Hanna, what you're describing sounds like the Land Rover LT230 case. It has a 1.2:1 high range, and a 3.5ish:1 low range. Also has the offset outputs and an integrated parking brake.
I was reading through the thread and although I think I am missing something here I have to ask: Is the only reason that more people are not installing the Marks gears in the t-case the installation difficulty and the poor customer service from the manufacturer? It seems like more people would run these gears despite the fact they are not as low as an orion or an atlas could provide.
I did not install them in my 62 because of their noise (reports of very audible gear whine is very common). My 62 is mixed use and includes lots of highway miles so an extra level of noise is not acceptable.
Hanna, what you're describing sounds like the Land Rover LT230 case. It has a 1.2:1 high range, and a 3.5ish:1 low range. Also has the offset outputs and an integrated parking brake.
Hanna, what you're describing sounds like the Land Rover LT230 case. It has a 1.2:1 high range, and a 3.5ish:1 low range. Also has the offset outputs and an integrated parking brake.
I think it's an adaptiblity thing. Personally, running dual cases and ditching the stock gas tank would also free up space to run longer upper rear control arms, so I'm all for that! I would love to Marlin to develop a toy box to go between our tranny and a split case. That would make me more than happy!
I don't recall the applications that had the passenger side outputs, but I know they are not uncommon. That big drum is just that, a drum brake. Seems unneccessarily large to me, and could probably be omitted for space savings.
please remove all ideas of a rover case from your mind. the marks gears are high on my list if someone doesn't offer an 0rion, stak, atlas, black box, or marlin solution. stay with basic tested options.
please remove all ideas of a rover case from your mind. the marks gears are high on my list if someone doesn't offer an 0rion, stak, atlas, black box, or marlin solution. stay with basic tested options.
37's with 5.29's and the Mark's case gears would be a great all around setup. Nothing too extreme, but extremely multi-purpose capable.
I think 80 series owners who aren't running extreme trails worry too much about R&P strength when going to lower gears/bigger tires. In a dual purpose rig, gear noise is a much bigger potential issue as it will drive you crazy and really wreck the enjoyment of any kind of regular use.
Regear the R&P, do case gears if you really have the $$$ and want the extra bit of gearing, and wheel it. That's what is great about the 80, there's really nothing complicated about the decision making outside of understanding your own needs and when they have exceeded the underlying vehicle design.
Brother as we speak your mind is preparing to "exceeded the underlying vehicle design" once again with these marks gears. Just like you exceeded the design with your 35's and 5.29's and body mods. Just like you exceeded the design of that xj you once wheeled...
A sliperly slope brother and you too are gaining mommentum
Randy at Advance Adapters has my name plastered all over his desk in line for the 80 series Atlas. but it aint going to happen and Randy admits it-I spoke with him personally about the project on several occasions. I even had a used tcase and offered it for free and he didn't want it. He knows that to use an Atlas in an 80 means the gas tank must altered/replaced. this one huge issue makes the 80 series atlas much less marketable as the tcase conversion will never be a bolt on in the 80.
But if you put the 3.1 marks gears in your case and regear your diffs you wont be as eager to get the lower gears offered by the atlas (not as eager but still eager)
