land-rover-lightweight.co.uk/Images/Electrical/Fog%20Relay%20Wiring.jpg ------------- http://www.land-rover-lightweight.co.uk/Images/Electrical/IR-Headlamp%20RelaysA.jpg http://www.land-rover-lightweight.co.uk/Images/Electrical/Head%20Lamp%20Diagram.jpg The above two diagrams and notes will explain how you can loose your headlamp lighting. Something makes me think I have found such a relay laid amongs the wiring behind the dash on a Lightweight, don't know why they did not mount it above the service brake automatic check relay that was introduced. http://www.land-rover-lightweight.co.uk/LRL%20M.html ========== Also :- http://www.winwaed.com/landy/mil/military.shtml A few not so handy diagrams (late) with fog guard , non colour but key can be viewed on another page.

Not much use for MT but a bit of info. Read a couple of books recently about WW2 night fighters , to help stop the Hurricane exhaust stubs glowing red in the dark they were coated with red lead paint after every sortie. I suppose this would be the real red lead paint now almost impossible to obtain.

The final act of a restoration (before the breakdown repairs start) - is to paint your diff. pan white http://www.hmvf.co.uk/forumvb/images/icons/icon10.gif WTF

http://forum.emlra.org/viewtopic.php?t=5355&highlight=inter+vehicle QUOTE. SAS dinkie Cpt Mainwairing Cpt Mainwairing Joined: 01 May 2005 Posts: 581 Location: West Sussex PostPosted: Thu Apr 23, 2009 10:43 am Post subject: Reply with quote Ah, but the one for a ferret is the wrong one for a wolf....... the ferret one is te early one with smooth cap, the wolf one is the later one with ribbed cap, the caps are not interchangeable....... _________________ I have a bog standard 90" 57 KG 59 On the basis of the above posted by SAS Dinkie who has greater knowledge of coilers than I have - I obtained a socket with plastic cap to be more correct (in garage & still to fit) - just in case I need to do a slave start for real. However - he is talking Wolf and my 90" is not even a Defender , so it seems I could use a metal cap type. I don't know when the change point was but probably old stock lasted a few years. I have examined a few dozen winterized Lightweights but only seen the metal cap type but there is plenty more to eyeball yet !

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Inter-vehicle-military-starter-socket_W0QQitemZ360177081362QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUK_Cars_Parts_Vehicles_Other_Vehicle_Parts_Accessories_ET?hash=item53dc3a1c12&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14 OK 'ish price - you may find one cheaper if you watch and wait. Note - this is correct type for Lightweight (black alloy cap) , with a black plastic cap - then this is more Defender era.

The Lightweight springs in fact have greater free curvature , this is why the 7 leaf front (FFR & later GS) have 22mm packers between the bump stop and underside of chassis. The ride height is upwards a bit compared to a civvy 88". If used mainly on surfaced roads a better choice is standard 109" rears , standard 88" petrol fronts (or diesel if you want firm). Original Lightweight axle hubs were oil lubricated from the axle. Later Lightweight axles are more or less civilian spec. (after the 1980 88" upgrades "rationalized") same spec. as 109" on front with oil slingers, locking ring at end of stub-shaft with snap ring , internal oil seals in end of axle tube (so no longer oil feed to hubs) - so not at all like the earlier S3 axles. The hub caps can be metal or plastic and are a slightly different profile to original series. Arguably the earlier reinforced axle casings were stronger (1 ton rated) but IIRC the later casings are 750 kg. rated so still well over the top.

============== The earlier reinforced 5'-0" overall (same as body width) axles were discontinued in 1980 for the "rationalized axles" , these are wider due to the hub-caps. Pros & cons for both type - good axles either way. A post 1980 with rationalized axles will have 11" front brakes (as 109") with a few other advantages. Chassis after 1980 were all shocking for corrosion, still a few mid-1970 chassis all original good. Value according to pricing the bits that are still good , better to spend £1000 and another £2000 on a new chassis re-build than £2500 on a glam job (show me one with a sound chassis) and only have £500 left to sort it - because you will not.

================ Originally the Lightweight GS had 5 leaf front springs but not a good idea, in the 1970's the GS was fitted with the 7 leaf fronts (same as FFR). The rear springs are heavy duty from the civilian Optional Parts. Springs do have fewer leaves than standard civilian but the leaves are thicker , the reason is to make them more compliant under full load cross-country. At one time most people ran their springs dry , better opinion now is to keep them oiled , nothing to stop you using standard 109" rear springs with two thick helpers when you are fully loaded. Difficult choice with parabolics because two leaf are best unloaded , load them up and you need three leaf (and you need to play about with shocks) . IMHO stick with quality convential leaf springs.

This is 27 year old cele DBG that has only ever been washed with car soap & water.

