DEFENDER2.NET - View topic - LOF MT82 Upgraded Adapter Shaft

↓ Advertise on Defender2 ↓

Home · FAQ · New Posts · My Posts · PMs · Search · Members · Map · Calendar · Profile · Donate · Register · Log In

Home > Puma (Tdci) > LOF MT82 Upgraded Adapter Shaft

Page 2 of 2

Print this entire topic ·

blackwolf

Member Since: 03 Nov 2009
Location: South West England
Posts: 16876

2007 Defender 110 Puma 2.4 DCPU Stornoway Grey

The rear face of the gearbox, the front and rear faces of the adaptor housing, and the front face of the transfer box are all machine and should be perpendicular to the axis of the shafts. I haven't ever seen a suggestion that there is a problem with this.

The position of the adaptor housing on the back of the gearbox and the transfer box on the back of the adaptor housing is defined by locating dowels and there should be no problem with this, provided of course that the casings are all machined to an acceptable tolerance. Machining to an acceptable tolerance should be no problem at all in modern process, but there are ways in which this could go wrong and it is almost impossible to check without very sophisticated equipment. Landrover's proven track record in screwing up simple things that other manufacturers by-and-large stopped screwing up decades ago and the general shoddy implementation of the TDCi installation means that it is not outwith the realm of possibility that there is a problem here.

Given that the MT82 and the LT230 have both been around in other applications for years without problems it would seem likely that if there is an issue it is with the adaptor housing, the new bespoke part.

Any positional error or this type would result in the splined coupling driving at an angle (like a propshaft UJ) and will cause rapid wear, and will also probably tend to drive the joint apart, which is another often-seen failure mode. It is one theory which fits all the symptoms and evidence but it is unproven so is just a theory.

There must be some factor at work which causes the huge variability in life expectancy of the standard coupling. Lubrication is clearly a factor but not the only factor, since the variability existed when none were lubricated and still existed after there were lubricated on assembly. It is possible that there are manufacturing or material variations in the parts themselves, but again this is very difficult for anyone other than the manufacturer to determine, and the fact that certain vehicles have got through a succession of couplings suggests the problem is on the vehicle not the couplings, again pointing to the housing.

Something is clearly amiss. The design concept is sound and by any calculation the dimensions of the splines is entirely sufficient for the transmitted power, so it should be fine. There are many Defenders on which it is fine, which have never failed, yet by 2008 there were many failures being reported.

8th Sep 2020 9:05am

Bluest

Member Since: 23 Apr 2016
Location: Lancashire
Posts: 3997

2007 Defender 110 Puma 2.4 XS CSW Java Black

I tend to agree with Blackwolf, there is some unknown variable in the way these things have been manufactured and assembled. It would be interesting to pull a complete assembled gearbox/transfer box whole that has failed and see if the mounting face of the bell housing is perfectly parallel with the transfer case output flanges. If not that would at least confirm something was out of alignment in between. 2007 110 TDCi Station Wagon XS

8th Sep 2020 9:41am

DSC-off

Member Since: 16 Oct 2014
Location: North East
Posts: 1351

2015 Defender 110 Puma 2.2 XS CSW Aintree Green

Grenadier wrote:
Please accept that my knowledge of these things, and these specific parts, is limited. But if the MT-82 mounting surface and the transmission box mounting surface are true, are unadulterated, are as per made in their respective factories, and if no shim or spacer has been added during fitting, how can the gearbox and transmission box be out of alignment? One assumes (here’s my gap in knowledge) that both will have been made with flat faces, 90 degrees to their overall shape/design, for flush fitting? If this is the case, where/how does the misalignment come from? I understand that Defender parts (indeed LR parts) may not be made with the tolerances demanded by NASA.

The miss alignment probably comes from an accumulation of tolerances, this might help to illustrate.
Angles and offsets exaggerated to show possible effects,
https://www.defender2.net/forum/topic62521-135.html

8th Sep 2020 12:30pm

Dinnu

Member Since: 24 Dec 2019
Location: Lija
Posts: 3207

2012 Defender 90 Puma 2.2 CSW Santorini Black

My 2012 90 has a history of eating through adapter shafts. I think 4 in all in just over 110kmiles.
Recently needed to take the transfer box out because of an oil leak (Ashcroft adapter shaft aluminium cover was badly fitted and leaked there).
Knowing the history, I tried to see what could be the cause. With the limited tooling I have, I checked the planarity of the adapter housing faces, and they were within 0.10mm (100 microns or less than 4 thousands of an inch). All dowel pins had a good fit. I could not get relative position measurements between dowel holes on one side to the other side of the adapter plate.

