Print

[Leon]

Er, you have forgotten another varient ... memory is failing ... but I think it's wheelbase was one inch longer than normal, but did that make it an 87" (or 89"?) . I think Rovers made 100 such vehicles, with 50 each of two sub-variants.

Answers on a post-card, please.

602

You must be thinking of the 34 military 81 inch with the 2.8L RR B40 engine.
https://www.bonhams.com/auctions/20148/lot/306/

[w3526602]

Hi Leon,

That's right ... but my understanding is that it was a hundred 81"s .. but then memory starts to fail ...was it
a hundred fitted with B40 engines, and a hundred fitted with Rover engines, for comparison purposes .... or was it fifty of each? "Workhorse" does not seem to mention the 81", although there is some reference to the Champ, on Page 84.. Note, I only took a cursory scan through the index.

Civilian Champ? Apparently all Champs were civilian (export only) The Military version was called FV1800.

If you  haven't got "LAND ROVER, Workhorse of the Word", tough! You've missed Christmas. Mine is the Fourth Impression 1982, bought new I'm guessing there were later editions.

Several listings for "Workhorse" on Ebay, I only looked at the first listing. New from a smidgen over £7, free postage.

First published in 1976, forty-five years ago, and still selling. It must have something going for it. But then, I read FIRST OVERLAND, in 1960. My daughter gave me a copy for last Christmas

Does the club have a copy of Workhorse?


602

[22900013A]

The 81" Land Rover was purely to test out the engine, it was never intended to build them in quantity - at that time that champ was supposed to be the vehicle of choice, the Landy was just a stop gap.

[Peter Holden]

Am I right Dan that they evtually decided that the champ was too complicated for field maintenance and repair.  It had a distinct advantage being able to go as fast in reverse as it could forwards

Peter

[Bronze Green]

The Houben family have just recently restored two of these 81in Land Rovers. They look stunning and I know one of them will be eventually coming to Lancashire.

[strang]

Peter Galilee had an 81" Series One with Royal Review bodywork. He sold it on many moons ago, and I believe a standard rear tub was fitted.

[w3526602]

It had a distinct advantage being able to go as fast in reverse as it could forwards

Hi Peter,

I think the Champ had 5-gears.

My diesel Champ had a conventional 4+R gearbox, which meant I could go forward by selecting reverse in the gear box plus reverse in the rear axle.

I did once try to work out how many gear variations I had available (assuming reverse in the gearbox added  yet another ratio). I gave up when my brain started to hurt.

602

[Peter Holden]

Yep a 5 speed box high and low range and I think reverse gear was located in the rear axle not in the gearbox.

The Ferret armoured car would also go as fast in reverse as forwards.

Peter

[22900013A]

Am I right Dan that they evtually decided that the champ was too complicated for field maintenance and repair.  It had a distinct advantage being able to go as fast in reverse as it could forwards

Peter

Iirc the comparison with the 80" (remember it was NOT designed as a military vehicle) proved it was just as good as the champa, a fraction of the purchase cost and far easier to maintain. I think there were also production and supply problems with the champ, which is why LandRovers were bought as a temporary measure which ended up being permanent.

[w3526602]

reverse gear was located in the rear axle not in the gearbox.

Hi Peter,

That is correct ... did I say the Champ had reverse in the gear box. If so, it was an "age thing".

The Champ had one (I think) rear crown wheel, but two pinions ... one in.and one out. The OUT pinion was connected to the front axle by a long propshaft.

Four wheel drive was achieved by engaging the front differential.

Thinks... I wonder if a Champ differential (either) could be fitted into a Land Rover axle, and if it could ,,, what would I do with it? Remember the Champ axles are indepedent susspension at both ends.

There is something in my mind, from way back when, that Champs had a problem with their back axles.   Or maybe it was a problem with the drivers?

602

[58paul]

There were 33 Rolls Royce 81'' built, as far as I understood, they were built to see the suitability of putting the engine into the land rovers to communise the engines between the champ and Land Rover, the engine soon pulled the Land Rover apart. When driven under hard test conditions, the chassis's were suffering from fatigue cracks etc there were lots of other issues I believe, they decided that putting the engine in a stock landy was not the way forward, hence the LR kept its rover engine and champ stuck with the B40. The B40 was a specific build spec to go in the landy, they were slightly different to the champ version.

[angello]

Interesting stuff! I remember looking over a couple of Champs in a scrap yard years ago and thinking they looked certainly more complicated and 'engineered' than a Land Rover...

On the subject of Land Rovers, thanks for the tip on asking on the Series 1 forum, I've been over there too. Elsewhere, a bit like busses, I have now been offered another Series 1! This time a 1950. Having looked at it, it's got some incorrect parts but is mostly in amazing condition - the price tag is too rich for me, but I have a friend who has recently bought a rather nice S2 (off this very forum) and he is looking to take on the S1... Hopefully it will come together soon.

With regards the first Series 1 which I started this thread about, I've now spoken to the owner and .... he's not sure he does want to sell it now  He was going to think about it... he might re-commission it before selling... etc. Which I suspect is why it has found itself in a barn for the last 5 years untouched....

I'll keep working on it and am keen to absorb any S1 knowledge anyone cares to share, so keep the posts coming