The Champ probably is DBG but this colour as it ages it can get darker (more so if it is a cheap alkyd type) - even cellulose does not fade as it oxydizes . I have a Lightweight GS, 19 FM 65 that I re-sprayed in 1982 with Berger cellulose DBG using their premioum Supergloss thinners. It set off like yours but now is almost as dark as the Champ , it was done with several thin coats of DBG and the Supergloss gave a high gloss off the gun (as intended) . It has never been compounded or cut. I have it on blocks awaiting a re-fit and re-spray. I could restore the alloy panels without re-spray but the bulkhead side panels / footwells were done with Galfroid inside & out and it has cream crackered & taken the DBG with it - so it will be to start again but the rest will just get a flash coat.

IMHO - just after 1974 is a few years too soon for NATO IRR. IMHO BSC 298 was in fact the paint used just prior to introduction of NATO 285 298 is very near to fresh 285 and can be easily mistaken , to my eyes 285 has more black content and 298 is a more pleasing colour with a touch more green. regards

It is what I would expect of a first assistance truck with foam generator - the plate is good provenance. The Contract No. is looking good , could be army (and records should turn out something at Deepcut Barracks (who retain the old Beverly Museum of Army Transport record cards) they make a charge of a few pounds IIRC £25) but I would be looking for the first paint coat to have been RAF Blue / Grey. Your first search that you are engaged in should turn out the military vehicle registration number. However if you have a good clear and unmolested chassis number branded on the dumb iron (with Blue / Grey paint) , then I would go straight to the RAF museum and ask them to do a history search for you because it is for £ free

And dare I say it - even the NATO green and spray shaded DP looks a quality job and rather Germanic .

The 1997 photograph shows no signs of several small hooks fitted on the bodywork for snow / ice blind rope lashing points. They (RM) could have fitted a heat exchanger in the cab but I would expect some signs of lining of interior panels with Hardura insullation material (unless it was a quick job). Seems more a case of a RM vehicle offering a bit of extra comfort for officer / SNCO , pity the in service photograph does not have a metal plate 4" x 6" immediately below the bonnet release hole (wired or tie-wrapped on) this would give rank (you can soon add your own Walt plate). Possibly the correct hose fittings are still left on the cylinder head etc. - interested to see a couple of photographs under the bonnet of engine at nearside. I would be interested in exactly the part No. for that antenna mount on the tin-top side, I have a few (not that one) but the photograph is not too clear. I have a similar GS vehicle as yours that I intend giving the full winterization treatment and that mount gives the possibility of a added "genuine" embelishment. =========== The present front view photograph of grille panel , again I would expect to see some evidence of the radiator blind having been fitted (none) . A good double-check is look on the top chassis rail immediately behind the lifting & towing rings - expect to see some small holes (as small as 3/16" dia. for pop rivets) where the radiator blind is secured. Again photographs not showing any evidence of snow/ice/anti-reflection screens for the headlamp blinds ever having been fitted. I live just over the big hill from you and at times often travel over - so it would be interesting to check out the hardware some time. Unfortunately there are very few in service photographs in the public domain of in service winterized LW/T - two years ago I contacted the RM museum to enquire about photographs showing the canopy with full snow/iceblinds but the had nothing ! I wish I had taken photographs at the auctions (I felt it was a bit frowned upon) , after a load of trouble - I now have more or less full details of these blinds for detail drawings to give to a tiltmaker. Still lacking exact final details needed for the door top blinds (LW/T rolled down , similar on 109" rolled up) but there seemed to be a bit of variation from memory but mainly in respect that ropes had been renewed with shock cords. Getting a bit late to get in service photographs now , they shrink (some seemed to have a lighter weight duck than tilt weight) - so dimensions is not easy. Many were stripped off as the winterized were civilianized in private ownership. All I need is a couple of good photographs of these door top blinds. regards

I don't wish to shatter any aspirations of a genuine Ex-MOD GS "Winterized" Lightweight that you may have, but sorry from what I have read and from just the single photograph I don't think you have one. I can say that genuine ones were produced by C.J. Williams Ltd. (Protec Precision) of Aldershot or some converted using the "kits" by REME. I have a full set of blue prints (for heat exchanger & nozzels etc. but unfortunately not for canvas screens or the Inter Vehicle Start) and in fact IIRC a Mr Mike Boxall supplied me with a list of vehicles they converted. The kits were disposed of (about 80 qty. 1992 by MOD at auction) and I purchased what I understand was the last 4 qty. from MVS (Lichfield) in Y2K. So - I can tell you with certainty that there is a possibility of at least 80 vehicles that have been converted in private ownership but some kits may be gavering dust in garages ? When it comes down to counting the rivets, then these private conversions can normally be readily identified. ======================= ISTR that I have seen the odd slave start mounted to in service Lightweights on the front panel (possibly REME LAD). Possibly some winterized by the army were done in this short-cut manner - I don't know for certain.. I will stick my head out a bit and state possibly with the GS there were two ways and the method on your photograph is one (not a very good one at that). I have 55 KB 92 RM 45 com. (grille badged 2IC) still with 45,816 Km / 28,468 miles on the clock, I have had it stood on blocks since Feb 1992 and it is probably the best example released. This is a GS - the Inter vehicle Start Socket is in the passenger footwell (on the seat-base) . The normal starting battery is under the bonnet but in the rear tub behind the seats is a framework for clamping the "SLAVE BATTERY" - tractor size with a sheet steel box cover. ====== In the case of a FFR , then the normal starting batteries were relocated to the rear corners of the tub (special made steel boxes secured where corners of tub cut away). This was done to make available the centre seat position to mount the heat exchanger. This is a point , that I am now unclear about. The heavy "blue coloured" insullation on the cables from the slave start socket in the footwell - I think they were just stowed at the rear of the tub. I think they were just coupled up to the Unitary Radio Kit batteries if needed for slave start.

