Print

[Craig T]

Random question perhaps....

I'm looking at fitting rear mudflaps to my 109" station wagon and according to the instructions you need to drill out the existing hole in the chassis, behind the spring hanger, in order to fit a nut-sert.
The rear end of my chassis was reconstructed with new steel during the rebuild as it was somewhat rusty so any evidence of a hole there is long gone.

I was wondering if anyone with a 109" perhaps on an original chassis or replacement could look for me to see if that hole is present and if it is, supply me with dimensions to drill my own chassis.

I could simply guess but might be nice to get it about right. Image of a chassis attached to show you roughly where I expect the hole to be.

Cheers

Craig.

[GRMac]

I thought they went on the rear crossmember but am happy to be told other wise 

[Clive Speaks]

I thought they went on the rear crossmember but am happy to be told other wise 

Yup, that's where mine were before they got ripped off 

[Craig T]

Well...

There is a specific set of mudflaps for the 109 that mounts on a bracket ahead of the rear crossmember.
RTC706 is the series 3 part number but I believe that number superseded an earlier number of the same design.

I can buy the rubber bits easily enough but I'm designing my own brackets using photos to get as close to the correct size and shape as I can. If they work I may get a few more sets laser cut in stainless and offer them to members is there is an interest in them.

They look like the image below.....

Craig.

[jkhackney]

My Previous Owner made some of these brackets out of alumin(i)um and pop-rivetted them to the chassis behind the rear-of-rear spring outrigger, the other end to the tub behind the wheel arch. I don't know if he drilled his own holes or used ones already there. He also lined the wheel arch with stout fabric-reinforced rubber, like that on a mudflap or conveyor belt, which he anchored on these brackets with more rivets. This completely keeps the rear crossmember and much of the tub supporting structure clean.

Yes my mudflaps have gotten ripped off occasionally. I cut off the torn bit and re-install them, so they get shorter with time.


-Jeremy

[Gertie]

Mine are mounted with the brackets pictured, though the nearside one doesn't have the exhaust exhaust cut out.  Had them off a couple of months ago to strip, prime and repaint the brackets as they were getting rusty and got my arty daughter to repaint the worn yellow lettering on the rubber.

Mine is a replacement galvanised chassis, but it has the mentioned hole with a nut insert, not original as it is a metric thread.  It will be the weekend before I could measure and take some pics but happy to do so if dries up for a while.  Remind me if you need it and someone hasn't come along with the answers in the meantime.


Paul

[Craig T]

Many thanks Paul

If you can measure the holes under there that would be fantastic. If I get stuck for any dimensions on the brackets I may ask for them too if possible.  :)

Cheers

Craig.

[Calum]

If we are talking about getting it right, correct me if I am wrong but didn't the rear mud flaps all mount on the crossmember until Series 3 production? 

Not that it really matters - they do look better mounted further forwards and I would think they work better too (especially if extended with rubber further up in the wheel arch as Jeremy describes)

[PTT]

Good afternoon.

I wanted to fit rear mudflaps to our 109" project as it arrived without any. There was a piece of angle iron pop riveted to the toolbox on one side and another bolted to the wheel arch (and the tub floor?) on the other so obviously they had been there at some stage.

Anyway I did some research and discovered that the flaps fit partway between the rear of the cross member and the wheel arch, the mounting brackets are RTC 706, they are no longer available and when they come up on ebay they are quite expensive.

So no rear (or front) flaps for the moment.

Kind regards,
PTT

  http://www.likesx.com/paraspruzzi-post-mud-flap-land-rover-109-series-2-2a-3-rtc706/

[genocache]

My 1960 regular does not.

[jkhackney]

I took some photos just now with my GoPro, which I'm still learning to use. Sorry about the blurriness. I obviously didn't hold still!

Mine has holes for the "paraspruzzi"  but the holes don't appear to be threaded or have inserts inside the chassis, but I didn't look too closely. Thus there are 2 rivets holding each rtc706 piece to the chassis rather than a bolt (see second photo). They are however bolted to the tub/wing/wheel arch.

They're from thick sheet aluminum and there's an additional angle bracket across the top of each mudflap as a stabilizer which doubles as a really effective forehead slicer.

Here's the left. The pipework is my night heater exhaust and the Dormobile sink drain. At top you can see the 10" long piece of rubber extending to the tub underside in the wheel arch.








And the right. I tore this one off, and had to rivet another plate onto it at the wheel arch end, in order to re-install it:






-Jeremy

[Craig T]

Many thanks Jeremy

They help a lot and they look very similar to what I'm planning. I'm guessing the original Land Rover items were mild steel and used to rust away quite quickly hence why aluminium replacements seem to be fairly common?

I have had a very favorable quotation from my laser cutter to make them in 304 stainless, bend the folds in them and then powder coat them black. It gets cheaper if I order 10 pairs so I may just do that and see if anyone else is interested in a set. The rubber bits are the same as SWB ones as far as I know so they can be obtained quite easily.

Thanks again.

Craig.

[Craig T]

Just a shame we can't get the "Land - Rover" branded mudflaps any more.

Craig.

[Craig T]

If we are talking about getting it right, correct me if I am wrong but didn't the rear mud flaps all mount on the crossmember until Series 3 production? 

Not that it really matters - they do look better mounted further forwards and I would think they work better too (especially if extended with rubber further up in the wheel arch as Jeremy describes)

That is something I'd like to find out. The mudflaps do appear in the accessories catalogue for 1965 but it doesn't differentiate between 88" and 109" versions.
I too prefer the look of them closer to the wheels hence why I'm pursuing this idea but if anyone can say for sure they were on the rear crossmember in 1967, I may be tempted to put them there instead.

Craig.

[tmcc]

My Richards chassis has these holes already on it, see pics. (perhaps they could confirm if that was what these are for and not vent holes for Galvanising etc).
Don't know if these are for the mudflap brackets as they are near the top of the chassis rail. (was expecting them to fit lower down from looking at photos of the brackets).
Measured centres 15mm from top of chassis, 45mm from face of spring hanger bracket, hole 10mm dia.(don't have rivnuts to hand so not sure if this is the dia. of the inserts).
Had series 3 county that had them fitted.
Photo shows the bracket fits slightly above the lowest point on the wing further back from where the wing brace fits to the wing. Unfortunately don't have any photos of the chassis end.
My 2A 109SW doesn't have holes on the wing for bolting the mudflap brackets on. (it had cross member mounted flaps fitted when I bought it, the chassis was so rotten I can't see if it had these holes in the chassis from the photos I took of it when dismantling)
My Optional extras Catalogue for 2A lists the RTC706 kit for these flaps/brackets, don't know if this is just to show retrofit as possible and not as optional at time of manufacture.
Count me in to buy a pair of brackets if you go ahead with getting them made.

Tom