New James Taylor book on the 80”

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline msm80

  • LRSOC & LR Register Member
  • RAF1952 80"-1948 80" & Co-pilot Finlay
  • Location: Dorset, UK
  • Posts: 3305
Re: New James Taylor book on the 80”
Reply #25 - Dec 16, 2021 - 13:24
I still like the book, there is lots of useful information and the pictures are excellent.


Sent from my iPhone using LRSOC

Thanks for that. Mine is all wrapped up in Santa's sack! :undecided:

I agree with Chris the first James Taylor volume was a great help just by showing other examples and more importantly it was quite an early take on the subject when many 'original' examples were still in hiding. I see these volumes basically as a guide, but in conjunction with the excellent experience of many on here plus the sight of truly original examples that appear at rallies, this is surely the best way to judge how and what is right if one is hellbent on trying to restore a 'perfect' example.

The fun starts when the rivet counters get going, that is why I enjoy my ex Military 80" as it quite literally is a collection of some later parts collected in military service though of course many in civilian ownership are in a similar state after some 70+ years, so the definition of 'original' is open to wide interpretation. :lipsrsealed:

Malcolm


Offline jonhutchings

  • LRSOC & LR Register Member
  • Location: Gloucestershire, UK
  • Posts: 814
Re: New James Taylor book on the 80”
Reply #26 - Dec 16, 2021 - 15:14
I agree I still like both books very much. In fact the earlier one has very fond memories for me as my parents bought me my copy when it was first published and it was the first book apart from the parts catalogue and workshop manual I had on the subject. My comments were in no way meant to detract from the book as a whole, I just think it's important to record errors such as these, as such books become "reference works" and so less experienced/newcomers to the hobby can be misled.

The pictures in the new book provide some excellent reference photos too.
1 Thank you.

Offline TomC

  • LRSOC & LR Register Member
  • Location: Moray
  • Posts: 9335
Re: New James Taylor book on the 80”
Reply #27 - Dec 16, 2021 - 16:23
I agree I still like both books very much. In fact the earlier one has very fond memories for me as my parents bought me my copy when it was first published and it was the first book apart from the parts catalogue and workshop manual I had on the subject. My comments were in no way meant to detract from the book as a whole, I just think it's important to record errors such as these, as such books become "reference works" and so less experienced/newcomers to the hobby can be misled.

The pictures in the new book provide some excellent reference photos too.

I absolutely agree with what jonhutchings says. I have always loved the first book, written when information was scant and yes there were some errors but it was the best that could be done at the time and so many have been grateful for that.

It has often been pointed out to me that not many people are infected with Land Roveritis Series One (var. Tempo) but unfortunately I contracted this at Dunsfold 20 odd years ago. So I am sad that the short piece on the Tempo 80" isn't quite correct in some parts, minor things that could have been corrected if it had been proof read by someone who knew about the 80", such as Mike Rivett who would have spotted the errors straight away. He knows the Tempo 80 used for the shoot intimately, and would have pointed out that the locker on the bonnet is aluminium not steel, etc.

It's still a great read and a long-looked for re-write of the 'Original'. I look forward to the next volume, but I do hope there is a bit of independent checking from someone like the Houbens - Apologies for naming them but they have incredible knowledge of the subject and I am sure there would be others who would be happy to help.
3 Thanks.

Offline PeteM

  • LRSOC Member
  • Location: Dunedin, New Zealand
  • Posts: 365
Re: New James Taylor book on the 80”
Reply #28 - Dec 16, 2021 - 19:26
Following up on an earlier post 860020 still has its original bumper which is intact, straight and has surface rust all over it, It was confirmed by experts that the very early production vehicle front bumpers were panted rather than galvanised
2 Thanks.

Offline Adam Bennett

  • LRSOC & LR Register Member
  • Posts: 431
Re: New James Taylor book on the 80”
Reply #29 - Dec 18, 2021 - 14:09
p30 Bumper
Quote:
"All production 80-inch Land Rovers had a detachable front bumper, and on the earliest models this was galvanised to improve it's durability. However after about 150-200 vehicles had been built, it was simply painted silver...." (end quote)

I think it needs to read:

All production 80-inch Land Rovers had a detachable front bumper that was simply painted silver, However after about 150-200 vehicles had been built they moved on to galvanised to improve it's durability.
1 Thank you.

