Or Marty put the washers on upside down.....
blueplasticsoulman wrote:
Are you saying instead of feeding the reducer from the flow, feed it from the return?
No, feed the reducer from the flow but instead of connecting it across the flow and return as it appears to be at the moment using Tees, connect it in the flow only. If you look at the diagram in the thread I linked to, take off hose 22, connect the steel pipe that comes from the inlet manifold to the reducer and then connect the return from the reducer to the heater input. Leave the return from the heater going straight to the other pipe without anything in it.
As OB says, with it plumbed as it is, you can force all of the coolant to go via the heater by clamping one of the pipes to the reducer so no flow can go through it, it will all have to go through the heater.
Yeah, that's in parallel using Tee pieces so the coolant flow can go either way, reducer or heater. If you can work out a neat way of doing it, it's much better to have them in series so both get the benefit of full flow. If you have a look at the diagram in this thread https://rangerovers.pub/topic/231-lpg-vapouriser-reducer-plumbing?page=2 then you need to get the reducer in the hose marked 22. You might need to find a couple of L bends to make it neat and tidy and reduce the chances of the hose kinking and making things even worse.
There's always the possibility that you have a stat housing from the same batch as Sloth found on his.
No idea, but it might well do, particularly when working hard. I looked it up some time ago and providing the mixture is spot on (as it will run hotter if weak and cooler if rich) I found info that said petrol burns at 1530 degrees C and LPG at 1550 C so hardly any difference at all, not enough difference to worry about. However, I'm not sure if that is right as aluminium melts at a lower temperature than that which wouldn't do the cylinder heads or pistons a lot of good, although it does explain why running an engine with a weak mixture for a very long time will melt a piston crown.
We'll expect to see photos of one very worn out pump later then.......
If the LPG reducer is plumbed in parallel, then the coolant has a choice of paths it can take, either through the heater matrix or through the reducer, whichever is easier. If the reducer is getting really hot, then that is probably the one with less resistance. That is why I always plumb them in series and go from inlet manifold to reducer and then on to the heater inlet and leave the outlet alone. It's dead easy on a GEMS but the pipework on a Thor makes it slightly more complicated.
It could always be that the blend motors aren't opening up far enough. Poke the Prog button and it should go to maximum heat from the screen vents. If it isn't really hot coming out of there, it is the flow through the matrix, if it is, it's the blend motors needing calibrating.
Morat, in all honesty it would be as quick, if not quicker, to change the pump if either Marty or Sloth can get one to you. The problem with the valves is that if you do have a leak, then you'll need to keep stopping to pump that corner up, you need to inflate them to roughly motorway height or it will wobble around like a big jelly at speed and there is always the danger that you will damage the ends of the pipes and create a leak for the future when you've taken them out. Even if you do have a leak that has made the pump work harder that it should, you won't wear it out on your journey home and it will be fine as long as you don't leave it forever.
Assuming you can get a pump, and it sounds like you have lots of options, changing it is a quick and simple job. 8mm spanner or socket to undo the mountings, 12mm open ended spanner to undo the pipe.
Why can't you bounce it? On something primitive you'd have bits of bent wire and a shock, we've got bags of air and a shock. The bags do exactly the same job as the bent wire, just better. What the problem might be is simply calibration. If you've got one corner trying to go higher than the other three, that will make the suspension on that corner harder so you would feel every little bump and ripple in the road.
As some of you already know I recently fitted one of the very nicely made, twin core, alloy radiators (one of these http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/DIRENZA-TWIN-CORE-ALUMINIUM-RADIATOR-RAD-FOR-LAND-RANGE-ROVER-P38-V8-4-0-4-6-94/350591602189) and have been extremely pleased with it. But I decided to be a bit more scientific (anal?) than simply watching the gauge on the dash and the last few days gave me the chance to try it. Having one car that needed to be trailered to the south of France and another to come back, I sat the Nanocom on the passenger seat and monitored the coolant temperature. Now obviously we don't want an engine to overheat but it does need to be within the correct range. Running at a constant speed with ambient at around 22 degrees, it sat at 87 degrees, on that way back last night when ambient got down to 3 degrees, it had dropped to 86. Slogging up some of the hills, it crept up and the highest I saw was 91. Interestingly, giving it a big boot full of throttle so it kicked down and the revs were up at around 3,000 rpm, caused the temperature to actually drop rather than go up as I had expected so it proves the water pump and viscous fan are doing their job. On a long downhill with a closed throttle at about 70 mph and I saw it drop (as low as 79 on one occasion) as you would expect.