What I also noted, the Ashcroft adapter shaft had absolutely no wear in the usual splines. Unfortunately, however, mine suffered some wear on the gearbox mainshaft (https://www.defender2.net/forum/topic59735-240.html).
Possibly the 'flow' of oil from the main gearbox to the kerb side helped to preserve the usual adapter splines

1988 90 Hard Top, 19J Diesel Turbo, Shire Blue - Restoration ongoing
2012 90 CSW, 2.2TDCI, Santorini Black

8th Sep 2020 4:37pm

Grenadier

Member Since: 23 Jul 2014
Location: The foot of Mont Blanc...
Posts: 5765

2011 Defender 110 Puma 2.4 DCPU Corris Grey

DSC-off wrote:
Grenadier wrote:
Please accept that my knowledge of these things, and these specific parts, is limited. But if the MT-82 mounting surface and the transmission box mounting surface are true, are unadulterated, are as per made in their respective factories, and if no shim or spacer has been added during fitting, how can the gearbox and transmission box be out of alignment? One assumes (here’s my gap in knowledge) that both will have been made with flat faces, 90 degrees to their overall shape/design, for flush fitting? If this is the case, where/how does the misalignment come from? I understand that Defender parts (indeed LR parts) may not be made with the tolerances demanded by NASA.

The miss alignment probably comes from an accumulation of tolerances, this might help to illustrate.
Angles and offsets exaggerated to show possible effects,
https://www.defender2.net/forum/topic62521-135.html

Excellent, thanks DSC

Monsieur Le Grenadier

I've not been everywhere, but it's on my list.....

2011 Puma 110DC - Corris Grey

9th Sep 2020 11:35am

Devon-Rover

Member Since: 22 Jan 2015
Location: South Devon
Posts: 906

2014 Defender 110 Puma 2.2 USW Aintree Green

LOF shaft fitted yesterday.

Really straightforward install get it all in and that's one problem area dealt with.

and i did the clutch whilst i was in there too

Click image to enlarge Also can be found on Fb, Ytube, Insta & Twitter @4WDSouthwest

4th Oct 2020 11:46am

Julie

Member Since: 07 Oct 2017
Location: Nantes
Posts: 421

2012 Defender 110 Puma 2.2 SW Keswick Green

DSC-off wrote:
The miss alignment probably comes from an accumulation of tolerances, this might help to illustrate.
Angles and offsets exaggerated to show possible effects,
https://www.defender2.net/forum/topic62521-135.html

I'd even go one step beyond : LR planned the 2 splines because there really exist fab tolerances. Otherwise it could have been just 1 single part + 1 spline (like LOF suggest it to be).

You can find this sort of splines in almost any agricultural vehicle and tolerances are even worse.

And any technician can explain what would happen if these splines moved without lubrication ...

7th Oct 2020 10:17pm

Dinnu

Member Since: 24 Dec 2019
Location: Lija
Posts: 3207

Perhaps LOF want to mitigate the LT77 and R380 where the mainshaft is one piece going into the transfer box. But for both LT77 and R380, the transfer box bolts on directly to the gearbox without adaptor housings. 1988 90 Hard Top, 19J Diesel Turbo, Shire Blue - Restoration ongoing
2012 90 CSW, 2.2TDCI, Santorini Black

8th Oct 2020 8:42am

pedrocandrade

Member Since: 30 Sep 2022
Location: Rio de Janeiro
Posts: 26

2011 Defender 110 Puma 2.4 SW Epsom Green

Hello everyone. I'm just wondering if we have news on the durability of LOF's solution here. I'm thinking of buying one for my 2011 Puma as it will soon get a new clutch from LOF as well.

Thanks!

2nd Mar 2024 12:27am

Devon-Rover

Member Since: 22 Jan 2015
Location: South Devon
Posts: 906

25 odd thousand miles later and AFAICT it is just as sound as the day it went in.

Also can be found on Fb, Ytube, Insta & Twitter @4WDSouthwest

2nd Mar 2024 4:54pm

nidge n

Member Since: 04 Feb 2012
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 714

only 12K miles on mine, but shaft and clutch have been great

2nd Mar 2024 8:36pm

Leamreject

Member Since: 19 Dec 2020
Location: Middle Earth - Leamington Spa
Posts: 955

I too had the LOF shaft fitted last year, my local LR specialist says a much better upgrade than OE Ride like you stole it!!
If I’m not on a bike it’s because only a 4x4 will do…
2011 2.4 Puma 90 HT

2nd Mar 2024 9:06pm

Page 2 of 2

All times are GMT + 1 Hour

Jump to

< Previous Topic | Next Topic >

Posting Rules

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum