Tales from the Sherpa Shed

[Matty]

Lovely work m9. 650 rpm seems low though. Id say it matters not a jot to bump it up more. Itll thank you for it when youve got a rake of electrical items switched on and a proper load on the alternator.

[grogee]

5 hours ago, Heavyspanners said:

Does it actually matter if the engine idles a few rpm above the 'book' speed?

No! Mine definitely isn't book, it shakes the whole dash around at the book value. 

According to my official BLARG book of lies, high idle speed can cause difficulty selecting gears, but I think this means ridiculously high idle speed, not +100rpm. And of course if it's super high you run the risk of overheating. 

I would set it to where it feels happiest, bearing in mind it'll probably reduce in the winter so you need a bit of a margin. 

I do suspect the book values were written with good old four star in mind, which we just don't get any more, and idle might be rougher as a result. 

[grogee]

Re: E-clips - I'd like to meet the sadistic bastard who thought those were a good idea. 

If it were me, I would try and find a circlip of the right diameter, possibly with an additional washer to sit behind it if needed. 

Then you can let the circlip pliers take the strain. 

[Heavyspanners]

31 minutes ago, grogee said:

Re: E-clips - I'd like to meet the sadistic bastard who thought those were a good idea. 

If it were me, I would try and find a circlip of the right diameter, possibly with an additional washer to sit behind it if needed. 

Then you can let the circlip pliers take the strain. 

Yes, some nice, sensible, studs and nuts would be much easier.

I don't think there'd be enough clearance to accommodate a washer + clip. The fixing groove on  the wheel cylinder only just protrudes beyond the back surface of the backplate. There's just enough room to get a clip in...

 

However, I have now bought some new clips from Accu, who are very much recommended, especially if you're looking for obscure fixings in unusual sizes. I've had all sorts of stuff from them. The new clips are far superior quality than the clips which came with the wheel cylinders. The pressing is obviously better (I don't have to point out which clip is which here, do I?)



The new clips have a definite 'spring' to them, which is how it should be - and what I was expecting from the original clips, which are absolutely rigid. I can press a new clip into the groove on the wheel cylinder, and just with thumb pressure I can feel the ends starting to give a little.

I think I could probably press the clip all the way on with just thumb pressure, but I'm not going to try that - partly because it starts getting painful as I apply more force (a pushing-pad, like a steel ruler, placed between clip and thumb would help with that), and also because I don't want to push it on and then find I can't get it off again. My disaster-anticipation radar is telling me not to tempt fate here!

I'm not going to really push it until the cylinder is on the Sherpa. But it feels like a small step forward. And I'm pleased that my assessment of the original clips as too hard and rigid wasn't far off the mark.

 

[grogee]

10 minutes ago, Heavyspanners said:

Yes, some nice, sensible, studs and nuts would be much easier.

I don't think there'd be enough clearance to accommodate a washer + clip. The fixing groove on  the wheel cylinder only just protrudes beyond the back surface of the backplate. There's just enough room to get a clip in...

 

However, I have now bought some new clips from Accu, who are very much recommended, especially if you're looking for obscure fixings in unusual sizes. I've had all sorts of stuff from them. The new clips are far superior quality than the clips which came with the wheel cylinders. The pressing is obviously better (I don't have to point out which clip is which here, do I?)



The new clips have a definite 'spring' to them, which is how it should be - and what I was expecting from the original clips, which are absolutely rigid. I can press a new clip into the groove on the wheel cylinder, and just with thumb pressure I can feel the ends starting to give a little.

I think I could probably press the clip all the way on with just thumb pressure, but I'm not going to try that - partly because it starts getting painful as I apply more force (a pushing-pad, like a steel ruler, placed between clip and thumb would help with that), and also because I don't want to push it on and then find I can't get it off again. My disaster-anticipation radar is telling me not to tempt fate here!

I'm not going to really push it until the cylinder is on the Sherpa. But it feels like a small step forward. And I'm pleased that my assessment of the original clips as too hard and rigid wasn't far off the mark.

 

I'm sure I don't need to tell you as a fellow BL owner but slather lots of copper grease around the fittings. I normally try and get some in the brake union threads as well, although someone will probably tell me kittens will die if I do this 

[BorniteIdentity]

Anything of use here @Heavyspanners?

[Heavyspanners]

On 03/07/2026 at 17:03, BorniteIdentity said:

Anything of use here @Heavyspanners?

I would be in there like a shot if I had an ADO16 variant, because there are quite a lot of parts specific to those cars...but not all that much which fits other cars in the BMC/BL family.

Unlike the Mini almost nothing is available new. Stuff like bumpers and the chrome trim around the windows is incredibly rare these days - the only way of getting it is to find a car that's being broken. The Hydrolastic suspension parts would probably be worth salvaging, too.

If they're 1300s the engines will be the 1275 version of the A Series, which are fairly desirable. But I suspect the engines (or parts of the engines) are already out.

My favourite variant of the ADO16 is the MG 1300 two-door Mk II. I'm being very specific there! I think the reworked tail fins of the Mk 2 cars look much better than the earlier versions -they make the back end of the car look much more 'together', if that makes sense. The two-doors had a sporty lean-forward look when viewed from the side, very different from the more staid 4 door appearance. I even think the MG grille suits the styling.

[Heavyspanners]

I have done battle with the Sherpa's rear brakes, and I think I mostly won.

It really was a battle, too. Brake reassembly is not a technically difficult job, but it's a screamingly frustrating faff-about in every other way. Probably quite easy if all the components are on a workbench in front of you, but a real pain to do it while scrabbling about under the vehicle.

Here's the latest collection of stuff I've bought off the internet (every job on the Sherpa seems to start with Buying Stuff Off The Internet):

One of the things I Bought Off The Internet was this - the E-clip installer sold by the MG Owners' Club, apparently a special tool commissioned by them. I took a bit of a gamble buying it, because I wasn't entirely sure it would fit, but it seems Sherpa wheel cylinders are the same as those used on the MGB. At any rate, the tool screws into the brake pipe thread just fine.

The general idea is that you sit the tool on top of the clip, locate it by screwing it into the brake pipe threads, then screw the nut down and it applies MASSIVE FORCE to the clip, which springs into its slot.

 

 

I did a dry run on my spare backplate so I'd know what I'd be doing on the Sherpa itself.

Theoretically the clip could go on sideways, as offered up here, but it would need a sharp tap to get it on, and I didn't have enough hands to hold the wheel cylinder on, hold the clip against the groove, and tap/push it home all at the same time.

 

I bought a clip-pusher tool (they're sold by assorted tool outlets at around £25 a go, ludicrously expensive for what it is), but I didn't end up using it. I think it really only works if you're assembling stuff on a bench.

On a vehicle, the same problem as above crops up: it's not really possible to hold the wheel cylinder in place while also precariously balancing the tool + clip in the right position. The tool doesn't actually grasp the clip. The clip just sits against the Y-shape at the end of the tool, and it can (correction: it definitely will) fall out if you don't treat it with extreme delicacy. And then, while you're doing the delicate clip-balancing act, with your third hand you've got to bring a hammer down on the end of the tool to tap the clip in.

One handy tip I did discover, though: the bleed nipple gets in the way. Remove it until the clip is on!

 

 

So, the push-it-straight-on method with the special tool was going to be the one to use. And it worked, although clearance was a bit tight. The MGB, for which this tool was designed, has leaf springs under the axle, not on top like the Sherpa.

Here's the tool, applying MASSIVE FORCE to the clip, one flat of the nut at a time. I thought the clip would go in with a dramatic BANG, but it didn't - in fact there was no sound or sensation that it had seated itself at all. It just went on with a complete absence of fuss.

 

 

I did discover one slightly dramatic thing when I took the tool off: the clip had gouged out a chunk of the wheel cylinder as it was pushed down, which I suppose shows how tight it was, and how much MASSIVE FORCE was at work.

The middle tongue of the clip wasn't fully seated in the groove at first, but I rotated the clip by prodding it with a screwdriver, and it just clicked in.

 

Here's the clip, fully home, rotated slightly to give me room to replace the bleed nipple. I didn't paint the back of the backplates before clipping-up, because the fixing groove on the cylinder barely protrudes beyond the surface of the backplate and I thought a layer of paint might be just enough to hold the clip off the groove. I just gave the immediate area a scrape for now.

Full restoration to concours condition (well, a swift wire brushing and some sort of anti-rust paint) will follow.  The clips are stainless steel, anyway, so they're not going anywhere.

 

 

And the other side. No gouging on this one!

 

The manual shows the wheel cylinders fitted with paper gaskets between cylinder and backplate, but there were no gaskets on my original cylinders and the new ones didn't come with any. So I fitted the cylinders without gaskets. As there's no need to seal the cylinders to the backplates I assume the gaskets (if any) are just there to take up any irregularities in the two surfaces, so the cylinders fit completely flush.

Paper gaskets for wheel cylinders can be bought on their own (and those Mini ones look like they'd fit the Sherpa), but I don't think they're vital parts. I've owned three Minis, and none of them had gaskets on the wheel cylinders.

I fretted about the gasket situation for a while, and in the end compromised by smearing a thin layer of sealant on the backplate, for the cylinder to sit against. That should fill any little bumps and hollows, and it will definitely be more durable than a paper gasket inside a brake drum.

As we saw in the previous episode, the old offside wheel cylinder had turned into a lump of rust, and I couldn't unscrew the brake pipe connection. So I removed the cylinder and pipe together - and that meant I needed to fit a new section of pipe, from the new cylinder to the flexi pipe connection on the axle.

While I was at it I thought I'd replace the flexi pipe. It looks good enough externally, but you never know what's lurking inside.

The good news is - new rear brake flexi pipes for Sherpas are available! The bad news is - the only version that seems to be available is the shorter variant, which I think was fitted to the vans, not to chassis-cab Sherpas with a load sensing valve. Unfortunately I didn't realise any of this until the new pipe arrived and I found it was too short.

 

OK, then, I will retain the old flexi pipe for now, and, erm, monitor the situation. But at least I can make my own length of new hard pipe out of standard bits and pieces to replace the flexi-to-cylinder section.

I did this job on my Land Rover some time back, but in that case I didn't need to make my own pipe, because - well, it's a Land Rover. Whatever part you need, you can bet that it'll be available at a reasonable price, for your convenience. Alas, this level of spares support does not exist for Freight Rovers, the unloved adopted cousin of the Rover family. So it's all down to me, then.

I bought some pipe and a very generic flaring tool for not much money.

Pipe clamped, flare-former inserted...

 

 

MASSIVE FORCE applied with the medieval torture device...

 

 

...and the pipe end is squidged into this shape.

 

In order to bend around the axle, the pipe needs some reverse curves. I practiced on my very generic pipe bender until I was sure I could get the right shape. And yes, I did remember to put the connectors on before I flared both ends.

 

 

I was just about to connect my shiny new pipe when it occurred to me that I was putting it on the wrong side of the axle.

Well, I don't know if there's really a wrong side and a right side, but the brake pipe was originally on the back of the axle, not the front. Just out of interest I looked under my Land Rover and Rover P4, and both have the brake pipes on the back of the axle. Is that the best-practice way of doing it, to give the pipe some protection from road debris as the vehicle moves forward?

If so, this is wrong:

 

 

And this is right:

 

 

There should be two pipe clips on that bracket, to hold the pipe a little straighter, but one is missing. Possibly one of these would do as a replacement. It does look like the pipe makes a long run with no support to the left of the clip, but that's how the original pipe was routed. It's quite firm, no flopping about.

The thing standing up on the axle is the breather valve, to vent any pressure which might build up in the axle case. It's a very old-school design, although made of new-school plastic. Series Land Rovers have a brass version which looks like something Isambard Kingdom Brunel would have fitted to his steamships. (Incidentally, since when has Britpart been an Original Equipment Manufacturer?)

Now it's time for the real fun and games - fitting the brake shoes!

Another improvised workbench, another self-written manual (because Haynes is really vague about brake reassembly).

 

 

The first thing to do is assemble the shoes themselves - self-adjusters on the leading shoes, handbrake lever on the trailing shoes.

Haynes doesn't mention anything about this, except to say that "if desired" the various components can be transferred to new brake shoes, which is a weird way of putting it. If you don't transfer the components to the new brake shoes, your brakes won't work. So I'd say it's a very desirable thing to do.

Handy tip: dismantle/reassemble one side at a time, thus ensuring you always have one set of shoes in fully built-up form, so there's always a reference to show how things should be.

Here's how the self-adjusters are fitted to one of the old brake shoes:

 

 

And here's me, fitting shiny new adjusters to my shiny new brake shoes (but using the original pivot pins and washers, because it seems these bits aren't available new).

I was rather concerned to see that the adjuster was directly in line with a weld, so as it pushed against the brake shoe it would be bearing on the weld, not the side of the brake shoe. But the old one was like that too (although, interestingly, the welds on the old shoe are much smaller), so I suppose it's OK.

 

 

Now the unfeasibly strong spring goes on...

 

I had huge difficulty pushing the adjuster spring down far enough to get the washer and circlip onto the pin. The pin itself would simply drop out of the brake shoe as I pushed at the spring. In the photo above you can see I tried to stick the pin in place with gaffa tape. That didn't work, so I made a handy jig...

 

The shoe could then sit on the wooden block, with the pin braced against it as I pushed the spring into place.

 

The spring needed some persuasion to stay down. It always tried to spring up again...

 

But finally the (old) washers and (new) clips went on. That little circlip on the spring is holding down a ridiculously large amount of tension.

 

Then I attached the handbrake lever to the trailing shoe. This is held on by a locking nut, and while the fitting kit contains new washers (including a wavy washer to keep the fixings in tension so they don't work loose) you don't get a new nut. Re-using old locking nuts is not good practice, so I bought some new ones.

 

Unfortunately I made a schoolboy error, and ordered coarse threaded nuts instead of fine ones. So I had to use the old nuts after all. I will, erm, monitor the situation.

And is it me, or is that a rather odd size anyway? Three-eighths of an inch - why not 10mm? I suspect it's because these are Lockheed brakes, so the parent company, at least, is American and thus uses Great American Inches rather than those pantywaist European millimetres.

 

As I predicted, re-fitting the strong handbrake spring was a real performance, involving two grips and MASSIVE FORCE.

No force is being exerted in this photo, I'm just holding the precarious assembly up for the camera. This was another three-handed job: two hands on the grips, MASSIVE FORCE applied to pull the spring back, while at the same time pushing the pin at the end of the cable into the holder. I'm not quite sure how I did it, but it went in eventually, after several attempts and some mild screaming from me.

 

 

Now I could fit the strut, which links the two shoes and is attached to the trailing shoe by another incredibly strong string which resisted all my efforts to stretch it enough to hook onto its fixing points. I had to use the strut itself as a stretching lever, and then somehow wangle the whole assembly into the small gap below the wheel cylinder. This took umpteen attempts and a certain amount of swearing, but eventually it went in.

 

 

"Offer up leading shoe and fit top spring" says the Haynes manual, as if it's all easy-peasy.

Well, it's not so easy in real life, because you've got to angle the shoes forward to reduce the distance the spring has to span, fit the spring into its slots, then push the shoes back in place, stretching the spring as you go, and in such a way that the adjuster on the leading shoe engages with the strut. As this is on the back of the shoe you can't see whether the parts have correctly slotted into place, or even feel if they're home, really. And as the shoes are not yet fixed to the backplate, if you take your hands away the spring makes a bid for freedom and the whole lot falls off and crashes to the floor. This will happen several times over.

There was more mild screaming, let's put it like that.

But eventually I got to this stage - everything precariously balanced in place here, but at least it's possible to see where the spring should go...

...or is it?

 

 

In the photo above it's possible to see where the long spring should hook on to the leading shoe, on the right - there's the hook-slot, at the edge of the shoe (so near, and yet so far!) But it was unexpectedly difficult to find the correct slot on the trailing shoe, on the left. There are two likely slots, and nothing to tell you which one is correct.

The previous brake spring set-up on the Sherpa was slotted one way on one side, the other way on the other side, so someone had obviously got confused about this before I came along (I'm glad it's not just me). In the photo above I think I've got the spring in the wrong slot on the left. It surely shouldn't be at that odd angle - should it?

Let's see what the manual says. Well, stop me if this doesn't come as a complete surprise, but the manual has no useful info about this detail whatsoever. There's this blobby diagram, where the two springs under the wheel cylinder are an indistinct mass, and the two springy-bits on the long spring seem to be the same length (in reality, they're different). The holes in the shoes don't look anything like the holes in my real-life shoes, either.

 

 

And there's this potato-quality photo, where the bit I really want to see - exactly where the long spring is fixed, on the left - is hidden in a dark area.

 

Here are the alternative spring-hooking points on the trailing shoe. There's a double slot above, and a round hole below. I assumed at first that the long spring should go into the lower part of the double slot, but if it does that there's not much to stop it jumping up into the upper part and taking on a weird angle - as has happened here.

So it should go into the round hole, then - er, I think.

 

I tried a dry run on the shoes and springs for the opposite side, which I hadn't started fitting yet. Everything in the photo below is opposite-handed to the photos above, but the choice of spring-fixing slots can be seen on the trailing shoe, which is on the right in this set-up.

The spring holding the strut in place goes into the top part of the double notch. We've established that, at any rate. The long spring goes.....well, I'm going to say probably the round hole. None of the alternative fixing points seem to be exactly in line with the spring, but given that the spring won't necessarily stay on the lower part of the double notch, it must go into the round hole - right?

As Sherlock Holmes said, when one has eliminated all the impossibilities, that which remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth. But it would be nice if the Haynes Publishing Company could just PUT THIS STUFF IN THE MANUAL.

 

 

Now I embarked on a new round of faffing about, with the steady pins which attach the shoes to the backplates. These are intentionally loose, so the shoes can move, but held in tension by springs so the shoes can't move all that much. A simple but clever set-up.....which is also a right pain to assemble.

In this case I improvised a third hand. I wedged a bit of wood behind the hub, pulled it tight with a ratchet strap around the leaf spring, and thus pulled the brake shoes onto the backplate, against the tension of the springs. This meant I didn't have to hold the shoes in place manually, so I could use two hands to fit the pins.

Note how the leading shoe, on the right, has sprung forward, thus disengaging the adjuster/strut, which I will have to re-fit, somehow, when I come to fit the pin to that shoe. It's all fun and games, innit.

 

Here's the pin plus spring in place. Fitting this assembly entails pushing the pin through the backplate from the rear, holding the pin in place (somehow) with a finger on its head as it sits in the backplate, while pushing the spring with MASSIVE FORCE down onto it from the front.

A quick twist to lock it, and it's done. Well, it's more likely to fall out before it locks, but that's the theory. It only took about 10 attempts to get it all lined up, pushed down, twisted and fitted.

 

Now I can transfer my ratchet strap to the other brake shoe, and insert the other pin.

 

Here's a peek behind the shoe, before I strapped it up. This shows how the strut and adjuster have to engage: the square bit sticking out of the strut has to fit into the curvy slot on the adjuster. This doesn't happen naturally as the shoe is moved into position, because the strut jumps up under the tension of its spring as soon as the shoe is pulled away and the adjuster disengages. So it's necessary to poke the strut down with a screwdriver as the shoe goes on, taking the screwdriver out at the very last minute as the gap closes up, and....hope that it works.

 

 

Well, I did all the above, twice over, with both brakes. It took two days of incredibly awkward work, and I still have to change the slot on one of the top springs and double-check that the adjusters really are engaged. But, basically, the brake shoes went on.

Here's the finished set-up, on the nearside (this one has the top spring in the round hole, which does look a lot more proper):

 

 

Assuming I haven't got anything drastically wrong, the next stage is to put the drums on and bleed the brakes. I'll probably renew all the fluid, because the stuff in there at the moment is almost certainly ancient and is a weird dark colour, like Brown Windsor soup. Then - wheels on, and we'll see if it works.

I don't want to make any predictions, because that's a guarantee that some unexpected disaster will occur. But the Sherpa just might come off its axle stands before long...



Famous last words there, of course.
 

 

 

[lisbon_road]

Thanks for creating this fantastic thread.  It really helps me to get moving on my own stuff, and also encourages me to document it more on here.  

I also loath those E clips on brake cylinders.  They are just so horrible compared with a simple M6 or 1/4" UNF screw that others use.  

As to the thin brake lining on one shoe, I remember when I had a car with all drum brakes, going backwards for the first time, I was amazed at how bad the brakes were.  This showed me that one of the rear brakes is basically doing nothing when going forwards, so it only works (hard anyway) when going backwards.  As the vast majority of the time, braking is done going forwards, one of those rear shoes hardly ever does anything.  

I've just re-read that and think I'm stating the obvious.  

Anyway next time I see a Sherpa I'll take a lot more interest in it.  

 

[High Jetter]

Epic work and write-up there, HS. I have a vague recollection of using water-pump pliers to squeeze those circlips on in the past - but I expect I re-used the existing ones rather than fitting new. Your clip actually looks thicker than the groove, but that might be an optical illusion.

[Heavyspanners]

51 minutes ago, lisbon_road said:

Thanks for creating this fantastic thread.  It really helps me to get moving on my own stuff, and also encourages me to document it more on here.  

I also loath those E clips on brake cylinders.  They are just so horrible compared with a simple M6 or 1/4" UNF screw that others use.  

As to the thin brake lining on one shoe, I remember when I had a car with all drum brakes, going backwards for the first time, I was amazed at how bad the brakes were.  This showed me that one of the rear brakes is basically doing nothing when going forwards, so it only works (hard anyway) when going backwards.  As the vast majority of the time, braking is done going forwards, one of those rear shoes hardly ever does anything.  

I've just re-read that and think I'm stating the obvious.  

Anyway next time I see a Sherpa I'll take a lot more interest in it.  

 

Years ago I read somewhere that drum braked Minis, especially the early cars with single leading shoe front drum brakes, don't stop very well in reverse. I decided to test this with my own all-drums Mini in an empty car park. Into reverse, step on the accelerator, get some speed up - then stand on the brakes and see what happened.

What happened was that I came within inches of reversing straight into a brick wall. I remember to this day the feeling of sheer horror when I realised the brakes weren't doing anything!

 

[Mr Pastry]

2 minutes ago, Heavyspanners said:

Years ago I read somewhere that drum braked Minis, especially the early cars with single leading shoe front drum brakes, don't stop very well in reverse. I decided to test this with my own all-drums Mini in an empty car park. Into reverse, step on the accelerator, get some speed up - then stand on the brakes and see what happened.

What happened was that I came within inches of reversing straight into a brick wall. I remember to this day the feeling of sheer horror when I realised the brakes weren't doing anything!

 

Long ago, I rebuilt a 1950s Lotus Eleven which came to me as boxes of bits.

It was a "Club," i.e. base model, with drum brakes, albeit twin leading shoe at the front.  It had been in bits for years but all seemed to be there, so nailed it back together, and took it out to my private test track.   At the end of the lane, braked, and not very much happened although the pedal was good.   Oh well, maybe it needs to bed in, try again.  Not much better after several runs.

Back to garage, drums off, all looked okay, bled and adjusted, out again, no better.   Hmm.  But then when I was turning around and getting a bit grumpy with it, I tromped on the pedal in reverse harder than usual, and it anchored up very smartly!

That's when the penny dropped.   Back to base, and this time looked at it more carefully.   Yep.  Somebody,  at some stage, had manged to swap the front brake assemblies side to side, so we had twin trailing shoes instead of leading.    It makes a difference.

 

[Heavyspanners]

I fixed the Sherpa, then broke it again.

When I left off the rear brake overhaul, I'd basically done everything except for putting that one spring in its correct hole on the offside brake, and making sure the adjuster had correctly slotted into place behind the shoe on the nearside brake. So on my next Sherpa wrangling session I took everything apart again...



...and put it all back together, with the right bits in the right 'oles. I even managed to click the brake adjusters into their zero positions, something I was very pleased about after having no joy with this supposedly simple adjustment earlier. The secret, I discovered, is to ignore everything in the Haynes manual and lever the adjusters down, rather than just pushing them in.

The final assembly was much quicker and easier now that I had initiated myself into the mysteries of Sherpa brakes, but all the same I'm very glad the job is now done, and I won't have to take the brakes apart for another 40 years. Of course, now that I've said that, I'll be taking them apart again next week.

Here's the mystery stud, an odd little component which later Sherpas have on the rear hubs. It seems it's only there to make sure the brake drums go on in a certain way, so the fixing screw holes line up. But you can line up the screw holes quite easily by eye, so I can't fathom why the stud is necessary. There seems to be no reason for it to be so long that it also pokes through the wheel - but it does, and that means the rear wheels need an extra hole to accommodate it, which is something to think about if you're sourcing Sherpa wheels. Not all Sherpa wheels are the same, and not all of them fit the back end. Nobody tells you this stuff when you buy a Sherpa. You have to discover it all by yourself!

Next thing to do is to put my shiny new brake drums on...



And here was a problem. The shiny new brake drums wouldn't go on.

I expected them to be tight. New drums over new shoes will always be something of an interference fit. But the new drums were more than just tight. They seemed to be slightly - but significantly - undersize. The offside drum wouldn't go on at all, while the nearside drum went on  about half way, and it was a struggle getting it this far:



This was one of those situations where I thought, "Come on, it's got to work. This must be just me getting it wrong in some way. If I keep trying, it'll come right in the end."

Well, I kept trying and it didn't come right. I think the new drums really are a smidgin undersize. Maybe it's a situation like the exhaust pipe, where I had three sections made by three different manufacturers, and although they were all supposedly made to the same dimensions the three sections would never quite line up into one accurate system (I finally fixed that problem, as we'll see below).

My brake shoes are Borg & Beck, my brake drums are Motaquip, and they just don't want to play nicely together in a way that I suspect they would if all parts came from one manufacturer.

Fortunately, I had a Plan B: re-fit the old drums. The old drums are OK, although they've certainly seen some life. They seem to have been painted black at some stage (or maybe black paint just dripped on them when the chassis was being painted) and someone has been at them with a hammer...



I cleaned them up, and while there's a slight wear ridge it's barely there. The drums have a good many miles in them yet.



You can't beat the Original Equipment Manufacturer!



When the shoes have worn down slightly I might have another go at fitting the new drums. In the meantime, this is fine.



Then I set up the Eezibleed again, and got some fresh fluid into the system.



I wouldn't be surprised if the old fluid has been in there since the 1990s. I'm sure it's not supposed to look like Henderson's Relish.

Front brakes got a bleed too, although I haven't done any work on the brakes at this end of the Sherpa yet. That's an adventure for another day.



I could probably just about get away with changing the pads on the front brakes. But it looks like the hub seal is leaking on this side, so the bearings might need a spot of looking-at. And if I'm going to take everything apart it wouldn't be a bad idea to fit new discs while I'm there.

All parts seem to be available if you shop around various different suppliers - no one outlet stocks everything. The brakes themselves are standard Lockheed stuff, also used on the Triumph Stag and Ford Transit, so new parts are out there although at 'scene' prices. I'm bracing myself to pay the Stag Surcharge and the Transit Tax. 

So there may well be a complete front brake rebuild coming up. Not just yet, though.



Wheels on, test drive (the length of the garage) completed, and I'm happy to say the brakes work very well. I tried not to be surprised by this, because there's no reason why the brakes wouldn't work well, but it still came as a slight relief to know that I'd put everything back together correctly.



While I was scrabbling about under the Sherpa, I thought I might as well finally fix the exhaust pipe in place. This was a 'get around to finishing it later' job which I had never quite finished. I  got bogged down in all the frustrating to-and-fro adjustments, none of which seemed to make the exhaust system fit exactly right.

As I mentioned above, I think the problem comes down to the fact that the exhaust is in three sections. It's impossible to buy one complete Sherpa exhaust these days - you've got to grab NOS parts whenever you see them (always bearing in mind that the exhaust arrangements changed several times over the years, so not all Sherpa exhausts are the same). Each one of the three sections I've got is made by a different manufacturer, and they don't quite work together with perfect accuracy.

I left the job with the exhaust roughly assembled but not quite lined up right. Now was the time for the final adjustments.

So, exhaust off...

I calculated that if the rear section was 5 cm shorter it would put the fixing points on the pipe exactly in line with the brackets on the chassis. So out with the grinder and off comes that 5cm (cable ties used to mark the cutting line):

Again to my relief, it worked. The rear section of pipe went from this....



...to this. No extra strapping necessary: the fixing holes now line up.



The middle fixing point went from this lash-up, with the bracket on the pipe too far back to line up with the bracket on the chassis...



...to this, with the two brackets (almost) in line, and linked by one simple piece of strapping.

The exhaust is now hereby ticked off the list. It's always nice to do that!

Unfortunately, here's where I broke my usual rule of "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

When I first got the Sherpa, the engine was in a bit of a state. I don't think it had been given any kind of regular maintenance during its years as a farm truck - just a bodge here and there, whenever something went wrong. Fortunately, BT were absolute sticklers for by-the-book servicing, so in its earlier days as a telephone van the Sherpa got a lot of maintenance, which helped it survive the lean years. Every replaceable item under the bonnet was Unipart, I'm sure fitted at the BT workshops, which would always use OEM parts.

Here's what the engine bay looked like when I first raised the bonnet. I think there's most of a farm in there...



Now things look slightly more shiny. I've given the engine a catch-up service, which has included new spark plugs and HT leads, new timing belt, new fan belt, new water pump, fresh coolant, new air filter, a fuel filter (there wasn't one originally), refurbished carb, new fuel hoses...



The two items I hadn't looked at were the distributor and the coil. But it occurred to me that if the coil was on its way out, that might explain the uneven idle which seems to be a characteristic of the engine, always present to a certain extent no matter how I adjust the carb. I don't know why that didn't occur to me before, but having belatedly had the idea I thought fitting a new coil would be a good move.

Now things get interesting, because my Sherpa is a one model year variant, only produced during 1985/86, and is different to every other Sherpa made before and after.

Older Sherpas have a standard points distributor and a ballasted coil, which supplies a lower voltage to the distributor during normal running and only delivers the full 12 volts on start-up, to avoid burning the points. To be strictly accurate, there's no actual ballast on the Sherpa set-up: according to the manual a 'resistor wire' was used, which does the same job. This stuff was common on petrol engines for years. Here's a more detailed explanation from Mini guru Keith Calver.

Early Sherpas, with the B Series engine, use the Lucas 45D4 distributor, a very common type which turned up on all sorts of 4 cylinder engines. My Land Rover and Mini both have one. From 1978, when the O Series engine came in, the Sherpa got the Lucas 48D4.

From the 1987 model year (so beginning in late '86) Sherpas had a programmed ignition system controlled by an ECU, triggered by a reluctor ring on the flywheel - all very much standard nowadays, but futuristic stuff in the mid-1980s, especially on a commercial vehicle which in many ways was a very old school design.

The 1987-on O Series engine was substantially reworked with a completely different cylinder head, and became the O2. The distributor on these engines is the Lucas 65DM4, and it uses a no-ballast coil which delivers the full 12 volts all the time.

I hope you're writing all this down in your Book Of Sherpa Facts. There'll be a quiz later.

Sherpas like mine, produced for that one year in the middle, have a 'constant energy' or 'breakerless' (those two terms seem to be used interchangeably) ignition system, featuring an electronic distributor but no other fancy kit.

On the face of it, this should be simple enough. These days it's common to replace points distributors with electronic versions. I did this on my Land Rover, and it was a great improvement, instantly fixing the wandering timing and never-quite-as-good-as-it-should-be engine performance. But trying to find out the exact spec of Freight Rover's factory fitted one-year-only electronic set-up is ridiculously difficult. The Haynes manual (you may not be astonished to learn) is no help, just giving some fairly general info. The specific types of distributor and coil are not identified.



Here's the distributor. Is that a 48D4, or a 65DM4?

The box on the side with two wires coming out is the amplifier, which increases the small pulses generated by the distributor into something hefty enough for the coil to recognise, and MUST NOT BE TAMPERED WITH because it contains Beryllium and is radioactive. I kid you not - it's a nuclear-powered distributor!



The description in the Haynes manual of how the distributor works - "rotation of a toothed wheel in a magnetic field" - doesn't seem to match modern electronic distributors, which have a Hall Effect sensor and definitely no radioactive material, and the only thing which rotates is the standard rotor arm.

If you take the cap off a modern electronic distributor, it all looks much the same as a points distributor. The only difference is the Hall Effect sensor (basically a little box) sitting on the baseplate where the points would otherwise be.

If you take the cap off the 1985-vintage electronic distributor on my Sherpa, you see....

...well, nothing. It's a sealed unit.

Apparently it can be dismantled if you really, really want to, but the Haynes manual, in a startling burst of candour, says "No specific dismantling instructions are available."  Right, then, I won't be touching that thing!



Although the big advantage of an electronic distributor is that there's nothing much to wear out and it's supposedly maintenance-free, I thought I'd better look into the possibility of getting hold of a spare - just in case. After all, I'm sure when Lucas designed their maintenance-free electronic distributors back in the 1980s they never envisaged them staying maintenance-free for 40 years.

The 48D4 distributor seems to be unobtainum these days, which is odd, because every other Lucas distributor (including the 45D4, which is almost identical) is available. If I want a points 48D4, as fitted to the early O Series engine, it seems I'll have to buy a NOS example, at a price of...

...HOW MUCH?



The electronic distributor on my Sherpa has a part number on it - 54403817. A search for this number turned up one second-hand example on eBay.

Apparently the same distributor was fitted to the Metro - who knew? Unfortunately, while the part number is the same, the Metro version won't fit the Sherpa because it's designed to be driven off the A Series camshaft, very different to the O Series.



It's just as well I don't actually need a new distributor, because it looks as if finding one will be difficult. Remind me again how the Sherpa is just one big parts bin special, and rubbish old BL never changed anything in all the years it was in production, and spares are easy-peasy....

Now let's look at the coil. This really is going to be easy-peasy, because any full-fat no-ballast 12v coil will work with electronic ignition, right?

My Land Rover has a Lucas Sport coil, and it's been absolutely fine, working with the electronic version of the Lucas 45D4. Here it is. The wiring is not particularly neat (although it's better than it was when I first bought the Land Rover) but it all works. The black thing is the fuse box, containing two (count 'em, two) fuses:



Now let's look at the way this stuff was done in Freight Rover land.

The Sherpa's coil is tucked away in the bowels of the engine bay, pointing straight down at the road. This strikes me as a less than ideal place, because the connections get splattered with dirt. But as far as I can tell this is the original position, as decided by the boffins at the Freight Rover factory. The coil has a Unipart sticker on it, which reads "USE ONLY WITH BREAKERLESS IGNITION" - presumably because it throws out too much juice for points to handle.

That sticker also suggests the coil is fairly ancient, because Unipart's car components arm went bust in 2014 (it's made a comeback since then). My guess is the coil is older than that: probably fitted in the BT workshops in the 1990s, when the Sherpa was still getting regular maintenance. If so, it's probably about time for a new one.



Weirdly, the coil has a condenser connected to it - the little round thing on the left. A condenser can fulfil the same function as a ballast or a resistor wire. It damps down the voltage thrown out by the coil while the engine is running, thus avoiding burnt points misery. But an electronic distributor has no points, so why is that condenser there?

The other reason for fitting a condenser is to supress interference with the radio, so maybe that's the reason my Sherpa's coil has one: the BT guys didn't want any crackling noises interrupting the lunchtime chart run-down on Wonderful Radio One, The Nation's Number One For Fun.

Here's the coil, disconnected. It turns out that although it carries a Unipart sticker it's actually made by Bosch. I've never seen a coil with a cover over the end before...

I removed the cover (and also managed to shear off one of the connector studs - the nut was seized, and when I tried to get the nut off the whole thing twisted and snapped).

This revealed several mysterious numbers, and that odd circular thing in the recess, which again I've never seen on a coil before. What is it? It's definitely a separate component. The numbers on it are 3.1 and 80 - what's that? Impedance?



The part number is on the cover: 1 220 522 011. A swift search of the internet brought up several second-hand coils of this type offered for sale, at fairly hefty prices. Apparently these coils were fitted to various Volkswagen, Audi, and Volvo models. Nobody mentions Freight Rover.

The fact that these coils are being sold as used parts tells me that you can't get a brand new version any more, but they're a specific type which some ignition set-ups require - other coils won't work. That creates a second-hand demand, which is unusual in itself. Coils are service items: they have a limited lifespan and then they're replaced.

Nobody buys a second-hand coil....unless they have to.

Hmmmm. Are you getting a bad feeling about this? I'm definitely getting a bad feeling about this!



Well, I will try to ignore my bad feeling and connect up a new Lucas Sport coil, after first researching which sort of Lucas Sport coil I need for electronic ignition.

In a complete contrast with the old Bosch coil, modern coils seem to have no identifying marks, part numbers, or specification info on them at all. Aside from the plus and minus signs, coils themselves are blank now. The only identification you get is the sticker, and that's on the bracket, not the coil. I suspect this is because all coils come out of the same factory in China these days, and they're just bought in and branded by various suppliers. But I think I've got the right one here. I think.



I fitted the new coil, and...



Nothing happened. The engine didn't even try to fire up.

I tried the old spark-plug-in-the-king-lead trick, so I could see what (if anything) was happening...



The spark plug emitted one small, weak spark on my first turn of the ignition key. After that, as the engine turned over - nothing.

I checked the wiring, to make sure I'd got everything the right way round (yes, I had).

I tried a different coil. This one is a Viper coil, intended for use with ballasted ignition, so the wrong type for my electronic set-up. Then again, since the right coil didn't work, here goes nothing....



...and, sure enough, I got nothing. One spark on the initial turn of they key, then no sparks. I tried putting the condenser back on. Same result: no result.

The one thing I couldn't do was put the old Bosch coil back, because I had sheared off that connection stud. If I want to try the original type of coil, I'm going to have to buy one of the second-hand ones off the internet. That does seem like a silly thing to do - I mean, it's a coil, they're service items. But if the distributor will only work with a Bosch 1 220 522 011 and nothing else, that's what I'll have to give it, one way or another.

Then again, there's this - the only coil I can find which specifically says it's for a Freight Rover with electronic ignition. Should I buy it? Do I feel lucky?



Maybe I'm looking at the wrong end. Maybe I put the distributor cap on wonky, or something. But then, I would expect to see sparks at the king lead. Nothing is coming through, so it must be a coil problem.

Well, anyway: that's where I've ended up with the Sherpa. It's an immobile garage ornament - again. And it was working until I tried to fix it!

 

[Sigmund Fraud]

Have you checked the resistance of the original coil ? A replacement with similar resistance should do the job. Don't trust the marketing blurb of classic car parts specialists*, check for yourself !

Oh, and beryllium is not radioactive, though it's pretty toxic and best left sealed in whatever component it came in.

[grogee]

I have a Lucas coil off my Maestro which you're welcome to try. I changed it during parts darts to cure a running problem which turned out to be fuel pressure regulator. 

Come to think of it, I also have a ported O-series head, which I paid a pretty penny for (it was NOS) and then spent more getting it ported. 

When I fitted it to my Maestro, I didn't get proper compression in cylinders 2 and 3, so I abandoned it... I think possibly it's for the early type MG EFI not the later type which I have. The oil pump is different too, because BL. 

Like your Sherpa they fucked around with stuff over the years which seems to have made bugger all difference, presumably just cost saving measures. 

[Heavyspanners]

On 25/07/2026 at 17:19, Sigmund Fraud said:

Have you checked the resistance of the original coil ? A replacement with similar resistance should do the job. Don't trust the marketing blurb of classic car parts specialists*, check for yourself !

Oh, and beryllium is not radioactive, though it's pretty toxic and best left sealed in whatever component it came in.

I've got the old Bosch coil in front of me, I've just put a multimeter on it, and the resistance seems to be between 0.9 and 1.4 ohms, depending on which bits of the terminals I put the probes on.

It tends to go back to 0.9 after briefly showing a higher reading. I assume the fluctuation is caused by dirt or rust randomly creating extra resistance. But I think we can say that the Bosch 1 220 522 011 is a low-resistance coil.

This is a fairly terrible photo, but it's not easy holding the probes on the coil and holding the camera at the same time...



The interesting thing is, the coil had a condenser fitted, which on the face of it would not be necessary on an electronic distributor. A condenser would increase resistance, knock the voltage down a bit,  and save the points on a mechanical distributor from burning out - and even then a ballast resistor or a resistance wire would have been the more usual method. But that's not a concern if the distributor has no points. So what was the condenser for? I guessed it was to stop radio interference, but that's only my guess. If my Sherpa ever had a radio fitted it's long gone now.

I'm not at my garage right now, so I can't test the Lucas Sport Coil which I bought to replace the old Bosch coil, but the internet tells me they have a resistance of 3 ohms. That type of coil is also commonly used with electronic distributors - I've had exactly that set-up (electronic distributor + Lucas Sport coil) on my Land Rover for years, and it's been fine. So why isn't that same set-up fine on the Sherpa?

I think the answer is that my Sherpa's 1985-vintage, factory-fitted electronic distributor is not the same as the Hall effect distributors normally used for electronic conversions these days.

As I found out when I took the cap off, the internals are completely different to any distributor I've ever seen. The Sherpa's distributor must have a particular spec which requires a low-resistance coil, so the usual choice of a Lucas Sport coil or anything similar won't work.

As Sherlock Holmes said, when you have eliminated all the impossibilities, that which remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth!

Well, it seems I need a 1 ohm-ish coil.

Still don't know if, or why, the coil might need a condenser, though....

 

[Heavyspanners]

2 minutes ago, Heavyspanners said:

I'm not at my garage right now, so I can't test the Lucas Sport Coil which I bought to replace the old Bosch coil, but the internet tells me they have a resistance of 3 ohms. That type of coil is also commonly used with electronic distributors - I've had exactly that set-up (electronic distributor + Lucas Sport coil) on my Land Rover for years, and it's been fine. So why isn't that same set-up fine on the Sherpa?
 

 <<More internet research>>

Ah. Here's why my Lucas Sport coil doesn't work on the Sherpa....

There are two different types of Lucas Sport Coil: the DLB 105 (3 ohms) and the DLB 110 (around 1.3 ohms). I've got the wrong one on the Sherpa.

On the face of it, that's a schoolboy error, but in my defence there's nothing on the coils themselves to identify which type they are, and anyway the higher resistance version is usually the one that's used with electronic distributors. That's what the internet will tell you, if you ask what sort of coil resistance you'll need for electronic ignition. But usually isn't always.

Well, I suppose that's the way forward: stick a low resistance coil on the Sherpa, and see what happens...

 

[Heavyspanners]

Here's a picture of my Sherpa, sitting in the Sherpa Shed. So what, I hear you say. We've seen millions of photos of that silly old Sherpa, in the same old ramshackle garage.

Ah, but this photo is not the same as all the others. Can you spot the difference?



The silly old Sherpa is now round the other way. It has always been nose-in up to now. Now it's nose-out.

I've turned it around. Which means the engine now works, it runs and drives, and it's been out of the shed and in again.

It's a small achievement in itself, but just getting the Sherpa shifted after such a long time in bits, on axle stands, never quite ready to roll,  did feel like a "Wahey!" moment. However, I didn't actually shout "Wahey!" because this was very early in the morning and I didn't want to wake the good folk of the village with the sounds of my merriment. 

Look, it's escaped!



All it took was the correct coil. It was as simple as that, although finding out which coil was the correct coil was more of a performance, since this is one of many matters over which the Haynes manual likes to draw a discreet veil.

After I'd discovered by a process of trial and error (mostly error) that the Sherpa's factory-fitted electronic ignition requires a low resistance coil (the opposite state of affairs to the familiar electronic conversions offered by the likes of Powerspark), I went on the internet and bought yet more stuff, including what is apparently the third from last new old stock electronic distributor of the type used on mid-80s O Series engines.

I didn't actually need a new distributor - the problem was with the coil, not anything else - but I thought it wouldn't hurt to have a spare distributor, especially as it seems there are no more NOS ones available once the last two are sold. If you have a vehicle with one of the later O Series engines with all that new-fangled electronic stuff, I'd say get in there now before it's too late.

Here's my electrical work bench (some fence panels on top of the Sherpa, which is actually a good working height):

The distributor came in a DAF box. Not Leyland DAF, just DAF. That probably means it comes from the Netherlands, where the Leyland DAF incarnation of the Sherpa was sold as a DAF. And there's a 300/400 series van on the box, the only silhouette I recognise among many other bigger vehicles. That in itself shows why DAF wanted to buy into Freight Rover - they didn't have any light commercial vehicles in their range. Meanwhile, Austin Rover (as the company had become) wanted to get out of light commercial vehicles. 



The distributor itself is a good old Lucas item, with 'Made in the UK' moulded into the cap. That's how you know it's new old stock.



I also bought some other spares, including two new distributor caps. They're the same spec as the cap on my NOS distributor, but they're interestingly different in detail.

On the left, the 1980s Lucas version, taken off my NOS distributor - bolt fixing, with washers. In the middle, Powerspark version, crosshead screws with washers. On the right, the current Lucas version, copper insert in the middle HT connection (which I suppose is an upgrade of sorts) slotted machine screw fixing, no washers (seems like a downgrade to me).

Neither of the new caps have 'Made in the UK' anywhere on them.



On the inside there are interesting variations in the plastic moulding - and also interesting variations on the wobbly-ness of the centre connection pin. The best one by far was the NOS Lucas cap; next best the Powerspark; while the new Lucas cap's central connector seemed very flimsy.



The old cap on the distributor on my Sherpa's engine was obviously worn. I'll be putting one of the new ones on - but which?



I also bought a new Lucas rotor arm, which again was different to the 80s version.

On the left, the old rotor arm, taken off the distributor on my Sherpa engine. It's obviously done some work in its time. In the middle, the NOS rotor arm, taken off my NOS distributor. Both the same design, with 'Lucas' moulded into the plastic. Interestingly, the NOS rotor arm does show slight signs of use, probably from the distributor being tested. On the right, the current Lucas rotor arm - well, it came in a Lucas box, if that means anything these days. The design is obviously different, with the metal part being held down by a rivet rather than moulded into the plastic. No 'Lucas' moulded into it. It does look suspiciously like a generic item...



In the end I put the Powerspark cap on the engine's distributor, with the rotor arm from the NOS distributor inside.

And then - the coil. This is the only coil I could find on the internet which was actually advertised as being for Freight Rover electronic ignition. Well, OK, then, I thought, challenge accepted! We shall see if it works. The coil itself is unbranded and came in a plain box, so who made it is a mystery. It does look properly new, not new old stock...



The original coil was fitted with connections pointing down, for easy splattering with road dirt. I decided to fit the new coil with connections up. Condenser not fitted.



And.....the engine fired up first time and ran with impressive smoothness. There was much rejoicing in the Sherpa Shed.

The engine probably still needs some fine-fine tuning, and it does like a bit of choke on first start-up in the cold of the morning, now that we seem to be living in a desert climate - hot, dry days and cold nights. But it does run well, and now that the Sherpa is in a driveable condition I'm not touching the engine again until it's ready for a proper road test. So far it's only had a length-of-the-yard test, and it did fine.

I will say there's definitely a Sherpa style of driving which I'll have to learn. It's ridiculously easy to spin the rear wheels if you stamp too abruptly on the accelerator.



Now I can make a bit of progress on all the stuff that couldn't be done with a Sherpa in the way, like rebuilding the Sherpa Shed itself, which is barely holding itself together at the moment. But that's another story!

[Shandylegs]

I admire the dedication shown...to something that identified as shite when new 🤯 

[Heavyspanners]

5 hours ago, Shandylegs said:

I admire the dedication shown...to something that identified as shite when new 🤯 

The funny thing is, the Sherpa was quite well received in its day.

It was very much based on old-school engineering, but then so was its main rival, the Transit.

Both the Sherpa and Transit had beam axles and leaf springs all round, front wheels swivelling on kingpins, and base-model engines that delivered a less than sparkling 60-odd bhp. Both were a step backwards, technically, from previous models: the BMC J4 and the Ford Thames 400E vans both had independent front suspension.

Somehow, this spec was brilliant in the Transit and rubbish in the Sherpa. Or, at any rate, that's the conventional wisdom now. But the Sherpa was actually quite well thought-of in its day.

The Sherpa had good economy compared to its rivals, as referenced in this 1977 ad, which in turn references a Truck Magazine test.  At this time the Sherpa was fitted with the B Series engine, not exactly famous for being frugal on fuel, so getting over 30mpg was very good. The 50mpg achieved by the diesel version was with the B Series diesel...



The quote in that ad from Motor Transport Magazine is interesting: "There can be no question that the diesel-powered Sherpa is the most fuel-sparing commercial we have ever tested - apart from battery-electrics."

You can imagine the reaction in the Sherpa factory: "Apart from battery electrics, you say? Hold my beer!"




The other interesting thing about the Sherpa, never acknowledged nowadays, is that although it stayed in production for years after its rivals had introduced more sophisticated models, it managed to hold its own even when it was the oldest design in a comparison test.

Here's a 1988 article from Commercial Motor magazine, published when the Sherpa had been in production for 14 years (under two different names and with quite a lot of development along the way). Commercial Motor did a round-up of all the vans they'd tested that year in the 1.8 - 3.5 tonne class, with the Sherpa up against things like the Nissan Cabstar and Fiat Ducato. The overall winner was.....the Sherpa.

In 1989 Commercial Motor did a comparison test with the Mazda E2000, Renault Master, Renault Trafic, and the Freight Rover 350. The Renault Master won - but only by one point over the Sherpa, because it had slightly better load volume.

I don't know when the conventional wisdom that the Sherpa was always rubbish came about, but I suspect it probably dates from the 1990s, when vans typically featured turbo diesel engines and car-like performance.  The Sherpa design had become so old that even its good points couldn't make up for the, erm, 'period features' of the concept. It dated back to a time when commercial vehicles were supposed to be slow, basic, no-frills machines, and it showed. The Land Rover was experiencing exactly the same problem at the time: a design which still reflected its origins as an alternative to the Grey Fergie tractor couldn't hope to compete in the era of the Toyota Land Cruiser and Mercedes-Benz G-Wagen.

By the mid-90s - the start of the LDV era - the Sherpa was indeed a bit rubbish when directly compared to the competition of that time. I suspect that as the years went by, and fewer and fewer people had any first-hand experience of light commercial vans of the 1970s and 80s, that gradually turned into "The Sherpa was always rubbish!"

But it wasn't. The Sherpa definitely had a heyday - longer than most - when it was considered rather good.

The way views on the Sherpa have changed over the years is a bit like the Jaguar E-Type, but the other way round. No, wait, hear me out, I can back this up (er, I think)...

The conventional wisdom of today is that the E-Type is the most beautiful car ever made, a Great British supercar, brilliant in every way, always one of the most desirable cars ever. But that's just today's view. The E-Type went through a lengthy bangernomics phase, where it was considered a ghastly, lumbering old barge, outdated and clumsy. My old boss bought an E-Type for £300 in 1984, and he thought that was expensive. But they really were poorly thought of in those days. You can't tell anyone this now, though. Conventional wisdom says that the E-Type has always been beautiful and desirable, just like the Sherpa has always been rubbish. This stuff is set in stone now.

I suspect my boss got an extra-cheap deal on his E-Type even for the time, because it was a late model, hard top, automatic gearbox. The value of those variants really was on the floor in the 80s. If you were going to buy an E-Type at all, it had to be an early manual roadster, not the pumped-up, watered-down, softened later versions, ruined for the US market. Everyone hated those.

I got a lift from my boss in that E-Type once. I remember sitting in the passenger seat, looking at that surprisingly basic dashboard (black vinyl finish, no polished wood), trying to keep up my end of an E-Type conversation. "Of course," I said, with an air of knowledge, "This is one of the least desirable models,"

And it was. But it would have been tactful to keep my gob shut. My boss went all quiet, and I think that was why I never got promotion.
 

[High Jetter]

Brilliant result!

[stuboy]

blimey you got stuck in.....

 

well done..........

[Matty]

@Heavyspanners. I drove both the big and little types in the late 90s and 2000s. And, to be fair, id much experience with the earlier leyland daf models. They drove much like every other van from the period. Good dependable things that gave no bother. Id go as far as to say they were a pleasure, but then i am odd. Happy memories either way.

[Asimo]

Early '80s, I (had to do for my employer) a college day-per-week course in electronics. Part of that was a project module, sort of general studies / electronics related. 

I got full marks  for my bit about the possibilities for electric vehicles.

Based entirely upon press-cuttings and brochures about the re-chargeable Sherpa.

 

[Heavyspanners]

18 hours ago, Asimo said:

Early '80s, I (had to do for my employer) a college day-per-week course in electronics. Part of that was a project module, sort of general studies / electronics related. 

I got full marks  for my bit about the possibilities for electric vehicles.

Based entirely upon press-cuttings and brochures about the re-chargeable Sherpa.

 

I would love an electric Sherpa, but they're rare to the point of non-existence. I've never seen one come up for sale, although strangely enough electric Bedford CFs (which used the same bought-in drivetrain) do come up from time to time.

There are two of them (two!) for sale on eBay right now....



Bidding is very low at the moment, with two days to go. It'll be interesting to see how far the price goes up. At the moment it looks like a bargain.

I was almost ready to put in a bid myself, although by the time I got the vans transported the overall cost would be a thousand or two, and I've got nowhere to put two vans anyway. I had a sudden attack of common sense just in time!

It would be nice to think the vans will be restored, but I have a suspicion they'll be broken for any parts which might be salvageable - although looking at the pictures it seems galloping rust has more or less eaten the bodyshells  already.  Bedford CFs do have an uncanny ability to turn into cornflakes while you watch. 

But if the drivetrains turn up on eBay at some point I'd be tempted to buy one and make my own factory-spec electric Sherpa....