Then for the real test. The car I was bringing back had to be picked up on Saturday but I wasn't due to set off for home until Sunday (yesterday) afternoon so it had to be taken up to my mates place after we'd picked it up. Now he lives just over 2,000 feet up the side of a mountain and the access is a very narrow, potholed stone with the odd bit of concrete, forest track that rises 1,850 feet in two miles as it winds it's way up the side of the mountain, including two very steep hairpins. So with this
hooked up to the back, I stuck it in low (not a cat in hell's chance of getting up some of the steeper bits with that amount of weight on the back in high) and set off for the top. The temperature started off at 87 and started to rise as I made the engine work for a living. By the time I was halfway to the top, it was up to 94 but didn't go any higher and started to drop back as soon as I let the engine idle for a few seconds. That was all on LPG too when all the naysayers will tell you it'll ruin your engine as it burns hotter than petrol. Later we decided to check my mates P38 (another 98 GEMS only a 4.6 compared with my 4.0 litre). By comparison, his runs at 94 when running but rises very quickly when sitting in traffic to the point that the Nanocom got grossly offended when it hit 100 degrees compared with mine that stays at 87 no matter how long I left it idling. So we reckon that his cooling is a bit marginal and, as the water pump is new, his radiator is likely due for replacement in the not too distant but what should they run at? I think we can safely say his is running a bit too hot, or at least getting a bit hot when left idling but is mine running too cool?
You're mirror imaging them so the bit of track that was used at high settings is used at low settings and vice versa. If you look at the diagram, they are configured as a potential divider, one end of the track goes to ground and the other end has a fixed voltage from the ECU so the position of the arm will send a voltage to the ECU which it converts into a number. It is just the polarity of the wires which are in a non-reversible plug that makes sure the readings will still be the same when you swap them. Which I know is completely different advice than that given by a self opinionated Admin on another forum but we all know which orifice he talks out of.......
You can't do just one sensor. The whole idea of calibrating it is to get the car sitting dead level even if the sensors are all giving very slightly different readings, which they do. A bit of wobble in the mounting holes or manufacturing tolerances in the resistor track (even good quality pots are only specced to +-5%) are going to give different readings. If you were to change just one height sensor and not recalibrate, then that one could be trying to make the car sit slightly higher which would make the opposite corner sit lower so the system would be constantly fighting itself trying to get it right.
You don't HAVE to do every height, you could do standard height and then deduct the same number from all of them to get Motorway height and add the same number for high, but it still wouldn't be spot on.
Can't tell you the range but it's only a standard pot so if you measure resistance between the outer two pins that will give you the track resistance. Then measure between one of the outer pins and the middle one, it should vary between almost zero and whatever the resistance of the full track is as you move the arm. The usual failure is wear at a certain point on the track so you'll need to move it very slowly to see any drops or jumps in resistance. An old school analogue meter would be better than a digital one if you have one.
It isn't much better over here, I've never managed to remove one without resorting to the angle grinder.
You can take both radius arms off and leave the axle with the wheels on the ground and the shocks stopping it from rolling away but it's probably better to take one off at at time. Not on radius arm bushes but on similar metal/rubber/metal bushes on other vehicles I've done it the anti-social way of burning the rubber out (preferably downwind of your neighbours) then threading a hacksaw blade through the remaining hole and slitting the outer steel so it can be pushed out. In fact if you put two slits in it, the two bits will drop out.
These http://www.polybush.co.uk/shop/land-rover/range-rover-p38a but not cheap either.
I don't mind a nerdy post and it reads better than some of the stuff I have to wade through at work too. Reading that Wikipedia article explains why the ones I bought don't work (it also demonstrates the American 'not invented here' mentality). The dipped beam filament needs to be 1cm forward and 3mm higher than the high beam filament. The ones you suspect might work, definitely have the spacing something like although I suspect that the 3mm height difference isn't as much as that. The ones I got have a single large COB chip where one end illuminates for dip and all of it for main so the spacing is all wrong. Dip isn't far enough forward and is on the same axis so never are going to be any good.
I can vouch for the fact that US headlights are crap with the vehicles I'm importing from the US (there's a 1972 Volvo 1800ES sitting outside that needs taking to France next week). On most of them, they also have amber front sidelight/indicator units so I remove the sealed beam units and fit 7" round conversion units with H4 halogen bulbs and integrated sidelights. Then I have to disconnect the feed to the sidelight filament and run it to the separate sidelight bulb in the headlamp. There's been the odd one where the side/indicator unit doesn't use a single 5W/21W bulb but use separate bulbs so I can leave the sealed beam units in place and change the all amber lenses on the sidelights for European clear and amber ones. The US sealed beam units will pass an MoT as the flat splodge of light they give on dip is acceptable according to the testers manual but they are pretty piss poor for trying to see where you are going in the dark.
I swapped the radius arms on mine with those from the SE and they've got orange poly bushes in. No idea how long they had been on the SE before I got it but they've done at least 40,000 on mine and are still fine. So I would say orange poly bushes are OK too.
Yeah, overdo it and the steering does get a bit heavy...... Back it off a bit.
My mate Russell (see https://rangerovers.pub/topic/539-newbie-4-6-hse-on-lpg) is a full time professional musician. Not sure if he qualifies for celebrity status but does spend a lot of his time at Abbey Road studios and did once appear on Coronation Street.......