Yup, that'll do it.....

Are the springs properly inside the calipers and not poking through the hole? Once the caliper is pressing them down, they shouldn't be capable of moving.

Original were TRW calipers but with the spring at the rear they shouldn't need anything extra (and neither of the ones you linked to will fit anyway.. I had a rattle going over bumps and also if I kicked the rear tyre. That was the dust shield bracket that had rusted through and it was the dust shield rattling not the pads.

I've got a trade policy that covers me fully comp for any vehicle I own or in my custody up to a value of £10k per vehicle and when that came up for renewal the premium had gone through the roof. I list any that I own, or will be with me for more than 14 days, on the Motor Insurers Database and the broker told me it was because I had 2 Range Rovers listed and insurers don't like Range Rovers due to the number of them that get stolen. I explained to him that it is the later ones that get stolen and mine were 25 and 27 years old so highly unlikely to be stolen as they don't have the stupid keyless entry systems and the chances or them being stolen to order to be stripped for spares or exported to Africa was pretty remote. He spoke to the underwriters and got them to agree to renew at the same price as long as I didn't have any more modern ones.

For the average user it is probably better to go for a limited mileage classic car policy as long as you don't do huge mileages. Best bet for them are the likes of Adrian Flux, Footman James or Abbeyfields. Abbeyfields have had good reports from others that have tried them and they will accept a P38 as a classic car.

Yup, go for it.....

A valve permanently closed means that the ECU has instructed a corner to raise but it hasn't seen a change in the signal from the height sensor. Doesn't help much as it could be a leak at that corner, it could be a fault within the Height sensor or it could be that a valve really is stuck closed. Why it doesn't behave once the fault is cleared I have no idea. I assume you are clearing the fault with the engine running, switching off then starting up again so it gets chance to reset?

You'll need to wade through it a bit, but in this thread https://discoweb.org/index.php?threads/reset-adaptive-values.92885/page-13 there's some software that can be used with an ELM327 OBD dongle that alleges can reset the adaptive values. Admittedly I've not tried it but as I have a Nano I've no need.

If you squeeze it until it feels dry, leave it overnight without any further wetness and squeeze it again. I suspect you'll get the same amount out again. It really does hold a lot of water.

I replaced the heater core O rings on one car that had been leaking for quite a while (owner had been topping the coolant up on a daily basis for months) and the amount of coolant that was retained in the foam under the carpet had to be seen to be believed. This was on a Vogue where that foam is a good inch thick. We used a wet and dry vacuum cleaner to get what we thought was a lot of it out but it still kept coming. The owner ended up putting old towels under it and propping the foam up to allow air to get underneath whenever he wasn't using the car until it was dry but that took weeks. So if any appreciable amount of water has been soaked into it, it will need a lot more than a hairdryer......

Try from here http://p38webshop.co.uk/index.php?route=product/category&path=71 (the last one), when you click on it, it should immediately download the pdf and open it in Acrobat. This assumes from a laptop or desktop, no idea what it will do on a phone though.

Marty's pdf of how to do it is very good, even my mate Danny who is as ham fisted as they come was able to follow and get a full set of pixels. Marty's instructions are here http://p38webshop.co.uk/RRdocs/P38%20HEVAC%20Pixel%20Fix%20v2.pdf and may be more comprehensive than anything from RPi.

It sounds as though you have dealt with all the likely places. Are you sure it is still coming in or if this isn't just water that got in there before you fixed the leak and hasn't evaporated away yet?

That is the advantage with a diff from Ashcrofts, all the pre-load and backlash is set up by them so it is just a case of fitting it. The main problem with the weight is that it isn't in one place. The end that you can't put a jack under is the heavy end and there's no really flat surface to sit it on.

This is what I use anywhere that calls for an RTV silicone https://www.autodoc.co.uk/reinz/982547. My local factors (Millfield Autoparts) stocks it. Not cheap but the Victor Reinz stuff is recommended by Porsche amongst others and it is very easy to use being in the aerosol type dispenser. The only problem is once opened the nozzle gets clogged so you may end up throwing half of it away.

Yes, I've got an Ashcroft on the rear and another from a different rebuilder on the front (a place up north who could do one for me in a couple of days whereas Ashcroft gave me a lead time of a month). The front has leaked slightly from the pinion seal from day one.