Thanks Clive for that info. I am going to have to print all this off and keep it handy in file , bit of a turn up for the book. It does seem conclusive then that there were Rover 10 FFR's - I need somebody now with good details of all the Rover 10 contracts , I suspect they were only for the later style Rover 10 - probably only for RAF ? I am certain I have never seen Army or RAF FFR Rover 10 , probably only built in small quantity. I always wondered why my Rover 10 had all the antenna reinforcement under the front and rear wings , because this would have been done just for commonality of design / parts but I had been reliably informed (REME apprentice mechanic from when we left school in 1965) they were GS only.

That seems to be the answer , but I am now wondering when the build date of those contracts would be . Would they be early or late type Rover 10 ? Clive - do you have any record of the very last Rover 10 (headlamps in the wings & shallow sills) such as start / finish date of build , VRN's etc. because I suspect they were only made for the RAF and I have been keeping my eyes open.

Refering to page 16 of The Half-Ton Military Land Rover by Mark J. Cook He states :- From 1961 to 1967 , a very large number of Rover 8 12 volt GS and 24 volt FFR vehicles were ordered and delivered. Only relatively small numbers of Rover 10 GS and 24 volt (but not FFR) vehicles were delivered, however, because the Rover 1 was to take its place, although this was not the original intention since only 75 Rover 1s initially required. =============================== So it seems they were like the last of line "KD" Lightweights , 24 volt but not FFR , or possibly they were RAF Helistart ? I have never seen one.

http://www.rafpa.com/ops..htm Clive Somewhere I have a copy of the above photograph (this is cut down for book cover). Interesting because it has the antenna sprouting out through the canvas roof at the centre of the hoop behind the seats. I did once check the number 96 AA 48 and IIRC it was 1968 , the RAF ones (early & late style) did not have front airlift bumperettes - possibly there was a 24 volt Rover 10 Helistart ?

Quote FV1609 All I did was to quote the publication that appears to cover Rover 10 FFR. ----------------------- Clive - I don't know 100% for certain , it is just what I have always understood to be the case. In the light of the documentary evidence that you have, you expect the MOD to be correct with these things. I wonder if some deskwalla just got carried away having reviewed Rover 6 & 8 documents and just profuced a new cover to the book ? I suppose there could have been the odd 24 volt version and it would take some buff with all the Solihull dispatch records. Is it because there was confusion as there was a FFR Rover 11 ? I suppose I am wobbling at 98% certainty that there was only 12 volt GS. There may have been export orders for 24 volt but that does not answer for the publication you have. If it was in error , then you would expect it would be noticed and a amendment with new cover or stick on correction ?

PS. I have checked the chassis and it defo. has a bolt on gearbox X member .

Now there is something wrong I suspect with the info. posted by Clive , The Rover 10 was only available in 12 volt GS. My understanding is that there was not a FFR version because this role was taken by the Rover 1 (2A Lightweight). I do like the sketch with the toastrack grille but this is stretching it. Basically there were two versions early (as the one I have , that has been messed and needs a new chassis) deep sills, with headlamps in the radiator grill, airlift bumperettes. Later version with headlamps in the wings and fitted with the basic curved end series bumperette (I will not state S3 because this was not the case). Both versions on combat chassis with rear bumperettes , underseat fuel tank(s) fill (so if yours has external fill it has been PO modified) , MOD spec. lighting fittings, razor edge bonnets, spare wheel mount on bonnet. ISTR that the later version contracts may have been RAF not Army , so I would be interested to know the VRM ? Chassis - front member 1 single hole for relay , so not so easy to change to LHD or other way (cost saving I suppose). I am 95% certain no removable gearbox x member but need to confirm by a look on underside ! Now if RAF - it could be 24 volt , the odd helistart (well nomenclature plated) turn up and chassis No. reveals they were originally line built under a Army Contract as a FFR (Rover 6 & 8) - BUT I have not known a Rover 10 like this. PS. Most like the tractor headlamp early version , I do but I also like the later version - they are RARE.

PS. Papav66 - of Pill Box Study Group I presume ?

Can't be me - I don't have a VPK (have 2 qty. ex-VPK) and the next will be a last of line "KD" funny 24 volt non-FFR that I don't have. I know of a very nice KD but the bloke who owns it is a bit too much like me.

A lot more than 10 qty. and that makes me an ABS.