Offline Adam Bennett

  • LRSOC & LR Register Member
  • Posts: 431
Re: New James Taylor book on the 80”
Reply #30 - Dec 18, 2021 - 14:17
P31 Gearbox (no 4) cross-member
Quote:
"This was bolted to the underside of the side rails, with two bolts either side" (end quote)

I think this referencing to the bolts that hold the gearbox to the gearbox crossmember, the first few production cars had a different orientation on the nuts and bolts.
1 Thank you.

Offline Adam Bennett

  • LRSOC & LR Register Member
  • Posts: 431
Re: New James Taylor book on the 80”
Reply #31 - Dec 18, 2021 - 14:31
P32 Outriggers
Quote:
"All chassis had two box-section outriggers on each side, welded outboard of the side rails" (end quote) James then talks about bulkhead cross members and goes on to say  (quote) " the second outrigger on each side was alongside no5 on front body support cross-member"  (end quote)   

I think this is a typo "All chassis had two box-section outriggers on each side, welded outboard of the side rails" wants to read (All early chassis have a tapered box-section outriggers on each side, welded outboard of the side rails) Not sure about the rest as I don't have my book to hand.
1 Thank you.

Offline msm80

  • LRSOC & LR Register Member
  • RAF1952 80"-1948 80" & Co-pilot Finlay
  • Location: Dorset, UK
  • Posts: 3305
Re: New James Taylor book on the 80”
Reply #32 - Dec 19, 2021 - 08:55
I'd agree with Adam's interpretation of that typo. But does not the overall shape of said outrigger taper to a square end as well as the main shaped taper from the depth of chassis rail to the end. In other words there are also tapered sides front and rear sides on the early outrigger examples, where the later ones are parallel! I have to say this is taking rivet counting to a new level and semantics but on the other hand some one would say any technical manuscript has to be word perfect!  Still looking forward to some study of this latest book.
M
1 Thank you.

Offline Richard Small

  • LRSOC Member
  • Location: Smarden, Kent
  • Posts: 9
Re: New James Taylor book on the 80”
Reply #33 - Dec 19, 2021 - 11:34
A very interesting and informative book, As stated above, such a shame it was printed in China, it seems the way of the current world.

Offline jonhutchings

  • LRSOC & LR Register Member
  • Location: Gloucestershire, UK
  • Posts: 814
Re: New James Taylor book on the 80”
Reply #34 - Dec 19, 2021 - 18:45
P32 Outriggers
Quote:
"All chassis had two box-section outriggers on each side, welded outboard of the side rails" (end quote) James then talks about bulkhead cross members and goes on to say  (quote) " the second outrigger on each side was alongside no5 on front body support cross-member"  (end quote)   

I think this is a typo "All chassis had two box-section outriggers on each side, welded outboard of the side rails" wants to read (All early chassis have a tapered box-section outriggers on each side, welded outboard of the side rails) Not sure about the rest as I don't have my book to hand.

Hi Adam, makes sense. I have found in general, in recent years the proof reading in books is often below par. I imagine it relates to the increasing costs of production and corresponding squeezing of profit margins.   

Offline Keith Robertshaw

  • LRSOC Member
  • 1955 86
  • Location: West Yorkshire
  • Posts: 313
Re: New James Taylor book on the 80”
Reply #35 - Dec 19, 2021 - 19:34
Proof reading for factual errors should be picked up by engaging marque experts to ensure accuracy, not sure if this was done for the first edition of the book - I’ll wait for the second edition when the errors have been fixed.
I hope the 86 version of the books gets proof read before print.
2 Thanks.

