Anoraks corner

[pfenlon]

Needing a slave cylinder bracket I was kindly sent one by Stuart, and I had it powder coated.

 

now having a fair few Extra spare parts I have found another one. BUT they are of differing sizes.

 

I have a pic showing them both one over the other with the bell housing bolts corresponding.

 

You can see the slave cylinder hole is in a slightly different position by about 1/4"

 

as the 2/3/4/ engines and boxes were the same, why is this?

 

then I can return it to cornwall!

 

[BrianC]

One is a Friday part (but which one)?

[mike3md]

One of these will give a better alignment to the push rod - but as Brian asks, which one? Maybe they did change during production for this very reason?

 

i think we should be told.

 

[RogerH]

Hi Pete,

I thought they were all wrong so I made my own. In order to gain that extra 0.0001mph I made it from 7075 T6 Ali.

 

Roger

[Ian Vincent]

I think you will find that the slave cylinder changed somewhere between the TR2 and the TR3a.

 

I say this because when I reinstalled my slave cylinder, I did it in accordance with the picture in the original workshop manual and the push rod was way too long. Eventually I worked out that if I mounted the slave cylinder on the other side of the bracket even though it was 'bad engineering practice' to put the bolts in tension when it wasn't necessary, suddenly the push rod fitted.

 

Somewhere between the original workshop manual being published and my car being manufactured, something changed.

 

Rgds Ian

 

PS I have just checked my facts and if you look in the TR3a owners manual there is a picture of the clutch slave cylinder showing the cylinder on the engine side of the bracket and yes the original workshop manual for the TR2 shows it on the gearbox side.

[Lebro]

I would fit which ever one gives the straightest line for the pushrod to the clutch lever - remember it's the middle hole of 3 that should be used.

 

Bob.

[pfenlon]

Hi Pete,

I thought they were all wrong so I made my own. In order to gain that extra 0.0001mph I made it from 7075 T6 Ali.

 

Roger

Hello Roger,

 

I bet theres a plane somewhere with one wing lower than the other, missing a bit of Ali!

 

I thought I would be a smarty pants and have a look at your Ali spec, then noticed that it had 2 rockwell factors, I only thought there was one for testing graded steel.

 

Then I got a bit confused (don't answer that)

 

rockwell hardness scales

[RogerH]

Hi Pete,

indeed you are confused - it is Ali Alloy not steel.

 

It should only have one hardness value but would not normally be Rockwell tested.

To test the hardness in most Ali Alloys you would measure its electrical conductivity and then compare to a chart - this in fact could give two hardness values.

 

Roger

[BlueTR3A-5EKT]

Part Number Time....

106701 was unique to TR2-3 probably Lockheed hydraulics but no change points are given in the parts book.

128042 Used TR3 (probably Girling but no change point given) through TR4A inclusive

136353 Used TR250/5/6 - I have not checked the RTC9093 picture book but guess there was no change after '73.

 

As we all know the gearboxes are interchangeable, meaning that the bolt holes in the bell housing did not change position. Plus - The TR5/6/250 slave cyl can be fitted to TR2/3 to replace the unavailable Lockheed slave cyl of that car.

Question - Does the Girling slave cyl fit the (Lockheed) TR2 or TR6 bracket? I have never ttried but would imagine it does.

 

So

 

Do we all agree the change in cylinder location position is probably to do do with getting the push rod at the best angle,

or is it just a mystery?

 

Peter W

PS Hand me my anorak.

[Guest ntc]

But they did change the thickness of the bell housing

[Lebro]

Just to muddy the waters still further, On re-building my TR3 last year, I was given a gearbox + overdrive from a 1972 Triumph 2000.

Since the only other box I had was a well worn TR2 - non O/D box, & fitted the all synchro one. Had to get the O/D refurbished, & the rear casing changed, but the box it's self was fine. Also had to fit a different friction plate to match the splines on the input shaft, so ended up fitting an entire GT6 clutch (diaphram type - nice & light).

 

Anyway, the point is, when I came to fit the slave cylinder, (using the original TR plate) I found the push rod was way out of alignment, so I tried the one from the T2000 which luckily had been still attached to the gearbox. It was a similar shape, but resulted in the pushrod correctly lining up with the clutch lever. It had been bolted to the gearbox side originaly, but for the TR it needed to be engine side in order to be able to fit the strut which connects the bottom of the plate to one of the sump bolts, & to achieve that I had to relieve part of it to clear something - can't remember what !.

I would have thought that the T2000 gbox would be V similer to a TR6 one ?

 

Bob.

[hpremote]

'Question - Does the Girling slave cyl fit the (Lockheed) TR2 or TR6 bracket? I have never tried but would imagine it does.'

Hi, Peter W: for many years and in fact up until two weeks ago, I used a TR6 clutch slave cylinder on my (formerly Lockheed) TR3. That '6' slave fitted my Lockheed bracket with no difficulty. But my car has become a real bitsa during my decades of ownership! I'm now back to a 3A slave, chosen because the master cyl is also a 3A item. All I have had to change is to a 3A flexi slave cyl. pipe.

And fwiw, I never experienced any incompatibility between the Lockheed and Girling brake systems either (that is, the solid bundy tube connections) - even when I was running the car in the middle of a conversion to Girling back axle and front (TR6) discs. Now that surprised me...

Cheers,

Tim.

[Lebro]

Suprises me too.

Back in the 70's having broken 2 half shafts on my early TR3 I changed to a girling axle, I recall that the threads on the brake pipe unions were not the same, & at the time, having not got my flaring tool yet, I got my local motor factors to make up the pipes I needed with lockheed threads on one end, & girling the other.

 

Regarding my post above, having thought about it, I think the T2000 plate was mounted on the engine side, & as such did not have the required curve on the top edge to clear the bell housing. this is what I had to create when fitting it to the TR on the gearbox side. It has to go on the gearbox side because the thin steel plate which covers the gap under the rear of the engine block has raised edges (for strength), & these would get squashed if the plate was against it.

 

Bob.