Correct, later 4.6 has a 4 pin as standard, earlier ones and diesel and 4.0 litre have a 2 pin. Diff ratio is 3.54 on all P38 versions.

Only if you spend more time crawling over rocks than driving on the road. You've got traction control that does the job on all but extreme surfaces.

Yes it is. Drop off the rear propshaft at the diff and tie it up out of the way, pull both hubs and halfshafts out by a couple of inches (you can even leave the brake callipers in place), undo the nuts holding the diff in place, whack it with a mallet to break the RTV seal and keep your hands out of the way as it drops as it is heavy. Hardest part of the whole job is lifting the new one into place..

Is it one tap per revolution? If it isn't peeing it down tomorrow, I'll get under mine and see if I can record the noise I have.

Mine is only there at idle and sounds horrible when I pull up at passport control when I'm getting on a ferry as it reflects off the side of the booth and the engine is nice and hot then. Give it a bit of revs and it goes away. I can just hear it from outside the car when started from cold and louder when warm but, as I say, it has always been there, never got better or worse. If I get an excuse to separate the engine from the gearbox again, I'll probably replace the flywheel and if it is still there then I really have no idea where it is coming from.

The spare also does it but to a much lesser extent and I've heard a similar noise from others too.

If a liner was slipping you'd be pressurising the cooling system. Does it sound louder from underneath the car? I've had a tapping noise from mine since I bought it at 205k and decided it was probably a cam follower, changed them and it made no difference. At 287k I had the engine rebuilt and it was still there but while doing something else realised it was sounding louder under the car like it was coming from the bellhousing. Decided it must be the torque converter but that was replaced, along with the flex plate, when I changed my gearbox about a year ago at 454k and the tapping is still there. With the lower cover off the flywheel (separate on a GEMS but part of the sump on a Thor) and the engine running, it looks like the toothed ring for the crank position sensor is fractionally offset so it could be one tooth on that just touching the crank position sensor as it turns. I've had a good look at it and none of the teeth looked 'shiny' like they had touching anything, they are all dead straight and the gap is perfect on all and there are no witness marks on the crank position sensor either. It sounds louder when hot but has never got any worse or better, so I just ignore it. It would be nice if it wasn't there though.....

Garvin wrote:

then it dawned on me that I could take the whole half shaft and hub out with the shield still attached!

and with the brake disc and calliper carrier too. For some reason rears usually come out easily enough but fronts can put up a fight, made more difficult as the ABS sensor has to be persuaded to come out in one piece as well.

I don't think any are actually clogged, but if the spray pattern is screwed or flow is restricted, then that could cause the lumpy idle. It doesn't sound to have a misfire as such, it just isn't smooth. I think taking them out and backflushing them with brake cleaner is my next step. I could just ignore it and do as I have since I've owned it and only run on petrol if I really have to. I've always said the petrol in the tank is regarded the same as the spare wheel, for use in emergencies only.

Pete12345 wrote:

If you usually run on LPG, maybe the £20 of petrol has lifted something from the tank bottom ?

Does Nanocom say which cylinder is misfiring ? If so, I would take that one out & do a bench clean with the 9V battery & carb cleaner.

Maybe, but it was running the same before I put the extra in so unlikely. Thinking about it, it ran much the same last year when I tried it on E85 (which Nigelbb has been running his Thor on) and I decided it didn't like it. But it may be that it wasn't the fuel but the fuel system. Nanocom doesn't give any P030x codes on a GEMS, so no idea which one, or ones, isn't running right.

I've still got the 3 Ohm wirewound resistor I used to limit the current when I did them last time, so may well do that.

Aragorn wrote:

i imagine a lot of these cleaners are somewhat snakeoily...

On mine, i found the injectors from a Rover K series were a direct fit and had similar flow characteristics, while being a much more modern design with better atomisation etc, so i just swapped them out. I can dig out the part number if you like? Was cheaper than paying to get the old ones cleaned.

That's why I asked in the first place, to try to avoid spending money on snake oil. I must admit I am a little sceptical anyway as when I did them with brake cleaner and a battery last time I found back flushing them got more dirt out and nothing you put in the tank is going to do that.

Interesting that K series injectors are a direct fit. Most K series engines used the earlier MEMS so that would suggest the electrical characteristics would be similar (if not the identical) and there isn't much difference in capacity per cylinder either.