Print

[Davidss]

... I'm not sure if the negative comments that I've read about them are .. that their build processes lack attention to detail. 

That captures it for me, together with their response to my inquiry about the first problem I found (Military extended front spring hangers, not the battery support struts).
Initially I was ignored, then I was told 'yours is the first complaint about that in the 30 years we have been building chassis'.
Eventually they attempted to appease me by saying they had changed their CAD drawings to correct the mistake I had found.
They NEVER apologised, verbally or by email.

As you can tell, their approach left a bad taste.

Regards
 

[AlexB]

Most negative comments tend to be from negative experiences

They are few and far between when compared to the hundreds of happy customers.

I have found that if I approach Richards prior to ordering, both to confirm assumptions  / ask for something different, they are very amenable and willing to please.

Is is always better to check and get right rather that assume and try to get something changed after cutting, welding, galvanising and transporting.

If MArsland have purchased the original "formers" they must be pretty well knackered by now!
 

[Adrian]

Ok you guys , in restoring our 1965 109 stationwagon my son asked how long our current chassis would last if we repaired and welded on outriggers etc, and I guesstimated 20 yrs. he the asked how much it would cost to replace in 20 yrs - he suggested 4K - I replied loads more than that- and furthermore I probably wouldn’t be around to do it- when upon he said let’s get a new chassis!
My question is , reading various forums  as it is a 109 4cylinder , as we are putting sunny Jim’s 200Tdi , would a 6 cylinder richard chassis be better - or am I opening a can of worms ?

[Formerlyjeremy]

No.  The reason the 6 cylinder chassis is different isn't because its stronger or something like that - its simply that the longer engine required the gearbox rear mounts to be moved 4in further back.

[Adrian]

Thank you. That’s just what I needed to know

[strang]

I can remember a post of this very forum from many years ago concerning a Richards 109 galvanised chassis which had been supplied to a customer with the crossmember behind the gearbox fitted upside down. Richards resolved the issue no problem, but it did seem an unusual mistake, and a surprise no one spotted it before it left the factory.

[AlexB]

Should you wish to fit an LT77 (90/110 5 speed box), then having a six pot chassis (or at lseat the engine mounts in the 6 pot position) makes this conversion easier, as the gear lever pops up in the right place

[w3526602]

Hi,

Sorry, purely academic, but one has to ask ....

Would it be feasible to order (either or both wheelbases) chassis with one removable gearbox cross-member, and "brackets" on the chassis rails for both locations? One day somebody might thankyou for your foresight.

Or are they mutually exclusive?

On my first "2nd hand" chassis replacement, the right hand chassis in-rigger engine mounting bracket had been chopped and replaced by a left hand bracket. The "butcher" had planned to fit a V8. Rather than replace the "long" right hand engine support, I cobbled a cantilever bracket that bolted to the engine, with the other end sitting on the new, short, chassis mount.

All I can say is that it "worked", and might be a good idea if you are fitting a different engine.

Making brackets to mate a Cortina engine to a Scimitar GTE chassis, required dog-leg brackets to take up the four inch difference. I have my own method of doing such dog-legs ... two bits of 50x25x2mm RHS, with 25mm dia holes right through, and a length of 25dia x 3mm pipe sliding around, and and through the holes in the RHS. Just bolt the brackets to where-ever, slide the pipe into both, and tack weld, etc.  OK ... nearly ... that easy

602