Offline Alan C

  • LRSOC & LR Register Member
  • Location: Paeroa, New Zealand
  • Posts: 881
Re: New James Taylor book on the 80”
Reply #36 - Jan 27, 2022 - 05:19
I have just received my book after a big delay and it looks to be a quality item. From a quick initial reading;

Page 41 Wheels, 4 1/2"rims, I do not believe these wheels were used as late as 0610-2222 in late 1949, or if so not consistently. My largely original R06101181 has a full set of the later wheels dated consistent with the vehicle mid 1949 build date. (i would have to go to where it is stored and look to advise the date on the wheels)

Page 47, (Details 1.6 litre) 2nd paragraph, ... for mounting the oil filter". A typo, should read ... oil filler. Rover P3s had an oil filler tube on the right side which was mounted onto the aperture on the right of the engine block.

Pages 87 and 88, Headlamps. I have always believed the 5 inch headlamps were Lucas and not Butler as quoted in the book. Usually but not always the lenses had the Lucas name cast into them.

1 Thank you.

Offline antarmike

  • LRSOC Member
  • Minerva & Bantam Trailer / 101" & Sankey / 55 86"
  • Location: Lincolnshire, UK
  • Posts: 6031
Re: New James Taylor book on the 80”
Reply #37 - Jan 27, 2022 - 08:17

Pages 87 and 88, Headlamps. I have always believed the 5 inch headlamps were Lucas and not Butler as quoted in the book. Usually but not always the lenses had the Lucas name cast into them.

AFAIK Bulter lamps had curved glass, Lucas lamps had flat glass.

The Land-Rover used a flat glass version, so even though not marked the indications are that they were Lucas not Butler.

Offline nickuk

  • LRSOC Member
  • Location: Hertfordshire, UK
  • Posts: 1342
Re: New James Taylor book on the 80”
Reply #38 - Jan 27, 2022 - 15:31
Butler was taken over by Lucas in 1948. Many parts were sold under both names for a while - don't know how long - through the 50's anyway - longer for commercial vehicle lights.

The small lights are "usually" called Butler lights because the tooling for them was Butler. When produced by Lucas the lenses changed and later the mounting threads got coarser and various other changes took place before they were discontinued. The Land Rover ones seem to be Butler shells with Lucas lenses and would have been supplied by Lucas.

Nick.
1 Thank you.

Online B.S.F.

  • Non-Member
  • Location: Queensland, Australia
  • Posts: 971
Re: New James Taylor book on the 80”
Reply #39 - Jan 27, 2022 - 22:00
Butler was taken over by Lucas in 1948. Many parts were sold under both names for a while - don't know how long - through the 50's anyway - longer for commercial vehicle lights.

The small lights are "usually" called Butler lights because the tooling for them was Butler. When produced by Lucas the lenses changed and later the mounting threads got coarser and various other changes took place before they were discontinued. The Land Rover ones seem to be Butler shells with Lucas lenses and would have been supplied by Lucas.

Nick.
That would explain why the ones marked "Lucas made in England" and the plain ones both have the same number,  552282, which I assume, is the Lucas number, 'cast' on the glass on the inside.
.W.

Offline antarmike

  • LRSOC Member
  • Minerva & Bantam Trailer / 101" & Sankey / 55 86"
  • Location: Lincolnshire, UK
  • Posts: 6031
Re: New James Taylor book on the 80”
Reply #40 - Jan 27, 2022 - 22:32
That would explain why the ones marked "Lucas made in England" and the plain ones both have the same number,  552282, which I assume, is the Lucas number, 'cast' on the glass on the inside.
.W.
War time production of 5" headlamps had the bodies stamped B-WD-H1 or L-WD-H1 to denote who made them .

I had a pair of L-WD-H1 on my Matador.
Sidelights similarly were marked to show maker,  This Matador had B-WD-S1 sidelights.

I believe I have seen wartime sidelights marked L-WD-S1 so maybe by whatever arrangement Lucas were also making the sidelight to the same shape, even before the 1948 takeover?
1 Thank you.

Offline nickuk

  • LRSOC Member
  • Location: Hertfordshire, UK
  • Posts: 1342
Re: New James Taylor book on the 80”
Reply #41 - Jan 28, 2022 - 14:11
I suspect but cannot prove the lenses with vertical stripes of equal width are Butler tooling and those with unequal stripes  to "improve" the beam shape are  Lucas. They changed over sometime shortly after Land Rover production started maybe during 1949 so both kinds may be found on vehicles.

Nick.

 

SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal