Jump to content

Bfg

Registered User
  • Content Count

    108
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

15 Good

About Bfg

  • Birthday 09/01/1956

Profile Information

  • Location
    Suffolk, England

Recent Profile Visitors

169 profile views
  1. I reckon someone's been pulling your dangly .. not us though .. eh ? ..as spark plugs do not only arc across their end tip.. If that were the case then the central electrode would only erode on that one side. Aside from which, as all schoolboys used to know - the four stroke cycle is in effect : suck, squeeze, pop, and fart. So even if it were practical to 'index' the electrode's gap - it might only make a slightest difference * if induction was immediately followed by the big Pop. But as there's a full crank cycle inbetween the fuel-air mix being drawn in & downwards by the lower pressure behind a descending piston, and then being compressed (9 : 1 ? ) into a tiny space all around the spark plug ..before the ignition is fired - the spark plug simply needs to face downwards and be angled towards the centre of the combustion chamber to be indexed. * and that difference would be the time it takes for the ignited air-fuel mix / flame path to travel just the diameter of the centre electrode. Of course, as Mike says.. some engines utilise squish effect (this is used on the post-war 500cc twin cylinder Sunbeam motorcycles I'm rather fond of). But even then, there's a broad wave-front of air-fuel mix (..the full width / diameter of the cylinder) to ignite ..so again the spark plug just needs to be nearest the middle of its combustion chamber.. Three or Four valves per cylinder facilitates putting the spark-plug in the centre of the combustion chamber, so the flame front has shortest distance to travel / combust all the fuel mix in the shortest possible time (..important for very high revving engines). And twin spark plugs were a popular tuning option offered on motorcycles at one time (..I gather very few customers though).
  2. ^ a little over my head on first reading and without taking the time to take in what you're saying, but thanks for the explanation. I'll read it over again until I understand. Does "the gap breaks down" mean : the circuit is completed when the electricity jumps across the gap ? Why not just say "until it sparks" - Would that colloquialism have a slightly different meaning ? Is this the purpose of 'sports' coils ? I'm not advocating spending to upgrade from a usable standard coil, but rather if the coil is US, then for normal driving / fast road use or economy cruising, would such a high-voltage big-spark coil make any difference. ? ie., is it worth paying more and to get a performance type ? I'm not able to distinguish which is better ..in the practical application of our cars. I can envisage they'd be benefits of having a (colloquial) "bigger" : higher voltage and hotter spark current, for a shorter time if the race tuned high-lift cam motor is spinning around at 7000rpm. But would the bigger spark (higher V & hotter) not be of benefit ..perhaps through more complete combustion at all times ? or is a slow burn more efficient at lower (2-4000 rpm) engine speeds ? Thank you. Pete.
  3. Thanks Waldi, Yes that's certainly a possibility ..using the gearbox cover instead of the lower half of the H - Good idea, and certainly a darn sight easier to fit than trying to get the original H-frame over new under-felt and thick-pile carpet. Taking this a step or two further : I could use a triangulating V ..from the top of the gearbox cover to the underside of the dashboard .. and could if required even fit that slightly across over to the passenger side. . . . We might start a new trend, of existing gearbox fibre or plastic covers being reinforced with a band of 30x6mm flat steel ..which the carpet neatly fits over and conceals. And then a neat power socket / cigar lighter / communication ports, plus GPS &/or audio equipment housings (..which are part of the structural support) bolted directly from the top of the gearbox cover's reinforcement band. As an Industrial Designer I have just copyrighted the idea, with a date and time stamp 19th August 2019 - 23:10 - so be quick Waldi you must now sell this our new sensation to Moss. Perhaps you'll be so kind as to manage it ..and just send me a cheque each month with my share of the royalty payments.
  4. Hi Roger. Someone from a London group of TR's said to me at Stratford on Friday night "Over there, that's Roger off the forum in the black bobble hat". I hasten to add that it was said in a most kind and appreciative way ..in gratitude to the time and trouble you put into helping others on this forum. And then the conversation went off on a tangent and I met colleagues from my local TSSC group - so I never got to meet you. That's a shame as I would have liked to have have done so, not least to put a face and voice to the forum name. Another time I hope. But anyway.. Yes I'd concur - the H section would give the scuttle body shell both sideways and vertical support. "Not sure what good the steel cover will do". If the existing bulkhead cutout had a much stiffer and wider flange - would that bulkhead not be stiffer as a panel ? And if that 'much stiffer and wider flange' had steel braces taken from many places around it - to the chassis mounts where the H-frame bolts through - would that not also stiffen / brace it even further ? Of course, once the bulkhead is braced to be much stiffer - it would be quite easy to better support the dashboard from that (..like shelf supports screwed to a wall). But what if.. the floor, from the bulkhead to the driveshaft tunnel was securely fitted / filled in with a steel cone - would that cover and driveshaft tunnel not be just like a deep corrugation for the whole length of the floor ? And surely that would carry significant bending loads ..just as any monocoque car's backbone-tunnel does ? And as the bulkhead is mounted to the forward diagonal stays - then this tunnel (in essence : a top-hat section beam which is mostly twice or three times as high / deep as chassis &/or door sills) would help brace the front suspension turrets all the way through to the IRS spring hanger.! Then, as a cone is especially good at resisting torsion - the steel gearbox cover (..a segment of a cone) securely tied-in to the bulkhead, the driveshaft tunnel (closed off with a breast plate on the underside) and bolted along its length to the floor and through that to the chassis - will also be torsionally stiffer. That's the direction my thinking is exploring. Peter
  5. . Ostensibly because I'm so tall, I would like (actually.. need) as much sideways legroom as possible - I'd like to not use / fit the gearbox bridge / H-frame within the American TR4A (I'm still trying to buy). So, after repeatedly hearing how the IRS is "not as good" / "not as stiff" as the TR4 chassis, and then sitting down and considering the chassis and body structures - I took my first practical step this weekend to stiffening the car's body-tub up ..and that was to buy a steel gearbox cover original to the TR3. Thank you Brian Chiswick in Hertfordshire. I accept this one has a hole where an ashtray had been fitted by the gear-change, and also the cutout for the speedo drive ..and otherwise may need modification to actually fit a TR4A.. but even with it sitting end up on the floor, the conical shape of this steel cover is very nicely torsionally rigid. I anticipate when bedded and securely bolted all around the gearbox aperture in the floor and bulkhead it will make a notable difference. Of course it weighs a sight more than a fibre or plastic one, but as that weight is low down and central to the car I'm guessing this will not detrimental ..in the big picture of weight n' balance. And in any case I can save that weight elsewhere. Pete.
  6. ..had a great weekend at Stratford A sight to greet you ..with Triumphs as far as one could see. With the TSSC together with the TR Register there was lots of interesting cars to see and keen owners to share their knowledge and enthusiasm, and then of course ten times as many non-standard 'personal touches' ..as one massive spot-the-difference game. As you can see despite the forecasts all week it turned out - breezy but otherwise good weather. I took this photo on Saturday during the Pride of Owner competition, not realising the absolutely gorgeous midnight blue TR4A which had caught my eye had a registration number familiar to these pages. See Mike's post of August 10th : "driving the Dingle Peninsula". Personally (..as a non-participant in this event myself) ..and bearing in mind how that car gets around a bit and is obviously just so enjoyed - I was delighted to see Brenda taking home 1st place in that competition. Congratulations to Mike and Mrs 'Brenda' on such a sterling achievement.. However it was equally as wonderful to wander around the camping site to quietly chat to owners and to see what delights they had brought out to show us.. Sunday was less packed but as you can see there were very many more cars to see. being the 50th anniversary of the TR6 there was a fabulous turnout of that model, and then I was astounded by how many TR5 & 250's I saw over the weekend. I'd never imagined so many had survived and were cherished. I'm old enough to remember the day when nobody wanted such gas-guzzlers ! Being a prior owner of a daily driver TR3 - I'm a big ban fan of TR2 and 3 cars, so i spent quite a while looking and taking photos of those. And then again because I'd restored a TR4 (in the early 90's) ..and am now buying a 4A, a fair amount of my interests was focused on those models too. Sunday's showing presented the cars according to model, so you'll see in the background (above) an equally fine collection of TR7's and 8s. The Triumph Herald celebrated it 60th anniversary and again as a prior owner, and also a member of the TSSC with a friend with a Herald estate, I was delighted to see them in abundance. I could easily envisage having a Herald as a nice & practical town car and a TR4 for spirited cross-country jaunts and touring. Similarly the Triumph 2000 / 2.5 estates always catch my eye, and whenever I see Triumph Stags - I think back to my dear old Mum, who I think was quite disappointed when I bought a '64 Daimler 2.5 instead of the Stag (always a favourite with her). A few oldies of the Standard and Vanguard marque were a welcome sight and the 1948 motor-show Triumph ? roadster was there too. With features reminiscent of a post-war Frazer Nash but very much more bulbous a car. The body is all alloy so I guess not very heavy (and despite not having been restored looks to be in really good condition) Its headlamps have pop open covers (think Lotus elan and you'll get the picture of how the covers look when closed.) and the car also include many hydraulically operated features including its hood (soft top). This fascinating vehicle and snapshot of post-war car design trends in response to 'Export or Die' politics and steel rationing, is looking for a kindly benefactor-enthusiast to restore it .. who knows perhaps crowd funding ?? There was so much to see for a returnee to the Triumph marque (after many years away) and so I had a great show. I really thank the organisers who pulled it all together, as well as the marshals and volunteers who made all things happen pretty smoothly. Great job boys and girls ! As for my own self.. well, I camped next to the very gentlemanly Yoop VanLiempt and his dearest wife Connie, ..a frequent visitor to international TR events over the past 20 years. I understand Yoop has some 40 cars including a collection of TR 2 through to TR7 models. We spent a very pleasant time sitting in our garden chairs drinking coffee and watching the many and varied Triumphs parade passed us into and out of the main arena field. I also had the opportunity to help Rich Crewe-Read (a very kindly friend from the East Saxon TR group) set up his gazebo / trader's stand in the gusty winds of Saturday morning, before I trotted off to the show itself. Rich had an impressive range (eight or so ?) different gearboxes restored by Peter Cox to show, explain the differences, and to offer TR owners ..as well as his very high quality aluminium fuel tanks and a host of other goodies on offer. While in that corner of the paddock I also spread a little wealth around the various auto-jumblers. I'm well-pleased with what I bought - a pair of black with whit(ish) piping TR4A seats and their runners for £40, a brand-new finned alloy rocker-cover for £55, and a very good condition TR3 centre console panel for £10. I left soon after 3pm on the Sunday. Even so on the return from Stratford to Suffolk I stop-started passed the M1 roadworks at a slug's pace, rather than go around the A14 roadworks and Cambridge at a snail's pace. The distance was much the same either route, but I had arranged to pick up the TR3 steel gearbox cover I'd agreed to buy from Brian Chiswick in Stotfold. Brian has a lovely TR3A and so we also had a good chat. I'm equally pleased with that purchase, so it was an all round a most enjoyable and also successful weekend for me. The drive across country from Stotfold via Sudbury to Ipswich is a great drive, so I then had a fun driving fast "only to the speed limit Officer" as a golden sunset illuminated the fields all around me. Autumn is fast on the way. I arrived home soon after 9pm, so 6-hours for a 160mile trip. And to think we actually pay good wages to civil servants to manage our road network.! It's not as if roads are a new thing in this country. I'm sure 2000 years ago or thereabouts the Romans popped across here for a week or two and built the Fosse Way. That's a decent road which for all its years - has probably had less roadworks than the M1. Or perhaps we should just get rid of our civil servants, concede to being European, and invite the Germans to replace our motorways with Autobahns [ end of gripe ]. Anyways up., I could babble on and on, show dozens of photos of car details and deviations from 'standard'', but I'll leave that for others to contribute. My big thanks to all who attended and showed their cars (..the real stars of this event), to the traders and auto-jumblers who brought so much to tempt us, the excellent commentators and evening entertainments, and again to everyone involved in making the event so excellent a gathering of Triumphs. Pete (aka Bfg) p.s. my tongue-in-cheek apologies to the chap in the beer tent on Friday night.. Bearing in mind I'm a towering 6' 5", broad and with a scruffy greying beard - I walked in from the dark ..literally dripping-wet, dressed in my summer clothes befitting that evening's weather ..ie. size 13 wellington boots, a XXXXL sized dark brown cape-like waxed cotton Driza-Bone full length coat, and a flat wide-brimmed waterproof hat ..of a style not dissimilar to that of the witch-hunter general ..and this guy just looked up at me and froze as I walked straight faced in his direction. I leant over and quietly asked him in a slow gruff voice "Have you seen where I left my chain saw.? " His eyes visibly went round, his jaw dropped, and his complexion drained to pale grey.
  7. What sort of excuse is that ! ? I haven't even got a TR yet.. The one I'm still trying to buy is in Arkansas, so I'm going in a Daimler-Chrysler Grand Voyager - excellent for car-camping. Hopefully next year then, Pete
  8. if you're at Stratford this coming weekend Waldi, I'd be glad to take you up on the invite. Pete.
  9. "the acids used are trapped in seams despite washing. These then come back to destroy paint finishes at a later date" I had have the same experience with Citroen inner wing panels I did a few years ago. These were washed and then left in the summer sun to dry thoroughly before cold-galvanising (zinc) spray painting and then paint. I would not say my paint finish was 'destroyed' but the off-white colour has locally discoloured slightly more orange in places. Fortunately that's only seen within the engine bay so it's not a big deal. However., if I hadn't used acid then the rust within those spot-welded seams would have remained anyway. Would that really have been any better ? And as those panels were off a lightweight Citroen - I'd have to be very confident the panels wouldn't be damaged / distorted / blown away by the impact, abrasion and heat of shot blasting. Sadly I've pretty-much lost all confidence in any professional service. And I guess that's almost a decider for me. I've also painted after a body shell, and also a chassis, have been blasted and it seems impossible to subsequently get rid of all the grit and dust, and those oh-so-fine 'bits', which magically appear out of every hidden corner, can then be seen in the otherwise nice paint finish. I guess static is behind this phenomenon as they otherwise defy cleaning out with a vacuum or air gun, so perhaps one needs to pressure wash with hot soapy water thereafter, and then of course bake to dry. A big advantage of using acid is that I can do that myself, as necessary and just one panel or a section at a time. That has its own advantages, such as selecting what's to be cleaned off ..which may not include areas of no rust ..like perhaps under the dashboard or where oil leaks have preserved original panels) or else to do more cleaning when having removed a panel or overlap and found rust under that ..not to mention it being hundreds of pounds cheaper than professional services ..plus the hassles of handling and transportation. Also I'll prefer not to pay someone to blast clean panels which will be cut out and replaced anyway, like the floors and sills. So although I'm presently open to suggestions / undecided what to do with my TR's body shell, the present thinking is along the lines of : Starting with removing all the interior and electrics and then to have commercial (as in haulage vehicles) steam / soap blast cleaning of body, chassis and rolling gear, and then for me to use acids once again, one section at a time. But this time I'd like to be better set up, with a hot-water pressure washer to blast out the seams, and then to use a blowtorch along each to dry them out. It would be nice to melt solder into those spot welded seams but I guess that would take far too long. My neighbour is a plumber, so perhaps he might advise. Alternatively I've often used wicking thread and bearing-lock products, so perhaps I'll find something suitable from that world - to wick into those seams, otherwise I'll focus on using very thinned paint and an air gun to blow it into the seams ? Pete
  10. Must admit I categorically refuse to use silicon sealant on any engine ..as I've seen the damage directly caused by beads of sealant which have got away ..and then blocked oil ways ..not just once but on several occasions during the short 18-month period I was professionally restoring vintage motorcycles. Of course the choice is yours, and I accept the risk must vary a great deal with the design of engine, but the post-war Sunbeam twin has an overhead camshaft and the oil route to that is susceptible ..and then the replacement cost of cam followers, rocker bearings, camshaft, plus the line-boring and sleeving - tends to make one's eyes water. ^ indisputable.. the bead of blue silicon sealant in the camshaft's journal. This is my own photo of a so-called 'troublesome engine' subsequent to having been rebuilt by the client's father. Ironically the engine had been fitted with a new camshaft, so he spent hundreds-of-pounds but tried to save a few pennies (..or minutes). The (above) oil feed is up through internal crankcase and cylinder drillings to the camshaft journals, and subsequently to the the cam lobes and followers. The oil's course is also to lubricates the bushes within the rocker shaft and then also the valve stems ..also serving to carry heat away. Oil return is down the cam chain ..so with no oil getting in - each of these things run dry, get very hot (cylinder head temperatures + friction) and self destruct. Is it that the design was poor ? Personally, I ride an early model from 1948 and two others from 1953 - each on their original camshaft journals ..so I'd suggest it is not the design but rather the home mechanic who tries a miracle-cure ..rather than to simply take a few minutes to prepare gasket faces to be smooth, flat and clean. And then to use the appropriate gaskets (..even if that means hand-making cork ones if they are no longer commercially available). My apologies to all if this is a little off topic, but just perhaps it equally applies to some oil ways in the TR engines.? Pete. p.s. I do however use black silicone sealant as a gap-filling adhesive on non-engine rubber parts. And I've effective repaired cracked but not split right the way through CV joint gaiters, and similarly to re-make the top part of a gear-change gaiter (which was torn off so did not seal around the gearshift). And then just the other day I used it to replaced the rubber bushes in the sprung saddle of my early S7. I bonded new rubber blocks to the steel carriers with black 'engine gasket' silicon sealant.
  11. Friday afternoon : rain forecast. Saturday 40% chance of rain ..likewise Sunday afternoon. Lots of car wax I'm thinking !
  12. I would have thought 6mm cork gasket would be difficult to handle for that size of sump. Admittedly my old bike engines are much smaller but I think I'd find 1.5mm - 2mm thk. plenty compliant. I suspect the 6mm stuff might best be used for pressed-steel rocker covers and sumps which have a retaining return flange around the outside edge of them, rather than for alloy covers with no recess. I'm not so familiar with the TR6 but have read that ..when the engine is still in the car - the sump drops down slightly and then slides back to be removed. So please check the amount of space you have to do that - before you fit studs, otherwise you'll be cussing me sometime down the line. If you don't have a lot of clearance then shouldered bolts, cut off to the correct thread length, ought to work fine. Having made yourself a cork gasket with nicely-tight fitting bolt holes - then I think the trick to fitting will be to apply gasket-goo between the bottom of the gasket and the sump's sealing face, and then lay it on that face and insert the bolts (with appropriate washers, etc.) up through the sump's flange and gasket. The gasket should hold the bolts in place, and conversely the bolts will hold the gasket in place - while you offer the whole lot up to the block. Personally I would leave the top of the gasket dry, or even add a smear of Coppaslip to it., so then, as and when the sump is next dropped off - the gasket ought to stick to the sump but quite easily be prised away from the block. I have a favourite 1" wide and quite bendy decorator's scraper to slip in between the gasket and the block, so I undo the nuts half way and then work my way around easing the gasket away - so that it is re-usable. As suggested previously ; when fitting the sump gasket for the first time - I don't tighten it so much as to squeeze the gasket-goo out. I find it better to just lightly (but evenly cross-diagonally) pinch the bolts up to a very low torque setting. I then leave the gasket goo to set overnight (or longer still) and only pinch them up tight just before I add the engine oil. Again I hope that is helpful. Pete. p.s. the TR4a ..I'm still waiting to buy, had an SAH rocker cover, but the existing owner sold it along with the rest of the SAH bits ..originally fitting back in 1965. The latter owner's intent was to covert this car into a TR5 ..but he never got around to doing that either. It's a little sad to have lost those original features but hey.. that was just another episode in the car's history.
  13. . seems logical to have the benefit of the handbraked wheels on the ground while you're jacking one end up, so I'd do front wheels (individually being easier) first and then the back wheels. .
  14. . To be frank I'm rather amazed at the harking-on about a porous aluminium sump, which seem to ignore (..in this instant) the oil would have to defy gravity to get up to the rim, to then run down onto the bolt heads. ! I’m fully aware that turbulent air flow can contribute to this phenomenon but unless the bottom of each of the sump fins have been wiped clean but the bolts have not - then the photo suggest this not to be the case. Naturally a soft-compound gasket is used to accommodate any surface imperfection of those mating faces. The higher the manufacturing tolerance and the more stable the mated materials : the less gasket thickness / compliance is required. For example, a gasket is generally very thin or not required at all during assembly of an oil pump, whereas for unstable and different materials such as a pressed-steel sump and a machined cast-iron crankcase - the gasket will be thick and very compliant. A gasket's purpose is to prevent fluids moving laterally across a mating face. And almost always, the hole in the gasket is bigger than the stud or bolt, and therefore there is always a gap sufficient for hot oil under both gravity and crankcase pressure to seep through. If the hole were not bigger then you'd have to tap the screw thread in through the gasket every time you fitted a stud or bolt. In many instances this 'self-tapping' may occur on one side of the gasket's hole but rarely is it all around that hole ..because manufacturing tolerances of the crankcase’s bolt pattern and the holes through an after-market gasket would not be accurate enough for an interference-fit. Similarly, the holes through the sump’s flange must be loose enough to account for any variation in the crankcase’s stud pattern ..as well as to get the studs / bolts through the sump even when crawling around under a car. Furthermore, because aluminium has a different rate of expansion to the cast iron crankcase, design allowance need be made for fitting these at different temperatures. Of course aluminium sumps and rocker covers fitted to iron engines will always be prone to leak unless there is sufficient allowance for thermal-expansion (..more prevalent on large hollow-shell casting than on smaller components). In the old days this was usually accommodated by using a thick cork gasket and very low fastening torque. Nowadays card gaskets are made and used ..but only because they are cheap to stamp out and then easy to handle for volume production, but they are not nearly as stretchy, so as the different-metal parts thermally expand and contract / move relative to one another ..their seal breaks. A couple of months ago, I bought (cheaply available off a well know auction / buy-it-now site) a one-square-metre x 1.5mm thick sheet of cork to make gaskets for a vintage motorcycle, specifically its aluminium sump. In this case I've used 'Heldite' to bond one side of the cork to the sump. In doing so, I fitted the sump ..evenly but only very loosely (so the jointing compound didn't all squeeze out) to allow the compound to set. Now fitted and in use ; the other side of the gasket is still without sealant of any kind, and I'm using just 6-ft-lb torque on its fastening nuts. They did need re-tightening after a number of thermal cycles, but they remain oil tight. An advantage of thick cork gaskets, over paper and other composite types, is that they are stretchy to pull over sump studs. This means that their hole size can be tight on the stud and yet dimensional tolerances in stud pattern are easily accommodated. They're not nearly so easy to fit when using bolts (rather than studs) but usually it is possible. The additional and great advantage is that cork bulges sideways very much more as it is compressed, so a hole through a thick cork gasket will pinch even tighter onto a fastening stud or screw thread. Fastenings. I see in the photo that your sump is fastened with bolts. But I wonder if they have plain shoulders ? Otherwise you are trying to seal something with a serrated edge. And unless those are thoroughly clean ..and sealant is wiped into those threads before fitting (I'm talking about the bit which is through the sump's flange, not that screwed into the block) - then you’re just making things difficult. Much better to use studs or else bolts with a plain shoulder. Usually I have to buy over-length plain-shouldered bolts or studs and cut part of the thread off - to get the length of plain-shoulder needed. Washers : Firstly a split washer will by definition not seal - it has a split.! And a plain or dowty washer will not seal if any part of the face is not reasonably smooth and flat - that’ll be the gap between the outside face of the flange and the underside of the bolt head or nut. This gap needs to not only be flat and quite smooth but also parallel to each other ..for the full diameter of your washers. From your photo I see that you’re trying to seal a washer on the rough cast finish ..and also very close to the inside fillet between the flange and the sump’s bowl. If your cylinder head or any other gasket face had that sort of mountainous texture would you expect it to seal ..why then should these ? If that corner fillet is holding your washer up at one edge then again it cannot provide a decent seal. I very often have to bend or file away the rim of a washer to get it to sit flat where such fillets are close to the bolt hole. NB. Please do not cut a sharp edge into such corners to gain more space ..especially with castings (in any material) as doing that would concentrated stress and may lead to it cracking there. It's a hundred times better to file away the edge of the washer. However, I do use a round needle file in such places ..but only to remove the projecting / high (casting) roughness out of those corners. Please do not file / cut the corner to a tighter radius. Wouldn’t you use a copper or fibre washer of the correct size to seal under something like a screw-in oil pressure sensor, so why use hardened steel here ? If in doubt, copper washers are cheap enough in the first instance, but otherwise can be re-annealed simply enough with a butane blowtorch each time they are reused. Naturally use washers with the correct inside hole diameter. A similar problem occurs on a boat's deck fittings, whether they be cleats, fairleads, stanchions or rigging, even though these are bedded in the highest quality compounds. Again part of the problem is the difference in materials, and also their inevitable flexing, but most commonly because fitters assemble the things and squeeze out all the sealant when they tighten the fastenings down the first time. The softer material then settles a little with use, and the fitting are not re-tightened before they leak.! A way around this is - to countersunk either side of the mating face's hole, just a 1mm into each is usually sufficient. This then gives the sealing compound somewhere to squeeze into and when cured is just like having an o-ring around the fastening. This generally isn't necessary with a car engine (greater thermal expansion but less flexing) but is easy enough to do so anyway. A final note about sand-cast aluminium parts - is that they distort as the molten aluminium cools. Furthermore as a ductile material - it tends to move when not stored on the flat. It is very common to find the gasket face, even on brand new parts, to be twisted, sunken or to have hogged a little. Over the length n’ breath of the gasket face of long sump this might be as much as 1/8”. Most likely a new part from a reputable dealer will have been machined to a much tighter tolerance than this, but has it always been stored flat.? A surprising amount of twist can be pulled straight with the fastenings, but less so with a sunken or hogged part. The way to check this is to refit the sump with sparkling-clean gasket faces and no gasket. Loosely but evenly pinch up all the fastenings, and then to go around to see if a feeler gauge will slip into the crack. Note : I hope the above does not come across as being too pushy / opinionated. I apologise if it does. It’s not nearly as easy to write well-meaning advice as it is to quietly explain some things face to face. Best regards, Peter. .
  15. I'm booked in to go ..anyone else ?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please familiarise yourself with our Terms and Conditions. By using this site, you agree to the following: Terms of Use.